i clearly see that jw's are constantly being told to only associate with fellow believers if at all humanly possible.
there is to be either no association or at the minimum, very little socializing with non-witnesses.
in your opinion, what does this produce?
Do you have any recent published comments on this teaching? I'm a non-JW friend, and I was just amazed at how friendly my JW neighbor is to me. She's quite devout, too, so when I learned that they were strongly encouraged NOT to socialize outside the group, I was mystified why she doesn't keep our relationship more circumspect.
I wonder if it's been in her reading diet lately... (She brought me chocolates yesterday. Yep, she's a nice friend!)
bebu
i think i've finally figured out why jw's don't celebrate holidays.
well, the first obvious reason is.
the g body tells them not to, but the second reason is not because it is pagan, if it were the.
It has always seemed like false piety to me. A way to separate and seem superior. With all the good things around to celebrate, and the admonition to rejoice in the Lord always, "Jehovah" is now all bent out of shape if we celebrate the goodness of the gifts HE gave: our children, our parents, our respective nations, etc. Like refusing to participate in the memorial, another "slap".
bebu
i was reading craigsa's post from his mother to his wife regarding how jws are baptized....and they arent baptized in the name of the father son and holy ghost as she so pointedly said twice.
all you jws out there who browse this forum...listen up!!
here are the questions you are asked when you are baptized and the changes to them over the years....do you see fs and hg mentioned anywhere here???.
Thanks for the information and the vey interesting post! I had been hoping to run across a concise treatment of the WT baptism as you have presented.
bebu
after the meeting last night italked to some of the elders in the car park, and asked what more i neede to do to get reinstated.
they commended me on the things i've been doing (?
), and said the main point for reinstating would be how much contact i've been having with my fiance, who's still a wittness.
((((((((((legion and wife))))))))))
PLEASE get some counseling for your wife! My JW neighbor was suicidal, and I think that talking with someone else (even me, a non-JW) and finding that people CAN care about her unconditionally kept her from going closer/over the edge. .
Her talking of suicide is a real plea for help. If she doesn't work and is alone all day, she can work herself down deeper. If she works all day and it sits in the back of her mind, unaddressed, she is still at great risk when it all comes out.
Call around to counselors and see if any of them have had experience with JWs; let them know she is sensitive about seeing a non-JW. Then tell her that, as her husband, you are directing her to see this specially selected person. Let her know that YOU want her to be around!!! I hope you've done something like this already; congrats if so. Doing nothing means nothing will change for her.
My biggest hugs to your dear wife! I'm pulling for you.
(I do not mean to hijack a thread.)
bebu
loo and behold!
a great and wondrous sign appeared before me: a golden sea, brilliantly illuminated, clear as crystal, yet refreshing to taste.
beer!
I didn't know Monty Python was Dutch... I learn sump'n new each day.
lev.27:28,29 says ..."but any devoted thing which a man devotes to jehovah from all which belongs to him, of man or of animal, or of the field of his possession, it shall not be sold nor redeemed.
everyone devoted to destruction(sacrificed) is most holy no devoted thing which is dedicated by man shall be ransomed; it shall surely be put to death.
this explains why jeptha, when promising to offer as burnt offering the first person to great him upon his successful return from war, had to kill his daughter dispite his feelings for her.
Hi peacefulpete,
I realize that the article was addressing another subject completely,but his comments at the end were interesting:
It is unfortunate, however, that modern Jewish commentators, led by Moshe Greenberg, have generally adopted the view that Ezekiel is here accusing God of having given bad laws, including even a law of human sacrifice of the first-born. [1] While the modern scholar must accept that pre-biblical Israelite practice included human sacrifice, the Bible itself denounces it, and no biblical writer would ever attribute its institution to the God of Israel.
Anyway, would you help me find more info on what has led modern scholars to believe that human sacrifice was practiced in pre-biblical times?
Thanks,
bebu
lev.27:28,29 says ..."but any devoted thing which a man devotes to jehovah from all which belongs to him, of man or of animal, or of the field of his possession, it shall not be sold nor redeemed.
everyone devoted to destruction(sacrificed) is most holy no devoted thing which is dedicated by man shall be ransomed; it shall surely be put to death.
this explains why jeptha, when promising to offer as burnt offering the first person to great him upon his successful return from war, had to kill his daughter dispite his feelings for her.
Here's a website that touches on the redaction/human sacrifice issue. It is actually an examination of Ezekiel 20:25-26 where the Lord gives "bad commandments". It is an interesting defense from the traditional viewpoint.
http://www.bu.edu/mzank/STR/tr-archive/tr8/bad-commandments.html
a few thoughts.... dt.
6:5 love the lord your god with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength (also matt.
psalm 16:2: i said to the lord, you are my lord, i have no good apart from you.. psalm 37:4: delight yourself in the lord, and he will give you the desires of your heart.. question: how can the dubs look at these verses, and still insist that god meant for the vast majority of people to live in a "paradise" away from the "desire of their heart"?
(...In that case, fantasy is much better than reality!
And if Christ is alive then the whole of reality is simply fantastic. )
lev.27:28,29 says ..."but any devoted thing which a man devotes to jehovah from all which belongs to him, of man or of animal, or of the field of his possession, it shall not be sold nor redeemed.
everyone devoted to destruction(sacrificed) is most holy no devoted thing which is dedicated by man shall be ransomed; it shall surely be put to death.
this explains why jeptha, when promising to offer as burnt offering the first person to great him upon his successful return from war, had to kill his daughter dispite his feelings for her.
The religion of the people we call Jews was like all religions, evolving. The OT went thru at least 5 periods of redaction to conflate contradicting stories and update the theology. It is only due to the popularity of certain tales that much more was not edited out. Sometimes the way the editor chose to deal with a now embarassing passage was not thorough enough and clues to the original meaning an be detected.
This is very interesting. And I do agree that all religions evolve in different ways. But I am still not convinced here that just because some people THINK or SUSPECT that any particular redaction has occurred doesn't give enough proof for me to just join the chorus.
What other evidence are you relying on for your statements?
since it's about that time of year, i have a new article on my site about the resurrection.
http://www.towertotruth.net/is_jesus_dead.htm
tower man
There are no valid assertions that lead to a valid conclusion, just a conclusion that has no basis. There are no provable assertions, and one cannot use unprovable assertions to arrive at an unprovable conclusion. DOH!
I guess then you will be unable to prove a durned thing in all of history, as history relies on textual evidence, testimony of witnesses, historians, archaeological evidences, etc. Anything that is relatively "unprovable" strictly from a scientific method standpoint.
Hardcore Christians make these kind of bullshit conclusions (based upon AIR) all the time, and I dine on their fallacies of logic. Yum, yum!
Yes, I think you'd need something to go along with that earlier little hors d'oeuvre...
Farkel... That "air" was your best argument????
There are a lot of books that examine and critique the assertion that Jesus has risen. They have been listed above in my earlier post. I do not intend to rewrite them all here!
