Posts by robhic

14

JW's just called on me.

by pc in

i just had a 40 minute discussion with two jw's.

i told them i really can't believe jesus was ever an angel.

i showed them rev 22:12-21. i told him that clearly states jehovah and jesus are both called alpha and omega.

robhic

(Exo 3:14) And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

(Luk 23:43) And he said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise. (comma after "thee" is moved in NWT.)

(Joh 1:1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (NWT adds the letter "a".)

(Joh 8:58) Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am.

(Rom 8:11) But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, he that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead shall give life also to your mortal bodies through his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

(Heb 1:6) And again, when he brings his firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him." [See NWT 1961 ver.] (In newer NWT it uses the words "do obesiance to" instead of worship.)

(Heb 1:8) but of the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; And the sceptre of uprightness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. (moving commas again...)

1

Interesting while reading

by robhic in

i am reading the musician sting's autobigraphy "broken music.

" at one point when worried about his ability to financially support his family he found that praying helped.. now, being raised catholic he resorted to catholic prayers and praying techniques.

he found praying the rosary helpful but for an interesting reason.

robhic

I am reading the musician Sting's autobigraphy "Broken Music." At one point when worried about his ability to financially support his family he found that praying helped.

Now, being raised Catholic he resorted to Catholic prayers and praying techniques. He found praying the rosary helpful but for an interesting reason. He said that the mindless repetition of the words/prayers rendered them meaningless (being raised Catholic I wholeheartedly agree) but also turned them into sort of a mantra that soothed his mind. I can agree with that, also, I think...

Then the thought occured to me that many religions make use of this. Zen and other Eastern philosophies just rely on the mantra as a mantra and don't pretend to be anything else. Seems like JW rely on the constant, endless stream of publications to numb the R & F's minds (read one of Blondie's reviews to see how independent thinking and some logic can change the tenor of the entire thing!) into a kind of mantra-like state. Don't reason out or question the actual words or meaning but just let your mind go numb and take what the WTS tells you as gospel truth. There would seem to be a lot of comfort in that -- that someone is doing your thinking for you and it's gonna be all right. Not to worry...

And I do think a lot of religious organizations rely on this same technique in some form or another for similar purposes. Am I correct about this? Does anyone else think that rote memorization, regugitating thoughts not your own, and doing it thru use of publications has a mantra quality about it? I'm curious.

Robert

27

Jesus and Satan are brothers.....says WTBTS

by gumby in

that's right.........god's "family" in heaven gave birth to two boys..........read for yourself.

*** w70 7/15 438 obedience the desired course *** .

21) not all children turn out the same way or for good.

robhic

Gumby sez:

*** w70 7/15 438 Obedience the Desired Course ***
21) Not all children turn out the same way or for good. Jehovah's heavenly family had two outstanding sons that are brought to our attention in the Bible-one turned out bad. He made himself Satan the Devil. (Job 1:6; 2 Cor. 11:3, 14; John8:44; 1 John 3:8; Rev. 12:9)

Interesting. I looked up the cited verses above and I can't figure how the ones that are shown have any bearing on the statement that Jesus and Satan were brothers. Job is a maybe to some slight degree:

Job 1:6

Now it came to pass on the day when the sons of God came to present themselves before Jehovah, that Satan also came among them.

But it still is a long way from actually saying that JC and satan were brothers. The others scriptures are even worse. They only talk bad about ole satan and "dog" him for being a deceiver and such. No familial bonds that I could see. Am I missing something here?

Robert

Finacial Question

by robhic in

when i worked, i did so in a professional capacity for a huge, world-wide corporation involved in the commercial food service industry.

we did equipment, services, design, etc.

for commercial kitchens in schools, hospitals, restaurants and the like.. during the course of my duties, i became friendly with a man who was director of services for the local salvation army.

robhic

When I worked, I did so in a professional capacity for a huge, world-wide corporation involved in the commercial food service industry. We did equipment, services, design, etc. for commercial kitchens in schools, hospitals, restaurants and the like.

During the course of my duties, I became friendly with a man who was director of services for the local Salvation Army. They had 3 missions to care for the homeless, drunks, and those down on their luck. They also had a secret location to house and protect abused women and children. They ran a number of thrift stores and also provided employment for some of these indigents many times. All in all I found the SA to be a very community-oriented entity and religion was almost a peripheral thing.

Not to downgrade their religious intentions, but listening to religious oriented talks from a standard-version Bible was the "price of admission," if you will, for receiving the free services. It also wasn't forced on anyone but I'd expect hungry, tired people who are being fed and cared for are quite a bit more receptive to listening to the religious materials than your average man on the street meeting up with a JW at their doorstep who interrupts their day.

