Posts by Island Man

76

Socialism

by Perry in

socialists think that money will solve all man's problems.

everything is obsessively related to money in the socialist ideology.. they have an almost supernatural ability to blame others with more money.

god calls this greed and envy.

I think you make a massive error by conflating Socialism with Autocracy. They are not the same. Look people: A christian railing against socialism. I guess Perry never read Acts 2:44,45 and Acts 4:32,34. Perry, you're railing against your own religion without even knowing it. LOL.

18

Kingdom Hall Attenders: Consider Stopping the Use of Loaded Language

by OnTheWayOut in

it's been a long time since i attended, but i understand that many of you still go to the kingdom hall for your various reasons.. a huge thing that helped me in my mentally breaking from their beliefs was to stop using their terms that put you, virtually automatically, into their thought mode.. using terms like "the truth," jw's feel special about themselves and this helps them separate themselves from "the world.

" by incorporating loaded language, jw's learn not to think, but merely to memorize words and phrases instead of analyzing a situation.. the reasons someone misses meetings is because they are "spiritually weak.

" they might be involved in "worldly thinking.".

Island Man

Elder: "Bro. OnTheWayOut, we called you here in the back room to discuss something that has come to our attention. A number of the friends - including ourselves - have noticed a recent trend in your speech. You seem to shy away from using theocratic terms, preferring instead speak in a somewhat plain - some even say tactless - manner. The scriptures talk about the power of the tongue and using it wisely. As Jehovah's people we have the privilege of speaking the "pure language". Which other organization on the face of the earth today has that great privilege? Why refuse to use the theocratic terms that Jehovah has so lovingly provided for us through the faithful and discreet slave? When you comment at a Watchtower study and refer to the preaching work as "door-to-door canvassing" how do you think that sounds to interested ones attending our meeting for the first time? What kind of impression are they going to get about our work?"

2

The important questions JWs should be asking themselves about this week's Immitate Their Faith study

by Island Man in

why did jonah think that he could run away from jehovah?

did he think that jehovah was a local god whose power and influence would not extend as far as tarshish?

and why would jehovah choose as his prophet a man like jonah who evidently did not appreciate that jehovah can find you know matter where you go?.

Island Man

Why did Jonah think that he could run away from Jehovah? Did he think that Jehovah was a local god whose power and influence would not extend as far as Tarshish? And why would Jehovah choose as his prophet a man like Jonah who evidently did not appreciate that Jehovah can find you know matter where you go?

How can Jehovah be a just and righteous god if he would bring a storm and endanger the lives of innocent mariners just to discipline his wayward prophet Jonah?

6

Loss of Tax exemption for Australian religious organizations

by defender of truth in

i have no clue when it comes to australian politics, but these articles got my interest.could this be the start of something?...it would take too much space to quote them all, but please read each one in order.

it might make more sense, what i am getting at.it seems to me that the debate we no doubt all want to see happen: 'why do religions, those who don't do any community work except advancing their own religion, get tax exemption?

', could be coming soon.or maybe i am wrong?www.crikey.com.au/2016/04/05/essential-voters-want-to-dump-religious-tax-exemption/http://m.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/tax-exemption-for-religious-groups-should-end-poll/2994952/http://m.theage.com.au/comment/easter-is-a-good-time-to-revisit-taxexempt-status-of-religious-organisations-20160323-gnpzjj.html^^ note who wrote the article, it says at the end.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/australian_sex_party^^ yes, the above is actually a real political party.

Island Man

All I have to say to the Sex Party's proposal is: Yes ... yes ... yes ... give it to us ... yes ... ahhh ...

40

I went to see my Dr about the blood card issue

by purrpurr in

i booked a double appointment so that she wouldn't be rushed.

i explained that i'd been brought up in the jw's and woken up to what a load of shite it was.

i explained that they have changed the blood card and that the elders in the cong are being told to effectively force people into signing it.

Island Man

purrpurr I think your doctor may be confusing JWs with Mormons. Mormons are known for their past racist policy of not allowing black people to join the priesthood. Many people often confuse JWs with Mormons due to the fact that both groups share the common trait of going door to door.

20

Lurking JWs: Do people really need to know and use the word "Jehovah" or other language equivalents, to truly know God?

by Island Man in

watchtower puts forth the argument that you can't really know god unless you know and use the appellation "jehovah" or its equivalent in other languages.

is this really true?

i say it's not true and i will demonstrate to you why.. god's name is not a mere label that we have to use to communicate with him so that he knows we're talking to him.

Island Man

Here's an interesting scripture that applies to JWs and the issue of them judging others as not being christians because they don't use "Jehovah":

"Who are you to judge the house servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for Jehovah can make him stand." - Romans 14:4

This verse is full of irony when applied to JWs' judgmental attitude on the use of the word "Jehovah". By saying persons aren't true christians if they don't use "Jehovah", JWs are actually denying the meaning of God's name! How so?

Look at what the last sentence in the verse says: "he will be made to stand, for Jehovah can make him stand."

In other words, Jehovah - He that causes to become - can cause those who don't use the word "Jehovah" to be standing as true christians. But by saying you can't be a true christian if you're not using "Jehovah", JWs are denying God's ability to cause such ones to be standing. They are saying the lack of usage of the name "Jehovah" is greater than what the name stands for. They are paradoxically denying the meaning of the name of God in their quest to promote the use of "Jehovah". LOL.

20

Lurking JWs: Do people really need to know and use the word "Jehovah" or other language equivalents, to truly know God?

by Island Man in

watchtower puts forth the argument that you can't really know god unless you know and use the appellation "jehovah" or its equivalent in other languages.

is this really true?

i say it's not true and i will demonstrate to you why.. god's name is not a mere label that we have to use to communicate with him so that he knows we're talking to him.

