i was speaking with a jw yesterday.
i'd previously mentioned the removal of the brackets around 'other' in colossians 1 making the mistranslation complete.
during our chat he said that the previous edition of the nwt was the more correct one, that the revised version was simply more readable and that it shouldn't be considered the best translation.
It's agreed by most scholars that those verses were likely inserted after the original writing, sunny23:
I knew that, i'm just pointing out the large amount of "false" scripture thats been in their bible from day 1 and has been denied by scholars for years. The Org that thinks it's lightyears ahead of everyone elses findings, doctrines, reasoning, etc has major faults they are still fixing. This whole time they have been touting the "all scriptures is inspired" phrase has been a lie, idiots.
i was speaking with a jw yesterday.
i'd previously mentioned the removal of the brackets around 'other' in colossians 1 making the mistranslation complete.
during our chat he said that the previous edition of the nwt was the more correct one, that the revised version was simply more readable and that it shouldn't be considered the best translation.
First thing I noticed about it was the entire first 11 verses of John Ch8 being REMOVED. Maybe over enough time they will start to realize more and more of the bible events never actually happened or are not divinely inspired until there is no bible left..HA! Also the timeline pictures in the very back mentioning 1914 as a "sure" date is real ballsy...and inaccurate.
faith gives you permission to believe that jesus actually did feed thousands with a few loaves & fishes, walk on water and rise from the grave.
all the evidence proves that none of this happened so why persist with faith?
why be dishonest with yourself?
EDIT: when I said "because of #2 requiring proof and there is non for God."
Meant to say "because of #1 being proof based and #2 apprehension based and there is no proof for God."
recently there have been several claims made regarding prophecies that came true.
i've not personally seen a prophecy that i would consider as having come true.
i would consider the following as the requirements to say something is a prophecy and evaluate whether or not it came true:.
This was not a good thread to read IMO, and confess I did not read it all.
Kate xx
Haha thats like ebert &roper saying "that movie was the worst we have seen all year, and we confess we did not watch it at all." Gee thanks for that.
I feel that for those who are not well versed enough in the bible to remember and identify all of the details of each prophecy because they spent more time daydreaming during bookstudy nights than listening, can benefit from a thread like this when you have family members trying to "prove" the bible is inspired by God because ALL of His prophecies came true to the last "T." Thank you to all who actually contributed. Marked
i don't recall reaading on here about any.. i just wondered if any actually happened?.
.
oops i misspelled "at" in the title.
The entrance to our neighborhood is passed by 4 congs to get to their hall 200 yds from our house. Thought about making JWFACTS.COM signs and putting them where neighborhood garage sale signs go. Its a small road and wouldn't be missed by any. Has anyone else tried this?
faith gives you permission to believe that jesus actually did feed thousands with a few loaves & fishes, walk on water and rise from the grave.
all the evidence proves that none of this happened so why persist with faith?
why be dishonest with yourself?
CL if there is one thing I have learned from Viviane, it's to know your EXACT definitions and state your points clearly and concisely!
LisaRose in her first post initially adressed the #1 type of faith using the friend analogy and its general acceptance and then contrasted it with the WRONG use of it when applying it (#1) to God because of #2 requiring proof and there is non for God. She was never "transposing the meaning of faith onto the word 'trust'" She was only contrasting the use of #1 and #2 by theists and I feel her post was fine. She is saying there is NO reason for believers to put faith #1 OR #2 in God and yet many believers THINK there is reason to put faith #1 AND #2 in God. Just because this thread might be more about #2 doesn't mean you can't adress #1 and how believers try to attribute it to God because THAT is relevant to this thread and IS one definition of "faith." That's what I get out of it. I'll admit I did at first get the same feeling you did in making wrong assumptions as you read it. Although CL never actually accused LisaRose of having religious faith so idk where that came from, he doesn't have problems with logic (here anyway), I think it's a misunderstanding of definitions and misinterpreting a post, or two. This forum/site taught me to come to agreements on exact definitions before you make accusations.