Now, interestingly enough, my friend (who was, himself a Christian scientist) told me that fully 90-95% of all money collected by the SA was re-invested in their services. They used 90-95 cents of each dollar collected to support their works and ministry and only 5-10 cents of each dollar left for overhead, salaries, etc. I thought this was phenomenal. That was in the 90's so may be less today, but still very good in my opinion.

After that long winded buildup, my question is how does the WTB&TS allocate their funds? Is there, or does anyone know of any information that breaks down the distribution? Like how much goes to the WTB&TS and how much is used for other purposes of any reason? I know most charities keep a much higher portion for themselves (it seems...) than they use for their actual helping services. I am not sure about the Red Cross but I'd wager it is much higher than 5-10% of income that they keep for themselves.

Besides printing costs and buying high-priced real estate how much and in what way does the WTS give back to their people? Loans made for building projects that are expected to be repaid don't count, I'd think...

Anybody have an idea of how this compares? I'd be curious as to how going door-to-door, trying to retain almost complete exclusivity, and not having a hospital, day-care facility, schools, shelters and all services like that for their own members much less anyone of the general public could makes the members feel so arrogantly superior and/or justify the lavish spending with (seemingly) little to show for it of the headquarters.

OK, whose got that information?

Robert

12

Blondie's "...Comments..." thread made me think

by robhic in

in blondie's excellent, as usual, "comments you won't hear..." thread i happened to look up the 1 corinthians 7:27 cite at the top about "time being shortened.".

as i read further, i came upon the verse at 1 co 7:36. i used the "compare" function of my esword electronic bible program and look at these results between these different versions of the bible:.

(asv) but if any man thinketh that he behaveth himself unseemly toward his virgin daughter, if she be past the flower of her age, and if need so requireth, let him do what he will; he sinneth not; let them marry.

robhic

In Blondie's excellent, as usual, "Comments you won't hear..." thread I happened to look up the 1 Corinthians 7:27 cite at the top about "time being shortened."

As I read further, I came upon the verse at 1 Co 7:36. I used the "compare" function of my eSword electronic bible program and look at these results between these different versions of the bible:

1Co 7:36

(ASV)

But if any man thinketh that he behaveth himself unseemly toward his virgin daughter , if she be past the flower of her age, and if need so requireth, let him do what he will; he sinneth not; let them marry.

(BBE)

But if, in any man's opinion, he is not doing what is right for his virgin, if she is past her best years, and there is need for it, let him do what seems right to him; it is no sin; let them be married.

(Darby)

But if any one think that he behaves unseemly to his virginity, if he be beyond the flower of his age, and so it must be, let him do what he will, he does not sin: let them marry.

(DRB)

But if any man think that he seemeth dishonoured with regard to his virgin, for that she is above the age, and it must so be: let him do what he will. He sinneth not if she marry.

(ISV)

If a man thinks he is not behaving properly toward his virgin, and if his passion is too strong and he feels he ought to, let him do what he wants; he isn't sinning. Let them get married.

(KJV)

But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of [her] age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.

(LITV)

But if anyone thinks it behaving indecently toward his virgin (if she is beyond her prime, and so it ought to be), let him do what he desires; he does not sin; let them marry.

(MKJV)

But if anyone thinks it behaving himself indecently toward his virgin (if she is past her prime, and so it ought to be) let him do what he will; he does not sin; let them marry.

(NWT)

But if anyone thinks he is behaving improperly toward his virginity, if that is past the bloom of youth, and this is the way it should take place, let him do what he wants; he does not sin. Let them marry.

All-in-all, this seems quite disturbing. In the American Standard Version (first quote) it seems to condone marrying your virgin daughter if she is past her prime! The rest of the versions seem to skirt around the issue and make the object of marriage "his virgin" and "your virgin past her prime."

So what does that mean? Your virgin? Sounds very nudge-nudge, wink-wink (Monty Python mode...) to mean your daughter as in the first scripture above. Can this be?

OK, all you scholars out there, what is this verse implying? I'm intrigued and a bit creeped out at the same time!

Robert

7

need help!!

by foxy lady in

having a "arguement" with my mum.

i need please the quotes from jw books etc that state about the age of people when 1914 occurred.

i seem to remember that they started off by saying that an adult was a "generation" then a teenager then finally a baby and when it did not come they abolished that "thought".. .

robhic

Or just go to the home page for the entire site of the page Poztate posted: http://quotes.watchtower.ca/ It's got more quotes about almost everything you could want or need.

