Posts by hurt

42

Screwing up folks lives

by JT in

jw
friends

this is an amplification and adjustment in understanding of what appears in the watchtower of november 15, 1974, pages 703-704, and of february 15, 1978, pages 30-32. those who acted on the basis of the knowledge they had at the time are not to be criticized.

nor would this affect the standing of a person who in the past believed that a mates perverted sexual conduct within marriage amounted to porneia and, hence, obtained a divorce and is now remarried.

with this one little footnote in the wt it wiped out folks very lives- notice they refer to such a major doctrinal shift as an "amplification and adjustment in understanding".

hurt

There are many things that the WTS holds to that is indeed "accurate" knowledge.

What about the converse. Is this also true or not? There are many things that the Catholic Church holds to that is indeed "accurate" knowledge. There are many things that the Baptist Church holds to that is indeed "accurate" knowledge. There are many things that the Seventh Day Adventist Church holds to that is indeed "accurate" knowledge... endless list.

And, contrary to the light you place them in, the WTS has NEVER claimed to be infallible. Plus, they have made it known that refinements can be expected as the Bible is better understood.

Indeed. But before refinement begins (ah! refinement is a process, the WTS changes doctrine and policy like by executive fiat) what happens to those who hold it that the current positions are unrefined? They are disfellowshipped. Why? Because being a Witness means accepting the length and breadth and heigth and depth of what the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses teach, including those teaching peculiar only to JW, which is dependent on the tim eperiod in which you've lived. During Rutherford's ruthless reing, you couldn't take vaccinations, vaccinations were a violation of God's everlasting covenant with Noah. Today, it's been refined. You could take vaccinations, but not soem fractions of fractions of processed blood. It's worse than the rules Jesus warned against in his days.

In a hundred years of its history, the WTS has committed so much blunders that what the other Christian groups, especially the Catholic Church they so much love to hate have done pales into insignificance. How can members of the governing body be seeing the speck in the eyes of others when they have logs in their eyes and clouds blocking their vision. How will they see the light?

Edited by - hurt on 5 December 2002 6:54:28

Edited by - hurt on 5 December 2002 6:54:59

42

Screwing up folks lives

by JT in

jw
friends

this is an amplification and adjustment in understanding of what appears in the watchtower of november 15, 1974, pages 703-704, and of february 15, 1978, pages 30-32. those who acted on the basis of the knowledge they had at the time are not to be criticized.

nor would this affect the standing of a person who in the past believed that a mates perverted sexual conduct within marriage amounted to porneia and, hence, obtained a divorce and is now remarried.

with this one little footnote in the wt it wiped out folks very lives- notice they refer to such a major doctrinal shift as an "amplification and adjustment in understanding".

hurt

Dear Brother Friday,

this is not so much about teachers of the Word erring. why can't the Society admit clearly that they were in error? Why must they blame those who believed them? Did you, in all your humanity, sense some compassion in the way the Society makes these fleeting changes that affects the way people live their lives? The matter touches on the larger issue of the the freedom of the conscience. Let us assume, for our benefit, that that cosncience is bible trained. Just when does the Society allow (ha! allow!) Witnesses to use the conscience that is trained in and out for several meetings a week? The Society has fostered the thought that it is infallible. Those who dissent are disfellowshipped. Is it asking too much that they at least admit when the err?

57

Do You Think That You're Smart?

by minimus in

jw
friends

after reading some posts on this forum, it is easy to see that some people here are extremely gifted.

some write beautifully.

some arguments are brilliant, too.

hurt

****Do you think you're smart?

Depends on whose company I'm in.

*****Issues about getting into a discussion?

Only if I'm ignorant of the issues, and discussion requires some knowledge. If it's simply thinking things through, I'll need time. Don't think on my feet.

Liliacs:There's nobody anyone cannot live without, no?

25

Have you ever sprung anyone??

by kelpie in

how is this.... i started working for a company in sydney while still a witness.

i moved from a little country town to there so didnt know a soul.

well the receptionist that worked with me was very loud and out going and used to swear quite a bit.. but i started picking up signals as you do when your a witness that this girl was also a witness.

hurt

We met at a club. A Saturday. Super Brother. Sunday, several days before we met he was knocking impossible comments at the meeting. He looked cool in shirt and tie and nice jacket. I did the talk #2 that week. He was there. Well, Saturday, we met at the club. He was smoking; literally, that is. I was on the dance floor. We didn't even as much as say hello. I thought he didn't recognize me. It turned out he didn't. One more Saturday, and we became simple pals. It wasn't really a case of getting "sprung" both ways. I just knew it the way he made his comments, and how he didn't care a hoot about them sisters hovering around him. He didn't care about FS either. I thought he wasn't doing it. But his numbers were fantastic. He would come to the meetings once in a while and churn out comments. Then the sisters would hover again like vultures. Then he'll disappear again for a while.

