Im new here

by POWER_OF_YOUTH 75 Replies latest jw friends

  • mouthy
    mouthy

    As for what Jesus would say about masturbation!!!

    I think if it was SO important to a being a sin. He would have told
    us in scripture.He mentioned all other things he didnt agree doing
    I believe excesive ANYTHING!!! Moderation in ALL things is mentioned.
    And the TWO commands he gave us is still in force ,to be a Christian
    1 ,LOVE GOD first
    2,do unto others as you want done to you!!!!
    So we must respect all,show love ( brotherly,love)
    Do well with you school work get an education,

    God be with you!!!! Grace ( or as the WT calls me UNDESERVED KINDNESS

  • POWER_OF_YOUTH
    POWER_OF_YOUTH

    I can't wait until Wednesday/Thursday. Im so nervous about my test results.

    As far as the masturbation thing. All of that is true, but we can't forget what is stated at Matthew 5:28. This scripture used to confuse me when I was younger because I would reason "How can you possibly avoid this sin when women were created so.......so so so so well?" Lol, but with this it seems that Jesus was targeting our intentions. Before with the Mosaic Law it was a sin just to commit fornication. However, it seems that Jesus was encouraging us to attack the problem from the root. Its not easy......or 100% totally possible (come back my beautiful latin bikini model >_O lol) but at the same time he knows we are mere earthen vessels made of dust.

    Masturbation seems to encourage the opposite of that, at least it did in my personal experience. Hence, as hard as it is we are encouraged not to do it. I know you think I am probably half crazy...........but all of this seems to make sense to me.

  • mouthy
    mouthy

    No I dont think your crazy... I think your a thinker!!! Good for you.
    I think when Jesus said that.... he was talking about the lustfull thought.
    It is human nature to look at beauty,but not all we look at becomes
    lustful thoughts. I know when I was a youngun, I used to look a good
    looking guys and think, "Boy! He smashing,I wish he would look at me"
    ( Not many did LOL)But I didnt think in a LUSTFUL way,just interested.!!
    I realize it is differant with guys, they seem to look at the body first,it
    is only after they meet the girl & talk to her they fall in love with her.
    But many guys wouldnt think of being "lustful " with her until he has
    won her heart.. .....Anyway sweetie good luck in your tests. I do hope
    this week will be a good one (((HUGS))))

    your alright in my books....

  • SweetBabyCheezits
    SweetBabyCheezits

    Welcome to the forum, young man. You sound like you've got your head on straight and will figure things out as you go. Just remember the words of Galileo:

    "I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."

    You seem to be using critical thinking skills beyond your years. Hold onto that... develop it. You're much farther along than I was at that time. Grab some library books that deal specifically with critical thinking skills. It's a set of tools that gets far too little attention in traditional K-12 schooling, IMO. I'm 32 and at the age of 27, the only CT skills I had came from osmosis.

    Thanks for sharing a bit of your circumstances. You remind me of myself at 17.... well, minus the college. I'd graduated early (home school for last 3 years -yech), started regular pioneering, and met a young "sister" at a JW wedding of a mutual friend. I was 17, she was 16. I locked in on her because of the way she carried herself: classy, poised, naturally beautiful... think Audrey Hepburn. She didn't appear to be pretentious and she wasn't clamoring for attention. I asked her to dance (after sweating it out for most of the night) and she accepted. Before the reception was over, she gave me her address and, infatuation or not, I was hooked.

    Anyways, long story short, over the course of the next year, I fell in love with her and pursued her relentlessly. Too young? Yes. Immature? Absolutely. After a number of platonic letters back and forth (aka texting of the 90s), she kindly gave me a lukewarm shoulder and made sure I knew we were just friends.

    Half a year later, she unexpectedly shows up at another wedding, we hit it off (though I cowardly tried to avoid her), started dating, and have been happily married for 12 years. (BTW, if you're interested in how my wife and I arrived at our current state of disbelief, here be the details.)

    I'm not sure why I'm writing this, aside from the fact that your story sounds familiar and makes me sentimental. I'd really like to see you get the best deal out of this life. Projection, maybe? Sounds like you have a lot of potential and you're still plenty young to fulfill it.

    Bear in mind, when you were younger, an adolescent, you accepted many things you were taught as axioms. Kids are, by nature, naive. The reason critical thinking is so valuable is because it forces a person to be critical of his own thinking, to even go back to the source of one's knowledge, and question it. It is self-refining, when applied properly. "How do I know? Why am I certain?" Religion typically - though not always - paints doubt in a negative light. This is no less true of the Society.

    Well, I've said more than I meant to so I'll cut it off here. Feel free to PM me if you ever want to talk about dating stuff. It's been a few years for me but I'd be glad to share my tiny shards of memory and experience.

    Best wishes to you, POY.

    -SBC

  • POWER_OF_YOUTH
    POWER_OF_YOUTH

    Thats a cool story, if I had a heart I would almost call it "sweet" lol. As far as love at a young age I am conflicted on the issue. I mean it seems as if most people need to sow their "wild oats" before becoming ready to settle down. Of course there is always an exception to this, but marriage is a two way street and its very difficult to determine whether the other peson feels the same way or whether they will hit a "mid life crisis" and ditch you to head to Vegas, blow 10,000 bucks on black jack, and marry some stranger they met while under the influence(replace my extreme hypothetical with w/e you want lol) so its safer to wait until you both are older.......plus you will have more life experience which won't hurt. My spiritual big sister was educating me yesterday about this. She mentioned that married couples who talk bad about marriage usually do it because of personal experience. And its like I had a mini epiphany because my memory flooded with various couples who gave me the whole "marriage is very difficult, it has a lot of ups and downs, and wait until you're 25 speech." Granted, I don't think im confusing a realistic approach with a negative one because these couples never mentioned a single positive experience about marriage. Wheres the "its very difficult BUT yadda yadda yadda....." or what have you.

