Posts by adamah

268

After 2000 years since JC was executed ,why have we heard not a whisper from GOD ALMIGHTY ?

by smiddy in

he/she had no problem talking to adam and eve ,though they were sinners in his/her sight .throughout the hebrew sriptures, ot, he /she had no problem communicating with fallen man ,imperfect humans , to dictate his will to his subjects by means of prophets , male and female ,according to the bible , the old testament ,the hebrew scriptures , god communicated not once ,not twice ,not even thrice ,but dozens of times during the first 4000 years of human history according to the bible.. why has this god been so silent these past 2000 years ,when their have been atrocities above the scale of anything that has ever been seen these past 6000 years of human existence .. oh you may say that the atrocities were not committed by god they were committed by man.

fair enough .but god intervened in human affairs in such smaller infringements.

with prophets or so the bible says.. the so called apostacy after the last of the apostles , the influence of satan in the world ,( or was that after 1914 ,) and the 2000 year gap when christ was supposed to return ,never mind about all the crap that went before it .. the fact remains we have never heard from god ,any god, or even" a " god, with either his/her approval or disapproval of events good or bad these past 2000 years... smiddy.

adamah

Dewandelaar and TEC,

What does the term "inalienable human rights" mean to both of you? If you know what it MEANS, is it a worthy GOAL to see that every human is NOT denied them (i.e. alienated from their fundamental human rights)?

Both of your examples indicate you REALLY DON'T QUITE UNDERSTAND what that phrase actually means, since conflating the experience of a slave 2,500 yrs ago with that of a modern-day person holding a job and calling themselves wage-slaves is just outrageous, a TEXTBOOK example of creating a false equivalency based on using the same word "slave" as if it carries the same meaning then as it does now.

Tammy, I need to assemble a response to the points you raised/questions you asked earlier; I didn't forget, and am not ignoring them.

Adam

40

Now I'm not a JW, is it ok for me to...

by Julia Orwell in

jw
friends

...drink a lot?

gosh i love wine.

i like a good bottle of wine each night, and i have a high tolerance to alcohol, though i never drank much (except for a couple of times with the vodka, but i don't keep that stuff in the house anymore, way too dangerous) as a jw because getting slightly happy is a 'sin'.

adamah

Julia said-

I feel like I wanna finish this bottle of wine, not because I want to, but because I can.

Yeah, that's an extremely poor reason to drink, or to do anything that is potentially self-destructive, as it is acting out based on defiance (which is not unusual for people after having exited a higly-controlled environment; many pop like a bottle of champagne after the cork is removed, after years of repression).

Although you don't have to follow THEIR rules, it would be extremely foolish to leave one damaging high-controlled environment ONLY to engage in self-destructive practices which only hurts yourself and those around you, in the long run: THAT would be the same end-point of WHY you left the JWs in the first place, right? Because it was potentially hurting others (eg no blood policy), based on a lie? You can do as much REAL damage to your loved ones with a bottle as you can do with a Bible.

You now have to accept the responsibility to YOURSELF (and your liver) to NOT do anything that is harmful to YOUR long-term best interests, and that includes dealing with alcoholism.

If you think you have a problem with drinking, you might be right. Seek professional assistance, and don't simply trade one addiction (endorphin rush from feeling loved by God) for another (endorphin rush from alcohol), since there's things that are far WORSE than being a JW and you can't take control of your life if you're only going to hand control over to others (JW elders) or to a bottle.

Just remember: Rome wasn't built in a day, so don't try to make up for lost time, take on too much change at once, etc. Pace yourself (which is also good advice when drinking).

Adam

2

AP News article: Speaking in tongues is DOWN amongst Pentecostals?

by adamah in

speaking in tongues is down amongst pentecostals?.

http://abcnews.go.com/health/wirestory/messages-tongues-pentecostals-20126103?singlepage=true.

messages in tongues down among pentecostalslos angeles august 31, 2013 (ap)by sarah parvini associated press at three crosses church, pastor ken walters urges his parishioners to join him in song and scripture.

adamah

Speaking in tongues is DOWN amongst Pentecostals?

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/messages-tongues-pentecostals-20126103?singlePage=true

Messages in Tongues Down Among Pentecostals

LOS ANGELES August 31, 2013 (AP) By SARAH PARVINI Associated Press At Three Crosses Church, Pastor Ken Walters urges his parishioners to join him in song and scripture. The charismatic 58-year-old extends his arms skyward and belts out melodies praising God.