Ok done mediating, lets talk about vices of faith, Donnye, where did you go?
faith gives you permission to believe that jesus actually did feed thousands with a few loaves & fishes, walk on water and rise from the grave.
all the evidence proves that none of this happened so why persist with faith?
why be dishonest with yourself?
donnye, what do you have to offer to this thread on Faith? Offer your own opinions on this topic.
So far it has been said that faith in God specifically:
What are your thoughts to these claims and give supporting reasoning please.
faith gives you permission to believe that jesus actually did feed thousands with a few loaves & fishes, walk on water and rise from the grave.
all the evidence proves that none of this happened so why persist with faith?
why be dishonest with yourself?
you're welcome Simon
IslandMan that's a great point: faith is useless and counterproductive to the powerful who desire to be followed in a specific way.
The concept of requiring FAITH for SALVATION is silly. Apply it to firefighters. If God was a firefighter.
faith gives you permission to believe that jesus actually did feed thousands with a few loaves & fishes, walk on water and rise from the grave.
all the evidence proves that none of this happened so why persist with faith?
why be dishonest with yourself?
In the large "pastor" thread Cofty started, I quoted another member and then made the statment:
Psac: "Because I can feel Him in my bones."
Sunny23: "Or perhaps its your subliminal fear of not having life after death resonating within you? Like Cofty said, many other religious people feel the same way you do towards a God you believe to be false (any God but yours). If one were to invent a new absurd and bogus made-up religion in North Korea, eventually everyone there would believe it and feel it in their bones too :)"
And then I got this response:
"Yes, and perhaps because of fear of losing the meaning of life in general. Take away God, that Love and Power and Grace (as they say) that is greater than us, and all life and meaning (for me) goes away. Evolution takes over - that we are just accidents that came through in time out of nothing, and a race of species that will disappear in time, meaninglessly - that all that is in the universe will grow into increasing disorder and then into nothingness - as law of entropy, that all of this shit is just a waste of time. Suffering has been discussed extensively in this thread - the picture of that asian mother with her dead daughter in hand brandishedly brought up from time to time to bring home the point. And we all have our own personal sufferings that we endure and go through each day. To go through all that, endure it, and burn in its fire, and then to find out that all is meaningless anyway, I would immediately end my life to save me all further trouble. After all, I am just an accident and nothing in all this universe has meaning."kassad84
I know personally as a young JW I used to think the same way. As soon as I would begin doubting the existence of God I would start contemplating the idea of dying without an afterlife and the fear of the unknown and abstract concept of eternal unconsciousness for some reason scared the sh** outta me so I would look up at the stars and convince myself there had to be a God, and I would apologize for that moment of doubt (to make sure I stayed on his good side haha). I think that people refuse to deny their faith or they choose to have faith on the foundation of fear of the unknown coupled with the delusion that "without a God and afterlife there is NO purpose to anything." It's sad to see people say that they would rather kill themselves if life was an "accident" and there was no afterlife when atheists actually feel quite the contrary, that life and well-being is the most important thing of all because it is limited!
Sam Harris adresses this concept well:
this is my first post on here so bear with me.
currently i am still an active jw with serious questions about the jw org.
i was hesitant signing up but really need as much input from the people on this forum to get a clear understanding on things.
"After reading the comments, I can basically pursue anything that would make me personally happy?
What if a person found happiness and joy in murdering people or if a school bully found happiness in beating kids people up? Or terrorist found happiness and joy in driving planes through tall buildings? Would it be correct for them to pursue those things?"
Psycopathy is a clinical condition/abnormality and can be identified biologically in most cases. The overall well-being of humans is the most important and those who counteract that need to be treated or locked up. To find joy in killing people is to lack empathy and biologically normal humans do not typically lack empathy so no, it would not be "correct" for psychopaths to kill to make themselves happy.
When it's told to you to "basically pursue anything that would make you personally happy," its under the assumption that you are a biologically and mentally normal/stable human being and not a psychopath or sociopath.
