Posts by adamah

15

Did the Serpent Lie?

by CyrusThePersian in

in john 8:44 jesus is quoted as saying that the devil is a "liar and the father of the lie.

" an obvious reference to the serpent story in genesis chapter 3.

(the johannine community, responsible for the gospel of john, the epistles of 1, 2, 3 john and revelation, was among the first to equate the serpent of genesis with satan, see rev.

adamah

seraphim said-

Genesis doesn’t have to be literal to have truth in it. The creation story is a metaphorical symbolic parable which is kind of obvious to some Christians, just not the fundamentalist types.

Yeah, this is a well-worn path taken here, no?

Once confronted with insurmountable evidence proving the sheer impossibility of a Bible claim, believers are forced to back-peddle and claim it's all only metaphor, even cite it as an example of poetic beauty.

Sure, except they're willing to forget that ancient men ACTUALLY BELIEVED a perfect Adam and Eve existed in a Garden-like location on the Planet Earth, and actually ATE a wisdom-bestowing magical fruit that violated God's command; hence, that's how death was introduced to mankind. THAT'S the purpose the story provided to Hebrews: an answer to the question, "why do humans grow old and die"?

Heck, anyone who's an ex-JW KNOWS they STILL believe it as LITERAL TRUTH, a HISTORIC account. They still accept THAT explanation, when science tells us death is actually a result of the evolutionary process of life, resulting from oxidative cellular degradation from accumulated photochemical-mediated damage, that prevents aged organisms from passing on their damaged genes.

Hence the Ark of the Covenant that apparently held the stone tablets of the law symbolised the tree of good and evil, and the covering lid of the ark symbolised the tree of life. The holy of holies represents the centre of the Garden of Eden, which is also why trees were part of the decoration of the temple.

Huh, and here I thought the Ark of the Covenant symbolized the Ark of Noah, the life-boat that protected the World from God's destruction, just like the covenant. Silly me, just being too stoopid (sic) to keep up with all the run-away use of symbology!

You apparently have watched Ancient Hebrew scholar Francesca Stavrakopoulou's BBC series on Secrets of the Bible, since she made a similar claim of the Garden of Eden being inspired by the interior decorations of the Temple:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZ9cvYB7Tes

(PT 1 of 4)

Although it's a compelling idea, I'm not completely convinced (although it's as plausible as any other explanation, I suppose).

Adam

33

Evolution, Biogeography VS. Experimental archaeology

by Brother of the Hawk in

i thought of posting this on an ongoing thread regarding proof of noahs flood by poster *lost*, but i think a separate thread is needed.

this is why.. first my disclaimer.

this thread is a theory since so many people love the theory and so as not to hurt feelings and insult anyone, this is only a theory.. my personal observation is this, as long as you bash watchtower all is ok. as soon as you try to present any resemblance of christianity or any belief in the bible, such as the flood, you are personally bashed.

adamah

First my disclaimer. This thread is a “THEORY” since so many people love “The THEORY” and so as not to hurt feelings and insult anyone, this is only a “THEORY.”

First problem: LEARN the definition of the word THEORY. What you offer is NOT a Universal Flood "theory" (a hypothesis that has experimental evidence to back it up), but in is fact a Flood HYPOTHESIS, a hunch or guess about a mechanism that you feel warrants further investigation but which currently has no experimental evidence to back it up.

You clearly don't understand that, or you wouldn't have repeated the "it's only a THEORY" jab (often directed against the theory of evolution), which is proof-positive that the person who says it doesn't understand that theories are hypotheses that HAVE earned the right to be called 'theories', after having been confirmed by multiple independent lines of scientific research (eg evolution is supported by fossil records, DNA analysis, even observed changes in living species of bacteria, viruses, AKA drug resistance).

You call yourself an "experimental archaeologist", but seemingly you don't even KNOW the difference between a theory and hypothesis? My-oh-my.... I won't embarrass you by asking your credentials to make such a claim, as I can only imagine the rigorous study required (and the $5 SASE and box-top off a sugery cereal).

If it helps, think of Richard Dawkins book entitled, "The God Hypothesis". Dawkins is correct, and he KNOWS the difference between a theory and a hypothesis, since the existence of any and all deities REMAINS hypotheses, a guess, a hunch, what some believers might desparately WANT to be true, but for which no scientific evidence exists. Thus God's existence remains unproven, and it cannot be referred to as "The God Theory".

Adam

19

if you had a miraculous, unexplained escape from death..

by nonjwspouse in

plus you were not baptised but grew up in a jw family, stopped attending or studying for 30 years then attempted to go back for a couple years.

the attempt had serious negative effects on your marriage, and personality, so you decided to stop all studies etc, for the time being ( over a year).

but with the full intention to return later and be baptised.. this miraculous, unexplained escape from death was discovered to have occured during this time of complete detachment from studies etc.. what would you feel explained this escape?

adamah

Today's Dr visit, and words " You shouldn't even be here given what happened to you", hit me very hard, and it did him too. It has a small chance of happening again, which is also scary. Next time he might not be so lucky.