While the small Assemblies of God congregation goes through all the traditional trappings of a Pentecostal service, there is one notable absence: speaking in tongues, a defining trait of the faith.

The 40-member church is among many nationwide that are reducing or cutting out speaking in tongues as they become more popular and move to the mainstream. It's a shift that has unsettled some more traditional Pentecostals who say the practice is at the heart of a movement that evolved out of an interracial revival and remains a spontaneous way for the poor and dispossessed to have a direct line to God.

They question the wisdom of placing less emphasis on a tenet that has defined Pentecostalism for more than a century.

"It's different now," Walters said. "People don't like to stand out if they don't have to."

As the religion becomes more widely accepted, Walters said, there has been a tendency for large Pentecostal churches to downplay the differences between Pentecostalism and other well-known Christian denominations.

The Assemblies of God, one of the nation's largest Pentecostal denominations with 3 million members, has 66 million members worldwide. Assemblies officials worried about the decline in messages in tongues — or spirit baptism — at a general council meeting this month. The practice decreased by about 3 percent to fewer than 82,000, the lowest total since 1995, according to statistics released by the Assemblies of God.

"This is a long-developing phenomenon," said Harvey Cox, an expert in Pentecostalism and professor of religion at the Harvard Divinity School. "They don't want what appears to be objectionable to stick out or be viewed with suspicion."

Meanwhile, newer strands of Pentecostalism — often with roots in other countries like Nigeria and El Salvador — continue to emphasize the practice in church as well as in personal prayer, Cox said.

While all Pentecostals accept speaking in tongues as a "gift of the Holy Spirit," these smaller, niche congregations aren't afraid to embrace the practice and don't care whether it scares some away, he said.

Pentecostalism represents one of the fastest-growing segments of global Christianity. At least a quarter of the world's 2 billion Christians are members of the Pentecostal faith or related charismatic movements, according to the Pew Research Center.

For the first decade, the movement was mainly comprised of poor white and African-American worshippers. Influenced by the spiritual renewal of the Azusa Street Revival — a Pentecostal revival meeting that took place in Los Angeles in 1906 — the Assemblies grew with interracial services that included speaking in tongues, prophecy and faith healing.

Occasionally, parishioners were "slain in the Spirit," falling to the floor following an encounter with the Holy Spirit.

Pentecostals believe speaking in tongues may be an unlearned human language— as the Bible claims happened on the Day of Pentecost — or it may be the language of angels. Studies show that words spoken when delivering messages in tongues lack the components and patterns of a true language.

At his service in a small chapel in the West Valley Christian Center, Walters steps aside after reading scripture and introduces a guest: Nick Farone, a pastor who runs a Christian center in Louisiana.

A member of the Pentecostal Church Of God — a denomination with about 500,000 members — Farone uses his time on stage to preach returning to the basics of the faith. Parishioners in the pews nod their heads in agreement, swaying back and forth.

"Praise Jesus," a woman says, her eyes closed and head bowed.

Farone said many Pentecostal pastors are failing to stress the importance of messages in tongues in their teachings.

The emotional and spiritual connection of speaking in tongues, the visceral experience, is what appeals to those in need during a time of economic and social instability, and is arguably the heart of the Pentecostal movement, he said.

After the service, Farone placed his right hand on his forehead and began to speak again. This time, the words were impossible to understand, streaming out in a long, rambling string of sound. He had just spoken in tongues, he said later.

"This is our power," he added, acknowledging he was unsure of what he had just said. "We shouldn't be ashamed."

The success of smaller congregations in Latin America and Africa is linked to their openness to the supernatural experience, Farone said. Poor parishioners feel they can contribute to the congregation by interpreting the word of God, despite living in hardship.

"You can't preach wealth in these places," he said. "Smaller churches have bigger hearts."

Adrian Tigmo has been attending service at Three Crosses for more than 20 years. The 64-year-old said he believes messages in tongues have declined because people outside the faith have been critical of the practice.

While he prays in tongues during worship, he does so quietly and to himself — not aloud for the congregation to hear.

For him, the resurgence of speaking in tongues in church depends on people leading by example. He said, "People can't just give up."

Hmm, perhaps because the people who do it like the way it makes them feel?