23

Peculiar Sayings in the Bible

by Navigator in

one of the problems in understanding the bible is the use of "idoms".

the word idiom comes from the greek word "idioma" which means peculiarity or peculiar phraseology.

scholars have estimated that there are more than 1000 idioms used in the bible.

hurt

It's making good sense! Read again, Naomi teaches Ruth the ropes on seducing a man. Chapter 3 is full of it. And she went at midnight (v 8). She asked for him to spread her skirt over her (v9). In v10, Boaz is on 7th heaven, he throws in Jehovah in this business: v10... She was there till morning. And left early so no one could recognise her...Ah. None so blind as those who won't see... none so braindead as a JW who won't think...

30

"Theocratic Warfare" LYING IS GOOD!

by UnDisfellowshipped in

jw
friends

use theocratic war strategy.

webster's dictionary definition of "big lie":.

webster's dictionary definition of "slander":.

hurt

Undisfellowshipped,

if memory does not fail me, the bible has recorded Satan to say something true. The account of mortal man's fall for example. Does that quote by Jesus, that there is no truth in the devil, imply that the devil may never speak the truth? I think not. The bible presents the devil as an intelligent schemer. If he's that intelligent then he would know it's expedient to speak the truth sometimes. Was it not Paul that wrote that he keeps transforming himself into an angel of light? It could have been Jesus who also said that. To be a good lair, he must not have predictable tactics. And he was wiser than Daniel, not so?

Really, the text of Jesus' words need not factor in what one may want to use that Watchtower quote for. The contradiction lies not in what other bible writers have written about the devil, truth and falsehood. The scandal is in the admission by Watchtower that even the devil could be an agent of truth. That admission has far reaching implications. Insofar as we agree that something may not always be false simply because of their source, then then the devil may be a source of what is true; it has been repeatedly said that discounting information solely beacuse of their source is a clear mark of irrationality.

47

Falsifiability

by donkey in

jw
friends

i pose this challenge to believers: what would it take for you to stop believing in god?.

this is an interesting challenge.

well, it may sound paradoxical, but in order for any claim to be true, it must be falsifiable.

hurt

Donkey beats his wife??? May be. May be not. May be donkey has no wife. A donkey's mate must go by some name... "Please answer "yes" or "no" Have you stopped beating your wife?" Catch - 22. You're toast either way. It's very simple.

Donkey, many smart believers in God will not go the way of evidential reasoning, or toe the path of logic. It is a belief. Only those who claim it to be logical may subject themselves to those laws of logical reasoning that will eventually quash their claim.

25

50 Die Over Miss World Article

by William Penwell in

jw
friends

edited by - william penwell on 21 november 2002 17:5:59.

hurt

William Penwell, you clarify. Your original words, as reproduced conveyed the idea that it should be tougher not only for the extremists to immigrate to the US and Canada, but also for those who might contribute meaningfully to society. Religious extremism should make the immration authorities tighten up. A few good people could be hurt, but there can be no blanket law or policy against muslims. There are good muslims out there. Stereotyping is an emerging monster in this thing about religion, intolerance, and terrorism.

25

50 Die Over Miss World Article

by William Penwell in

jw
friends

edited by - william penwell on 21 november 2002 17:5:59.

hurt

Simon wrote:
I think their is a certina amount of stupidity having an event like "Miss World" in a muslim country.

Well, that country is exactly not a Muslim country. It just happens to have a pronounced Muslim
population. And the sort of Muslims who would burn houses and kill people for opinion published
in a newspaper live in a part of that country, the North.

Realist wrote:that is one fucked up part of the world

Probably.

Mary:These men seem to have a hatred for women that they have learned from both their culture and their relgion. As far as I'm concerned, I agree with LuckyLady: don't let any more of these peoplefrom these insane, backwards countries, into ours.

William Powell: I don't consider myself a "bleeding heart liberal" or a "red neck right wing wacko" but I have to agree that these fundamental Islam extremists have spoiled it for those ones that would immigrate into the US and contribute to society. US and Canada have got to toughen their stand and make it harder for these ones to come into our countries.

Sweeping generalizations. May be there should be some section in immigration forms that asks
questions about religious orientation, perhaps specifically about being fundamentalists, Islam or
Christian, or of some other religion. so a country becomes backward and insane if it has some citizens who are insane are backward in their thinking and actions? Mary, do a little thinking.

LuckyLucy, you want people form that country barred from getting an education in your country? You probably well know how many of the type that wreck havoc would seek an education in your country. And william Powell, please, how could the fundamental Islam extremists have spoiled it for those that may be able to make good cntributions to the US and Canada? You want it to be harder for those that would contribute to society to come into your countries? I'm hopeful the policy makers do not have your mind. They don't, and will see beyond your sort of conclusion.

30

"Theocratic Warfare" LYING IS GOOD!

by UnDisfellowshipped in

jw
friends

use theocratic war strategy.

webster's dictionary definition of "big lie":.

webster's dictionary definition of "slander":.

hurt

Blondie: hurt, I wondered too, then I thought, "If something is true, is it true because of the individual who said it or because of the facts that support it?"

Well, the WTS, or whatever it was called at the time, must have meant to pay more attention to reason, according to that statement, if they meant it. Of course, it makes sense. Why discount something simply beacuse of its source? But I meant to confrm form Undisfelloeshipped that he got the reference right. I haven't checked. If that's out of the Reprints and not out of context, then the WTS is certainly more than a century back in progressive thinking.