Island Man

Watchtower puts forth the argument that you can't really know God unless you know and use the appellation "Jehovah" or its equivalent in other languages. Is this really true? I say it's not true and I will demonstrate to you why.

God's name is not a mere label that we have to use to communicate with him so that he knows we're talking to him. God can read hearts and will know that a worshiper is addressing him even if that worshiper does not use a form of the word "Jehovah". For example, the gospels show that Jesus never directly addressed God in prayer with the name "Jehovah". He always addressed him as "Father". So one does not need to use the name "Jehovah" for God to know that he is addressing Him.

Also, it is often not necessary to use "Jehovah" to distinguish him from other gods when conversing with others about which god you worship. Unlike ancient times when polytheism was rampant and worshipers of "Jehovah" were in the minority, the world today has a very high percentage of theists that worship "Jehovah" (the god of the bible) and one often only needs to use the word "God" or say he is christian for others to know which god he worships.

So really, the labeling and distinguishing functions of the name is not as important as JWs make it out to be. So what about the name is important? It has to be the meaning of the name. Since God's name has a descriptive meaning, then God's name is actually a description of who he is. Therefore knowing god's name is really about knowing who god is - his character or nature as described by the meaning of the name. So look at this:

"Jehovah" means "He Causes to Become" and Watchtower says it alludes to the fact that God causes himself or his creations to become whatever he wishes so that his will can be accomplished. Think about that meaning for a while. Can you think of any words or titles that encompasses the meaning of the name? Of course you can! "Creator". Doesn't a creator quite literally cause things to become? What about the term "Almighty" or "All-Powerful"? Do these not also convey the impression of one who has the power to do anything - to cause anyone or anything to become anything he desires? Really, the expression "He Causes to Become" is just a fancy way of saying "He that does things", "He that makes things", "the Prime Causer", "the living God", "the active God" - the God that actually has the power to do things and cause things to happen, unlike the other lifeless idol gods, etc.

Now honestly ask yourself this question: Does a person have to know the word "Jehovah" and it's meaning, in order to know these things about the God of the bible? If a person studied a modern KJV that uses "LORD" and omits "Jehovah", would he not still learn from it that God is Almighty, Creator, Prime Causer? Would he not still learn that God has the power to cause anyone or anything to become whatever desires it or them to become? So you see a person does not have to know the word "Jehovah" to know God's name - to know that God causes to become. For the very name of God is demonstrated by his dealings recorded in the bible. So everyone who is familiar with any bible unavoidably comes to know God's name whether or not the bible contains the word "Jehovah"!

So really, JWs are making a big fuss over the use of a label - the meaning of which is known by virtually all bible-reading christians even without them having to know the actual label, for the whole bible reveals the name of God and so it is foolish to claim that persons don't know God's name, just because they don't know the word "Jehovah". It's shallow, legalistic thinking on the part of the JWs. They focus on telling people to know and use a word when the very persons already know the essence and meaning of that word even without literally knowing the word itself.

So when non-JW christians use titles like "God", "Father" and "Lord", and in their hearts ascribe to these titles the same connotations of "Almighty", "Prime Causer", etc, and think of him as someone who has the power to cause anyone or anything to become whatever he desires - aren't they actually using God's name in their hearts, to the extent that they know the meaning of the name and ascribe it to a label? Think about it.

33

Christians Know Who God Is

by Loi_241 in

many of us christians have a good question for you to ask, “who is god?” there are more than six scriptures to share with you.

you know the bible itself a true message for all the people on earth.

the bible explains ‘in the beginning god created everything: heaven, earth, animals, people and everything.’ thus, you notice god created humans, adam and eve.

Island Man

The OP makes a number of very unconvincing and unsubstantiated assertions. Very typical of religious folk.

13

Would crime rate go up if we were 100% positive this is the only life???

by James Mixon in

no resurrection, no 70 virgins, no 7 millions jw's living for thousand of years, no coming.

back as dog or cat you are dead and done..

Island Man

No.

Scandinavian countries have some of the highest percentages of atheists, of all countries in the world. But their crime rate is one of the lowest.

Most humans are good people. Religious persons who sincerely believe that fear of God is the only thing holding people back from anarchy - those religious persons are inherently lawless and immoral persons who know that they themselves are only being good because of fear of God and they are projecting their own lawless predispositions unto the rest of society.

20

A Sincere Question Regarding Macroevolution

by jacobm in

jw
friends

i have a sincere question related to macroevolution:.

microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species.

despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change:.

Island Man

Google "Ring Species".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvYpBi7HG9k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb6Z6NVmLt8

"Have scientists ever been able to recreate or virtually witness a Macroevolution type jump that "transcends the boundaries of a single species"?"

There are no jumps from one species to another. The transition from one species to another is extremely gradual spanning multiple generations. The best way I can think of illustrating it is to imagine the brightness of the sky at midday and at midnight as being two different species. Now imagine each second of time from midday to midnight as being one generation of the species in the process of evolution. There is no single second of time that jumps from midday to midnight. Rather, there are multiple seconds of time between the two. Also each second of daylight leads to another second of daylight. No single second spans the transition from night to day. It's an extremely gradual transition whose dynamics cannot be perceived by the human eye viewing it in real time. Evolution is like that. Each generation of the transition is able to reproduce with the generation immediately before it - they are always of the same species. But "final" generation would not be able to reproduce with the original generation. They are as different as midnight from midday.

So when creationists say that they believe micro-evolution but not macro-evolution, it's as if they're saying: 'I believe one second of afternoon daylight leads to another second of very very very slightly less bright afternoon daylight. But I don't believe that the brightness of midday eventually turns to the darkness of midnight. The idea is utterly ridiculous!'

LOL.