Adam

55

Do You Think The Witnesses Actually Know What They Believe In?

by minimus in

i think they know what they don't believe in, like no blood, no hellfire, no trinity....but they really couldn't explain what their beliefs are and why they believe as they do.

do you agree?

adamah

I don't think the average JW actually CARES about what they believe in, as long as it's what the GROUP says they believe. They often don't even KNOW what they're supposed to believe: if you've ever seen one JW explain something and then stop with a quizzical look on their face and turn to their partner JW and ask, "Wait a minute, is that right? What do we believe about X, again?" you've seen this dynamic in action.

With most people, they believe what they believe NOT based on logic (JWs believe a snake was possessed by Satan to make it talk, for crying out loud!), but EMOTIONS. Hence ex-JWs often think that if only they find the PERFECT smoking-gun logical contradiction in JW beliefs, they'd have found the universal anti-JW fact to convince everyone about TTATT. That's about as silly as searching for the fountain of youth, since it's often not about LOGIC.

Instead, most people believe based on EMOTION, subconsciously weighing the implications of their beliefs on THEIR lives; it's ends-based justification in action, since they consider the EFFECTS of the beliefs on their lives, and not the actual TRUTH of the beliefs (they don't have to, since EVERYTHING the JWs believe is TRUTH; that's what the Little Blue Book tells them). Hence they often will believe only what they WANT to believe, and that's exactly what FAITH is all about.

Hence people are often cognitively-blinded from seeing even the most glaring contradition you show them, since like I said, it's not about logic, but emotion.

Adam

32

Mom calls out Jehovah

by Poztate in

jw
friends

an 18 year oul girl stabbed her mom to death with 79 stab wounds.

her mom cried out jehovah during the attack to no avail.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/judge-rules-18-year-old-isabella-guzman-of-aurora-will-be-held-without-bond-in-mothers-slaying.

adamah

steve2 said-

Adam, the question of the Watchtower's significant and negative impact on people is an entirely separate question from the violent actions a few individuals carry out who have suffered that impact.

Yes, that was the original conclusion you stated, which you're now repeating. Beg the question, and lead with your conclusions much?

Or are you saying that anyone who has had a strict religious upbringing should be excused for their interpersonal violence and instead blame their upbringing?

"Excused"? 'Straw-man much?

No, I'm saying that it's only one of many mitigating factors which likely WILL be considered when the case goes to trail (or more likely, at the sentencing phase). Knowing the climate of cover-up of sexual abuse in JWs (eg 2 Witness Rule), and with a JW minority sister with an attractive young daughter, I won't exactly be shocked if an investigation reveals this girl was abused by someone in a position of authority in the KH, but the abuser was able to suppress the charges made by the victim and the daughter blamed the mother for not standing up for her. No evidence of that, AFAIK (and you can just imagine the paper shredder's in the KH getting pretty hot the day after she committed the murder, to avoid bringing "dishonor to Jehovah's organization"). Just saying, such a scenario wouldn't be that far out of the realm of possibilities to explain her behavior (I saw some comments elsewhere about this being somewhat a recent development in her personality, but who knows).

Anyone who blames their upbringing - or any other external factor - for deliberately crossing the line into violence needs to take a good hard look at themselves that they allowed themselves to act in such a dysregulated way towards others.

Straw-manning again? I didn't say that such environmental factors justify a "oh, the poor baby; let her go FREE!" approach, just that her environment IS a factor: you push someone enough, and sometimes they snap. You and I don't know what the reality of her environment and her state of mind was at the time, so it's pointless to quibble over it now, but better to wait on the investiagtion and trial when all the facts are heard.

Oh, and you might take a good hard look in the mirror to ask why you're so strongly biased, feeling the compulsion to protect existing power structures in such a knee-jerk manner, even before knowing all the facts of the case. Why are you so threatened by the suggestion of children who might snap after being sexually-abused?

You discredit the vast untold numbers of people who have suffered under the Watchtowers unloving policies by and who have not resorted to interpersonal violence often under lots of provocation.

"Discredit them", LOL?

The greater insult to young victims of a high-control group like the JWs is to tolerate a status-quo mind-set, where they're allowed to perpetrate their actions for a few more decades, and continue playing the "blame the victims" games what JWs do so well; worse to not investigate the factors where the adults MAY have contributed to raising psychologically-damaged and scarred humans in toxic environments, where surprise! Some of them DO snap.

The world is full of people only too happy to blame external factors for their violence. Thank goodness there are statutory secular laws that seek to hold people accountable for their violent behaviour.