Sounds like it's high-time to find a new doctor, one who's not superstitious, since that's not helping anyone. Yes, they're out there, and they THINK they're doing believers a favor by supporting their patient's superstitious beliefs, when in fact they're only likely insecure about their OWN faith in God, and abuse their power over others in order to profess their faiths on the job. That's totally unprofessional behavior, and something that may warrant a written complaint to the State Medical Board as unprofessional behavior. For a science-based profession like medical SCIENCE, offering a "God Dun It!" excuse is simply unacceptable....

But aside from that, this sounds like engaging in a whole lot of post-hoc rationalization to me.

Think about it: if the family member beats the odds and survives, it's explained away as being given a second-chance by God. If the family member DIDN'T survive, it's explained away as punishment from God for turning his back on him. God cannot lose for winning, and the entire dynamic is driven by what someone WANTS to believe as an outcome correlated with a cause, AKA an untested, unprovable hypotheses.

If someone is willing to give their mind over to that kind of absurd reasoning and then call it "logic", then they deserve what they get. That goes for doctors as well as patients!

Adam

15

Did the Serpent Lie?

by CyrusThePersian in

in john 8:44 jesus is quoted as saying that the devil is a "liar and the father of the lie.

" an obvious reference to the serpent story in genesis chapter 3.

(the johannine community, responsible for the gospel of john, the epistles of 1, 2, 3 john and revelation, was among the first to equate the serpent of genesis with satan, see rev.

adamah

I've always thought of the story of Adam and Eve as serving as the literary equivalent of the beginning of a typical traffic school, which always begins with the same cliched' gruesome photos taken from traffic accident scenes as if to explain WHY you should pay very close attention on a Saturday morning to dry vehicle codes when you'd rather be anywhere else. The point is that the Torah is 50% dry legal codes ("thou shalt not mix cottons with linens"), with parables of historical characters blended into the Torah to display certain messages offered why paying strict attention is required to avoid making a boo-booh.

Technically, the serpent was the first-recorded whistleblower in the World, who's greater SIN was disclosing insider-information that he wasn't authorized by God to leak to humans. He spoke truth against power, and didn't lie: we saw which one won out there!

The part I like is God's bald-faced lie, "the DAY you eat of it, you shall surely die". Note how the serpent uses the term "day" to refer to immediately after eating the fruit ("the DAY you eat of it, your eyes will be opened"), but then God is supposedly using the same Hebrew word for day, but referring to a 1,000 yr day (as 2nd Peter offered in the NT) to account for Adam's death, some 900 yrs later?

Of course, God's apologetists also will claim God was actually referring to Adam's "spiritual death" etc, which rings as wild extra-scriptural speculation, making excuses for the same character who they believe will exercise control over THEIR eternal fate (AKA kissing up to the boss).

(Of course, 2nd Peter single-handedly decides that Lot deserved to be declared "righteous", even though the Genesis account went out of it's way to depict Lot as "the prodigal nephew", and closes with Lot living in a cave, committing drunken incest, being spiritually dead to God (dead people were buried in caves; the name 'Lot' even is symbolic, meaning "veiled" or "hidden" from God). The Bible just makes it up as it goes, and believers are given permission to engage in post-hoc rationalizations to find whatever works for them.)

And of course, neither the serpent nor God offered the important little detail that God Himself WOULD be the DIRECT CAUSE of Adam and Eve's death, by taking actions that led to their deaths (with whole spinning sword to block access to the Tree of Life, being cursed, etc).

The story has so many continuity errors and logical holes and inconsistencies to it, you could drive a Mac truck through it.

If anyone can make it through the first 10 chapters of Genesis and NOT recognize it's mythical stories written into Judaism theology and built upon older Sumerian/Greek mythology, then they're possibly: a) brain-dead b) suffering from Stockholm Syndrome c) they don't WANT to see the problems, but WANT it to be true, since they're so heavily emotionally-invested in the story-line.

Adam

36

Would You Shun Your Own Son or Daughter For A Million Dollars for the rest of your life??

by Narcissistic Supply in

jw
friends

simply for the money..

adamah

The question reflects a basic MISUNDERSTANDING of human motivations: it's not about money.

Social psychologists know you don't need to pay $$$ to get people to do something, and in fact, paying $$$ would likely have the opposite effect of demotivating compliance by cheapening the decision, forcing people to think in terms of THEIR own economic/monetary value. That's the LAST thing you'd want to do here, since those who shun use the plausibly-deniable excuse of doing it FOR the benefit of the person they're shunning.

Instead of monetary reward, a policy that enforces shunning works most effectively simply by telling people they have to do it to earn some non-financial intangible 'reward', to gain access to something of shared value amongst members of the group (eg surviving Armageddon, Panda Petting privileges in the New System, earning God's approval, etc). Take economic factors out of the decision, and many people will throw their own flesh and blood under the bus in a heart-beat to get that non-economic benefit.

Whether it was done intentionally or not, religion has long exploited weaknesses in the psychology of human decision-making, after stumbling upon some common principles that just work. Christianity has had millenia to perfect the secret-blend that allows for motivation of human behavior.