Robert

67

Did Noah really build an ark?

by frogit in

this might be worth a watch for us uk ers.

noah's ark will be broadcast in the uk on bbc one on sunday 21 march at 1900 gmt.. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3524676.stm.

it's also an interesting read.

robhic

All the biblical specifics aside, scientific proof seems to point that there really was a flood, just not at the time stated to make bible chronology true. The book "Before the Flood" by Ian Wilson gives scientific theory and some facts that there really was a flood about 5600 BCE.

It is theorized from evidence that ice melting during a warming phase in geological history caused the sea levels to rise. This, in turn, caused the Mediterranean to overflow thru the Bosphorus strait and -- presto! -- the small body of water that should probably have been known as the "Black Lake" 5000+ years ago now became the Black Sea.

This is also supported by undersea pictures by Dr. Bob Ballard (the guy who discovered the Titanic) of what look like remnants of buildings and other artifacts of civilization at the bottom of the Black Sea. This would indicate a settlement of sorts along the shore of what was the Black Lake before the melt and subsequent flooding.

No Ark or Noahacian involvement is provided so it seems to be real enough and was used in the bible for their purposes but is a good fable and nothing more.

Robert

6

Marital Status after Armageddon

by robhic in

what's the deal regarding marriage and marital status after the "big 'a'"?

i was once referred to mat 22:29 where jesus says that resurrected people will be like angels and neither marry or be given in marriage.

but that doesn't cover all the possibilities.. i have also read (but a search doens't give me what i need) that those married couples surviving the big a will remain married in the new system.

robhic

What's the deal regarding marriage and marital status after the "Big 'A'"? I was once referred to Mat 22:29 where Jesus says that resurrected people will be like angels and neither marry or be given in marriage. But that doesn't cover all the possibilities.

I have also read (but a search doens't give me what I need) that those married couples surviving the Big A will remain married in the New System. Where does it say (if it does) that single people surviving will be allowed to marry? Is there a WT publication that I can cite to illustrate the "After Armaggedon Marital Arrangement" so to speak? Quotes site doesn't have anything specific, either.

Am I close or is this doctrine even more complicated? I'd like to know:

Marital status after living thru armageddon
Marital status after being resurrected (people already married before death)
Marital status of singles surviving Armageddon (can they tie the knot in paradise? Get all perfect gifts? )
Marital status of singles being resurrected if differing from Mat 22:29

I would really appreciate WTS literature cites for backup. If anyone has specifics I would sincerely appreciate it.

Thanks,

Robert

12

Tartarus in 2 Peter 2:4

by Leolaia in

in my recent thread on the nephilim and the rephaim (http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/68224/1.ashx), i indicated that the legend of the titans was broadly related to the canaanite and hebrew myths of the nephilim and rephaim, but here in 2 peter we see more recent hellenistic influence on jewish legend.

according to hesiod and other greek writers, the titans were the wicked offspring of ouranius and gaia ("heaven" and "earth") who initially had sovereignty over the cosmos but whom zeus and the olympian gods defeated and consigned to eternal bondage in the prison called tartarus in the netherworld.

iliad 8:13-16 describes tartarus as a bottomless pit located below hades, a distinction reminiscent of hades and the abyss of revelation.

robhic

Leolaia, you really know some stuff!

Your mention (above) of the giants/titans as the result of angels marrying human women made me think of something I read just last night.

I am currently reading the book "The Dead Sea Scrolls" and the portion I read last night mentioned these giants. The Scrolls seem to indicate that the so-called giants were as much as 450 feet tall!!! Who the hell could believe a giant 450 feet tall?

OK, maybe 10 feet or thereabouts but a 450 foot person is just utterly ridiculous. How tall was Goliath? Slinging a rock 450 feet and hitting a target the size of the 450 foot man's forehead is nothing short of miraculous. Now if David had had a sniper's rifle...

Interesting thread -- as always -- and even though it is much too deep and intense for the likes of a heathen like myself I appreciate the effort you put into them. I also like the new avatar, although I found the old one disturbingly hot. Maybe I should try out for the next Planet of the Apes movie if they make one?

Robert

44

Cast your vote: Is Jehovah a Myth?

by frankiespeakin in

thanks to many fine posters i think we can make an intelligent choice.

cast your vote and debate if you like.

robhic

As a non-JW and confirmed agnostic I'd like to somewhat echo what "Love_Truth" said. From all my reading of JW and non-JW religious literature alike, I'd have to say that the jehovah character in WTB&TS literature and many others is myth. Well-conceived myth to assert control and cause fear in the members of said religions but mythical, nonetheless.

Is a Supreme Creator a myth? That I don't really know. There is so much information against a creator but there is a lot of unproven and unproveable stuff, too. So, who really knows for sure? I think you should just live a good life, help others and let whomever sort it out at the end!

Robert