True, they're called sociopaths.

And what a shame that high-control groups like the JWs are able to operate with little governmental restraint, due to powerful religious special-interest lobbying groups and the widespread support of theistic fantasies amongst the general population. Freedom of worship seems to be the freedom to raise brainwashed minds by feeding them 2,500 yr old paternalistic and misogynistic rules of the Ancient Hebrews, and then acting surprised when you discover that ancient legal codes aren't such a GOOD idea after all (eg 2 Witness rule).

Adam

3

"Walking" Shark discovered in Indonesia

by bytheirworks in

jw
friends

forget sharknado.. enter: "the walking dead" shark.

here's the video:.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxefud1c-do.

adamah

Uh-oh, better not let Ned Flanders find out about these "walking fish":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfy1XqfmL1Y

Adam

32

Mom calls out Jehovah

by Poztate in

jw
friends

an 18 year oul girl stabbed her mom to death with 79 stab wounds.

her mom cried out jehovah during the attack to no avail.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/judge-rules-18-year-old-isabella-guzman-of-aurora-will-be-held-without-bond-in-mothers-slaying.

adamah

Steve2 said-

Others, while not condoning the girl's murderous rage, have suggested the part played by the Watchtower. This is nonsense. The difficulties between youth and their parents go back millenia and cross all cultures and religions.

You're kidding, right? You've likely seen literally hundreds of threads discussing the harmful and damaging policies of high-control groups like the JWs, discussing the effects of shunning on effected youth, policies and beliefs that shelter/cover up sexual molestation, no blood transfusions, no flag salute, national anthem, no sports, worldly friends, etc.

Not surprisingly, such an environment actually DOES have an effect on SOME youth, even driving them to the brink of suicide (and many, over the brink, when they sense no other way out). You may have even experienced it personally, or seen it in others who've suffered as a result of such practices and policies.

Yet when someone get pushed past their breaking point, suddenly some are not willing to CONSIDER linking causes with effects, even denying it as a possibility? ( The clinical psychologist was SPECULATING, of course, but not without reason: although we don't know if there's any actual evidence of WHY she was driven to a homicidal rage, he was speaking based on a high-index of clinical suspicion, based on past experiences with patients.)

It has nothing to do with one's political leanings, but with COMMON SENSE: it's hard NOT to link an ultra-conservative approach to life (eg anti-education policies, misogyny/sex abuse cover-ups, etc) being harmful to some personality types, where being raised in almost any other environment would lead to very different outcomes. That's exactly WHY society has decided that some children should be removed from their parents where there's abuse (emotional/sexually/physically): it's an affront to basic human decency to let them be raised in unhealthy environments, and it's needed to reduce the incidence of tragic outcomes like this.

Of course, we wouldn't even be talking about the girl if she had done the "socially-approved thing" and only killed herself, but instead she killed her mom in a head-line grabbing manner. If she hadn't done that, it wouldn't have made the headlines, and JWs would say, "oh well, demon possession drove her to kill herself; she was a bad seed anyway", and the real truth wouldn't come out; the JW would be free to continue with their harmful backwards Luddite policies.

Point being, it seems some want to have their cake and eat it, too, crying how harmful and abusive the Sparlock cartoon is (!), while being unwilling to consider the actual evidence when cases like this occur (and people actually die).

Adam

268

After 2000 years since JC was executed ,why have we heard not a whisper from GOD ALMIGHTY ?

by smiddy in

he/she had no problem talking to adam and eve ,though they were sinners in his/her sight .throughout the hebrew sriptures, ot, he /she had no problem communicating with fallen man ,imperfect humans , to dictate his will to his subjects by means of prophets , male and female ,according to the bible , the old testament ,the hebrew scriptures , god communicated not once ,not twice ,not even thrice ,but dozens of times during the first 4000 years of human history according to the bible.. why has this god been so silent these past 2000 years ,when their have been atrocities above the scale of anything that has ever been seen these past 6000 years of human existence .. oh you may say that the atrocities were not committed by god they were committed by man.

fair enough .but god intervened in human affairs in such smaller infringements.

with prophets or so the bible says.. the so called apostacy after the last of the apostles , the influence of satan in the world ,( or was that after 1914 ,) and the 2000 year gap when christ was supposed to return ,never mind about all the crap that went before it .. the fact remains we have never heard from god ,any god, or even" a " god, with either his/her approval or disapproval of events good or bad these past 2000 years... smiddy.

adamah

Cofty said-

Christians waffle in metaphors and then pretend they have said something.