Adam

12

Feeling not well: guilt

by Gorbatchov in

gorby is not feeling well at the moment.

wife and kids went to the kh last week.

gorby stayed at home watching live soccer game psv - milan.

adamah

Yeah, I think it's a mistake to try and make JWs out as if they're all evil bad people: most of them AREN'T, but they ARE trapped into a social dynamic that they're unable to exit, due to self-perpetuating mechanisms and policies. To the person, they lack the ability to exercise control over their own lives, and instead go with the will of the group. Social control IS a powerful force, and few are able to go against the group, EVEN IF the group is heading off a cliff like lemmings. It goes against ALL human instincts to NOT run with the crowd, but in this case, it's important to do so: sometimes the crowd IS quite mad, and simply put, is WRONG.

Ultimately the best decision you could make would be to give them the chance at freedom in life so many have, but take for granted: the freedom to choose a religion without social pressure of the risk of loss of one's family. In that regards, the best thing you can do is be the example in the family of someone who reassures them that you'll ALWAYS be their father who loves them, whatever religion they're apart of.

Be the "bigger man", even the father you never had, and that may pay off in spades when they come to the correct conclusion themselves in the decades that follow. You can only be true to thine own self, and that's nothing to feel guilty about, but quite proud of.

Adam

85

The final chapter in the confusedandalone story...

by confusedandalone in

this morning i get a frantic call from my sister (who has been baptized 1 year and one month and never attends meetings anymore).

in tears she tells me that this morning my father picked her up in the car and told her that i was am apostate.

that i no longer loved jehovah and that i was going to be disfellowshipped.

adamah

Congrats C&A, as in the end, you exited from the Borg on YOUR own terms, and that's what really matters to gaining a sense of personal empowerment from the exit. There's no price worth selling one's personal integrity for, as that's all you've got!

Like others have said, hope springs eternal that others may come to the right conclusion on their own steam and at their own pace, but ultimately everyone needs to make that decision for themselves (and no one can do it for them).

Adam

17

When You Were A Witness Did You Tattle? Snoop?

by OneStepOut93 in

were you one of the witnesses that tattled and tried to find people doing "wrong"?.

or did you ever tattle on someone and regretted it later?

would you take it back?.

adamah

I suspect this thread will be alot like the "shunning confessions" thread, where it's ALWAYS going to be hard for some to admit to having been someone who shunned others, and who realized it was fundamentally WRONG to do so, rather than as someone who wants to rationalize shunning behavior as a "show of love". There's always going to be those who feel better than others by saying, "well, I NEVER did that!"

It's the same dynamic with tattling/snoopers: of course few would see it as tattling even now, when it's always easier to rationalize it away as, "telling an elder of someone's actions so as to help them", or choose to conveniently "forget" about such incidences.

Ironic really, since the first step in growth and regaining such healthy boundaries is by admitting you had a problem, in the first place. Can't grow beyond it if you don't 'own' it.

Adam

10

What would it take....

by Separation of Powers in

jw
friends

i was speaking to my sister the other day.

she has faded much quicker than i. she moved on with her life along with her husband and family.

we still talk every day and share our little ditties about life.

adamah

I often ask a form of that question to a "true believer":

"What evidence could possibly be presented to you to convince you that God doesn't exist?"

If they're honest, they'll admit that NO evidence could be presented, since they KNOW God exists; they just KNOW it.

There's no point even talking any further to them about it, since their belief in God is not logical but is quite untouchable; their belief exists ABOVE the realm of evidence, and is in the realm of DESIRES, what they WANT to be true.

Whether they want to admit it or not, their belief in God exists largely because of THEIR egotistical desire for Him to exist, and not based on some external verifiable evidence of God's existence or not. That's a damning admission, a self-incriminating statement for them to make (and even harder to recognize, since their ego is entirely intertwined up in the decision).

Restated, it's not a LOGICAL decision, but an EMOTIONAL one: anyone who thinks it's purely driven for logical reasons is missing the boat for what keeps most people inside the JWs: the fear of loss of social connectedness, the threat of expulsion from the group that even controls one's power of association with one's own family.

You'd better believe that the JWs understand that element, and use it against those who they seek to marginalize, declaring them as "apostates" or bad associations. That's the power of the group, and God help anyone who dares take it on, since you're going up against the status quo.

Adam

35

How would YOU explain cognitive disonance to a Jehovahs Witness on your doorstep

by smiddy in

seriously , in plain simple language that the most thick headed jw would understand.. and what examples would you use.. smiddy.

adamah

The thing that gets often overlooked is that cognitive dissonance is UNCOMFORTABLE, and hence the brain will try any number of possible strategies in order to ameliorate (reduce) the pain of contradiction, eg suppression of thoughts, distractions, rationalizations, etc. These strategies often seemingly work well enough for many to reduce the dissonance, and people WILL forget about the contradiction if they ignore it long enough or accept an explanation as valid (when it really doesn't explain the contradiction; Bible apolegetics exist, NOT because they offer a logical explanation, but because they fill a niche/need).

Adam