by openminded 5 Replies latest jw friends
I was just wondering how “the only true God”, who has been in existence for ever and ever, would have never had to settle the issue of his sovereignty up until a few short years ago with Adam?
I mean infinity is a long, long time to be around and never be questioned about this. Are we Gods first experiment with “free will”? If we are, I guess it would explain the problems we are having.
Any one thought of this?
Hello openminded,
I do find your question very original,
but I do believe that the answer can be an...elusive one!
I 'll try to think of one and post it!
Agape, J.C.MacHislopp
Well,
It seems to me that the angels would have had free will. Now, why did all this trouble get started with us earth bound folks is a puzzle to me. First, one of the angels gets jealous of God and becomes Satan. Then, some other angels came to earth and want to get laid. It's very confusing to me.
I should think that angels are at least as smart as people, so why would one of them (Satan) want to pick a fight with God? Most humans are smarter than that.
Larc
Then, some other angels came to earth and want to get laid
########
even as a jw i used to have a problem with this story is sounded so right out of some SCI_FI movie
creatures for the black lagoon looking for "Nookie"
i mean come on could they not come up with a better solutions
but ck this out
when i was at bethel we ask Karl Adams who is the head -non-anointed in charge of the Writing Dept
this questions
since the angels are neither men or women why then did they take on MALE FEATURES INSTEAD OF women>
can you imagine how FINE THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN AS WOMEN- we are talking some serious Hally Berry and Jenifer Lopez now man smile
ok let me see if i can think of a fine white woman- ok Cindy Crawford
it's a joke no racial attitude meant- smile
anyway
he told us it was "Undoubtable due to the fact that Males/Men were so dominate in biblical society (much like today as my wife would say)
but anyway they chose to be men since it would allow them to father child/offsprings- can you believe it the first recorded "Players"
smile
and we sat there in the Towers Lobby just amazed at his depth of understanding and how DEEEEEEP! HE WAS - looking back now i realize he was blowing smoke in our eyes
yep he hoodwinked and bamboozled us
how sad
james
Why would an Almighty God need to settle the issue of sovereigny in the first place?
He wouldn't .... that was a WTS setup to keep you loyal to them
JanG
CAIC Website: http://caic.org.au/zjws.htm
Personal Webpage: http://uq.net.au/~zzjgroen/
As for the length of eternity, I don't think the concept applies. While we are used to thinking of clock time in terms of finite measurements, it seems to me the idea behind eternity and infinity is a constant. I mean isn't it true that mathmatically, regardless of adding, subtracting, multiplying or dividing infinity is still infinity? You can't exactly have half an infinite amount or one more than infinity or whatever. I think the implication is that if you accept the concept of eternity, you have to then accept your perspective is limited at best. (to go back forever and ever, where there ain't much of anything going on) If anything, the perception of clock time would be an illusion, which is what some other traditions teach.
As for the matter of free will and universal sovereignty, I'm sorry to say that the argument over Job wouldn't really carry. The thing is, again you are playing a numbers game. If there is going to be a group of faithful people and others who are not faithful, where do you draw the line and say this many settles the issue of universal sovereignty? If it's a matter of having exceptions to the rule, there has already been enough I would think.
I don't know, but it seems to me the idea of free will contradicts this idea that the issue can be settled once and for all. I mean if free will will always be there, what's to prevent other people from deciding to be wicked and mess up paradise? I mean Adam was perfect. I vaguely recall something about those people would be destroyed right away, or something, but dag nammit then the second death wouldn't work would it, death was supposed to have been no more..
Maybe my memory fails me, but there is also another issue of just HOW do you know? What constitutes "proof" of a correct way to rule? If anything I think the only solution that fits within that model is that humans have to develop some higher faculties to directly realize what is right rulership. (or actually directly perceive ultimate reality) Even if you look at the world as a lab and use the tools of statistics, the number of factors to control for and possible scenarios have to be up there with infinity. So frankly, if the idea of direct realization is in there it can work, but as we know what is taught is that you just have to believe, and for that matter you're suppose to ignore things you don't understand right now. This is fine, except it seems that it is implied some things you will never understand, which of course may be true. However, if direct realization is what is called for in the way of real proof the only reasonable thing is that you would atleast want to shoot for that through individual development, not stay stupid and accept the words of those assumed to be an authority.