Yup, and worse is they don't even understand what paradoxical sayings are, since they've accepted the rationalization of the paradox, having long-ago forgotten what the original disconnect was that led to it being considered paradoxical, in the first place!

That's some heavy-duty suppression of thinking, and paradoxes explain how believers come to accept that first is last, up is down, rich is poor, visible is invisible, poor is rich, faith is evidence, etc. It's just another brick in the wall of the inversion of logic that the Bible forces readers to accept. ON FAITH.

Then if they encounter a paradox that's just a bit too excessive for THEIR personal tastes, they refuse to accept it, but quickly come up with an alternative explanation that fits into THEIR image of God (and it's not hard to find an alternative approach in the Bible, the Holy Book of Multiple Choice Answers, where NO choice is wrong, if you don't think it's wrong and you can come up with a rationalization that satisfies a party of ONE: yourself).

Tammy seems to think if she can find ONE example of someone hearing voices to justify it as the basis of FAITH, that's good enough: she's willing to overlook the VASTLY more numerous examples of "men of faith" mentioned in Hebrews who DIDN'T hear a voice or see visions of future events (including Moses' parents, who had no such experience on which to base their FAITH) so she's able to ignore the MANY EXCEPTIONS that disprove her claim. That's a classic example of cherry-picking, AKA selection bias, only seeing evidence that you WANT to see, and automatically putting on the blinders for anything that DISPROVES your conclusion (where FAITH is another way of saying, 'shutting down cognition and going with one's feelings and prior beliefs').

That also explains why believers are able to excuse Abraham's rape and forced surrogacy of his slave-girl without so much as blinking an eye: they won't ALLOW THEMSELVES to "see" it. Jesus even knew about this phenomenon, being frustrated by those who had eyes but could not see. He wasn't referring to their "spiritual eyes", but their physical eyes and ears.

It's an air-tight belief system, and it SHOULD be obvious that groups like the JWs/LDS/RCC are merely MANIFESTATIONS (AKA symptoms) of the SAME underlying condition that lies at the heart of the problem: a belief in Jesus and God.

So Tammy, are you not aware of Jesus performing miracles? What are all those SIGNS that Jesus is said to have provided? Were these miracles designed to support belief in God via FAITH (unseen evidence) or KNOWLEDGE (visible evidence)?

In Mark 8, Jesus had just performed the miracle of feeding a massive crowd with a few fish and bread, but Jesus pointed out the FAILURE of miracles (SIGNS, aka VISIBLE evidence) to build FAITH in eyewitnesses, EVEN in HIS OWN APOSTLES who had witnessed TONS of his miracles with their OWN EYES:

14 And they had forgotten to take bread, and did not have more than one loaf in the boat with them. 15 And He was giving orders to them, saying, “Watch out! Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod.” 16 They began to discuss with one another the fact that they had no bread. 17 And Jesus, aware of this, said to them, “Why do you discuss the fact that you have no bread? Do you not yet see or understand? Do you have a hardened heart? 18 “HAVING EYES, DO YOU NOT SEE? AND HAVING EARS, DO YOU NOT HEAR? And do you not remember, 19 when I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces you picked up?” They said to Him, “Twelve.” 20 “When I broke the seven for the four thousand, how many large baskets full of broken pieces did you pick up?” And they said to Him, “Seven.” 21 And He was saying to them, “Do you not yet understand?”

Jesus was ASKING them to DO THE MATH, verbalizing the miracle that they JUST HAD witnessed with their OWN physical EYES and EARS, but had not understood or internalized, since it clearly hadn't built their FAITH in Jesus to be able to "provide for their daily needs"! They were discussing the FACT (KNOWLEDGE) that they saw with their own eyes that they currently had no bread, yet were anxious that they'd starve! And this, right AFTER WITNESSING Jesus feeding the ENTIRE crowd with their OWN EYES!

Jesus was implying in verse 21 that FAITH does NOT come from witnessing miracles (visible evidence), but FAITH IS built on BELIEVING IN Jesus ability to PERFORM MIRACLES, which Paul continues with Jesus theme by saying FAITH paradoxically comes from NOT WITNESSING signs, seeing visible evidence! That's why Jesus even refused to provide SIGNS from Heaven, earlier in the same Chapter:

Mark 8:11-12

11 The Pharisees came out and began to argue with Him, seeking from Him a sign from heaven, to test Him. 12 Sighing deeply in His spirit, He said, “Why does this generation seek for a sign? Truly I say to you, no sign will be given to this generation.”

The Pharisees sought to test HIM, seeking a SIGN (visible evidence): Houston, we have a problem, as Jesus doesn't get TESTED (except by his Father)! The request exasperated Jesus DEEPLY, such that he threw up his hands in disgust and said no more signs would be provided.

So your saying that you 'test Jesus' reveals you are thinking like a Pharisee, a Doubting Thomas, AKA someone who is WEAK in their faith.

Of course, it's awfully convenient for Jesus to say that visible evidence is no longer provided to support belief in God, since SIGNS never WERE possible, in the first place.

Cessationists hold that miracles are stopped in modern-times, following the death of the apostles; continuationists disagree, and the disagreement has resulted in a schism in Christianity long ago:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessationism

Random errata:

You cannot lead unless you first serve. It sounds like a paradox, but it is a truth.

That demonstrates you're entirely missing the point of a paradox, since I never said it WASN'T based in truth; I SAID paradoxes are designed to appear as illogical and counter-intuitive, until it's resolved away with rationalizations (just as you did with ALL of them).

"And if a man strikes you on one check, turn to him the other check, also."

This is not a paradox.

You fail to understand that the NORMAL human response is to defend oneself when you're assaulted, so turning the cheek is the PARADOXICAL response. Of COURSE it is explained away by citing love for one's fellow man, but you miss the ENTIRE POINT of a paradox: it's SUPPOSED to be counter-intuitive at first glance to grab one's attention.

Adamah: Abraham had to rely on rationalization (a knowledge-based thought process) on a belief in resurrection to justify his FAITH, since he didn't KNOW beforehand that God would call it off at the last moment. God didn't TELL him, "OK, this is a TEST of your faith" beforehand. Tammy: Yeah... I don't get your point. Yeah, it's clear you missed the point. Despite being called a prophet, Abraham BY DEFINITION COULDN'T have known that God was TESTING HIS FAITH by ordering him to kill Isaac (i.e. Abraham couldn't KNOW that God would only have him stop at the last moment), since otherwise it wouldn't be a TEST of his FAITH! If Abraham KNEW AHEAD of time that God would say, "STOP!", then that's not a "TEST" of anything, if one KNOWS what the answer WILL be BEFORE the test is given: that's CHEATING, a rigged game, where the 'fix is in' (already KNOWING what the answer WILL BE BEFORE the question is asked, like the game show scandal from the 1950's where contestants were provided the correct answer, since it made for exciting TV). Abraham HAD to proceed with the test, even plunging the knife into Isaac's neck, having FAITH that God would resurrect his dead corpse afterwards. THAT'S the kind of faith required to please Jehovah, per Paul, and God only stopped Abraham from doing killing Isaac after he got the answer he required (although, AGAIN, it makes no sense that an omniscient being has to TEST things, as it should already KNOW future events; God blows his own omniscience traits by testing anything). All prophets know the future events... because they were TOLD or SHOWN them.

NOPE, not so.

You clearly don't understand that the word 'prophet' in the Bible does NOT always refer to someone who has been given the charismatic gift of 'prescience' (foresight, the ability to see or know future events, which is needed to make prophecies and is granted by God to SOME mortals like Isaiah, Ezekiel, etc, those who's writings constitute the Nevi'im, part of the Tanakh).

I fully expect you to deny that, too, even though it's a KNOWN FACT, even as the example of the prophet Abraham above should show.

He didn't have to act... but it does show that one is allowed to question God, albeit with respect... because of course you could be the one not understanding, and lacking faith in the love that you know God IS, and the promises He has made and taught... if you think to judge Him without even asking Him.

You don't understand that Abraham didn't question an ORDER he was given by God (eg to kill Isaac)? He questioned a policy that didn't personally involve him (i.e. Abraham wasn't ordered to personally kill the Sodomites; the angels were). Instead, Abraham was actually serving as what Hebrews referred to as a go'el, a mediator or redeemer who acted on behalf of others (in this case he didn't even personally know). This was a respected endeavor which was considered honorable, and his example was used to encourage such interventions on bahalf of others. But you completely missed the significance that Abraham is portrayed as playing an honorable role in Hebrew society, which was obvious to anyone who heard the story in the context of ancient Hebraic beliefs in 500BC. What ELSE have you missed?

No, I'm going with an asking questions; testing the inspired expression approach. You know the one that Abraham used... and then later we are TOLD to test the spirit, to see if what was spoken came from God.

"Testing the spirit" directly contradicts the concept of Jesus' chastizing of Pharisees and Doubting Thomas for their lack of FAITH, example of Abraham offering Isaac, etc so resolving that contradiction falls squarely on YOUR shoulders (hint: you'll rationalize it away with SOMETHING that makes sense to you).

The scenario is you're TOLD that killing the person is the "greatest act of love", and YOU have to act on FAITH.

Yeah, I heard you the first time. I don't think you heard me. How would that be the greatest act of love? That is a question I would ask, considering all He has taught ABOUT love.

OK, then let's modify the scenario:

Tammy is told by Jesus that she needs to kill a person as an act of "the greatest love" for them (preventing them from committing a great sin that triggers further bloodshed, even a war), AND for the greatest love of others, since the person is planning to self-detonate on a bus loaded with 100 small innocent children. You can prevent this horrible event by killing the person just moments before they board the bus thus preventing major bloodshed, and placing the issue of whether to resurrect the person into God's hands.

So, what do you do? Whatever you call it (FAITH, etc) do you follow Jesus' ORDERS (as any good Christian is expected to do in similar circumstances)? Or do you insist that Jesus pick someone else to do his work, since your FAITH is all about what he does for YOU, and your faith in him just ain't all that real?

(expecting waffles to be served up piping hot, in response.)

Adam

24

a little fun stumbling 2 jw's in fs

by JunkYardDog in

jw
friends

i run into 70 yr old jw's working houses, i watch how long they stand at doors with no one answering.

so i come up and ask you know someone living here?

you been standing at the door a long time.

adamah

Well, kudos for airing some hostility and "having some fun" with them, but if you think you raised some doubts in their minds which might've actually HELPED them as human beings to escape from the JWs, then you're likely WRONG: you only managed to elicit a CLASSIC defense mechanisms (eg his parroting "we'll only have to wait to see"). So you might want to have yourself checked for being deluded, if your goal was to actually HELP them break free.

"Shot-gunning" a load of issues at a JW is rarely effective, since WHO responds to being told ANYTHING? Oh, people who blindly follow orders, that's who, but their "leader" promises eternal Panda-petting privileges, and what do you offer?

They'll never bother to look into ANY of the issues you raised, since instead of focusing on ONE single issue, you shot-gunned. Since you're trying to persuade them from their current beliefs, it's generally more effective not to TELL them, but to ASK them for answers, gently forcing them to THINK, not shut-down their logic and go into thought-suppression mode.

Reverse witnessing is more difficult than some think, and it's not intuitive to most.

Still, kudos, as at least you tried (although you only got them to kick into "protect from apostacy" mode, what you called "tilt")....

Adam

32

Mom calls out Jehovah

by Poztate in

jw
friends

an 18 year oul girl stabbed her mom to death with 79 stab wounds.

her mom cried out jehovah during the attack to no avail.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/judge-rules-18-year-old-isabella-guzman-of-aurora-will-be-held-without-bond-in-mothers-slaying.

adamah

The psychologist they interviewed in the piece mentioned how cases of rage are often started by some trauma she experienced in the past (sexual abuse/rape); that, combined with her mom's "unconditional* love", where she experienced a psychotic break and snapped.

(* unconditional: see terms and warranty for details, as certain restrictions DO apply for JW families.)

Knowing what we know about JWs and shunning, there's little doubt in MY mind that the high-wire was raised to dizzying heights for this girl due to known JW practices, her knowing that her own mom would shun her/put her out in the name of protecting her eternal life in a minute. I can't thinking that a COMBINATION of factors played a role in this tragic incident (eg a high-control cult that strongly prevents exit by social ostracism, frowns on secular education/college, a teen's poor inhibition control, combined with possible history of sexual abuse or even just raised in a highly-misogynistic culture is an explosive combination).

Don't think I'm making EXCUSES for her, but the daughter IS a victim who threw away her life by making the WRONG choice, but trapped animals lash out in mindless rage when they're backed into a corner and sense no other options.

There's mitigating factors here that any court-appointed lawyer worth their salt who are representing her would carefully examine and build a defense on (or use to reduce her sentence to give her the psychological help she desparately needs).

Adam