    She also mentioned a few couples in our hall and how one sister married a brother because everyone else was doing it and how she didnt even love him at first. Another mentioned that one sister wants to have kids right now but can't because her husband doesnt want to. Granted I am pretty sure, or at least hoping, that she realized this and just decided to make a sacrafice to marry him. The final couple she mentioned experienced the same problem as the first in which the wife didn't love the husband, but as for why they did get married.....perhaps she got caught up in the wedding day (shrug). Just hearing all of this kind of made me scared of marriage though. I mean assuming that these stories are true what on earth happened to common sense? But, I will cross that bridge when I get there, if I get there lol.

    And truer words have never been spoken granny LOL. It seems as if with guys its sex first then love, while with women its the opposite. A good looking girl will definitely catch my eye, but if I meet a girl who is genuinely kind she will basically turn into a super model into my eyes. I know thats a cliche quality, but it can be hard to find sometimes with all the gossip and such. Hope your having a good day though, and I hope things start warming up in Canada for you.

  • mouthy
    mouthy

    SBC!!!! I read all you have written(the details) also.I just love ya brother...You are an excellent
    writer,I can understand why POY interested you...You sound like you & he had brians even though
    yours was mindcuffed for a long time & I think POYs is partly....
    I do hope you two keep in touch I think your a "helper"
    POY!!!! I have adopted you....Do well in your studies this week,I want a full report
    And it is still "ruddy" cold here ,but the snow is melting....

  • POWER_OF_YOUTH
    POWER_OF_YOUTH

    What? o_O (checks out some info)

    So the issue is, why trust Ptolemy(huge apologies for any errors with this info as I only spent 20 minutes reading through some of the info) with the date of 539 and not 587?

    Also, granny you called my mind partly handcuffed? LOL jerk. Anyways, will do and I hope to hear from you soon SBC

  • SweetBabyCheezits
    SweetBabyCheezits

    POY, there's a lot of background that needs to be considered on the 607 vs 586/587 issue. I'm sure you've searched and discovered the numerous threads on the forum regarding the Society's proprietary chronology. Also some really good information at JWFacts.com, but I recommend, if you're really interested, reading The Gentile Times Revisited for depth. You may want to do this after a little checking to see that the scholarly consensus supports 586/587BCE dating for Jerusalem's destruction. Open any encyclopedia that has been quoted in the Watchtower or Awake and read up on Jerusalem.

    That was another issue of mine: The WT regularly quotes from what they seem to consider reliable sources to support their views on some topics... but disregards those same sources when they conflict otherwise.

    What you won't find (AFAIK) are many - if any - totally third party scholars who debate the 607 dating. Why? Because aside from a couple branches of Adventist faith (JWs primarily), nobody has a dog in the fight. It isn't like evolution vs creation. The mountain of evidence for the 586/587 dating is as great as that for the "anchor" date of 539. If we are judging without bias, we pit the evidence against a consistent set of criteria, and we follow that evidence where ever it leads. We should not write off the evidence if it disagrees with our personal foregone conclusion, right? If you really research Russell's methods of calculating prophecy (John Aquila Brown, pyramidology, etc), you will eventually see the role that cognitive bias played in all of it.

    Anyway, the chronology issue was just the first domino for me. Once I realized the F&DS hadn't been given authority by God himself, other issues with policy and doctrine made sense: This is just a group of men, who may have had good intentions throughout, but were not directed by any divine being. The jig was up.

    I paste these aphorisms often and I know I probably sound like a broken record to some people but, to me, these sum up my experience. They also contain more wisdom in a single sentence than entire books I've read. (Which isn't saying much..)

    "Nine times out of ten, in the arts as in life, there is actually no truth to be discovered; there is only error to be exposed." – Mencken

    The discovery of truth is prevented more effectively, not by the false appearance things present and which mislead into error, not directly by weakness of the reasoning powers, but by preconceived opinion, by prejudice.”
    -Schopenhauer

    IMO, the trick is to identify old presuppositions and suppress bias long enough to judge them fairly.

    Before I forget, I hope I didn't convey the wrong idea earlier. I don't recommend marrying at a young age. Yes, it has worked out great for me and my wife but I think we are the exception to the rule and lucky at that. For my kids, I hope they get an excellent education and enjoy some years of travel and experience before they settle down.

    Mouthy, thank you for the kind comments. I don't know that I've mentioned it before but I appreciate your voice of experience and personality on this forum. Can I adopt you as a grandmother for my kids?

  • mouthy
    mouthy

    Can I adopt you as a grandmother for my kids?

    The adoption was carried out at 8.50 a.m Monday April 4th.

    Now I have to go clean the ruddy snow off my car.
    it snowed again last night UGH...so send the kids to clean it

  • POWER_OF_YOUTH
    POWER_OF_YOUTH

    LOL I actually ran into the same problem! When I was studying Evolution and seeing if what I had could stand up to that. When the brochure was first introduced the brother, in FULL confidence, was like "Oh, we have references, check them if you want." So I did, and I actually stumbled across some website where someone pointed them out. So at first I am like......."God dangit, that dude was paid to encourage us to check the references. Welp, my mom isnt going to be a happy camper." So I kept scrolling through them, and it turns out what they did was take a sentence that summed up the general idea of the quote. For example.....here we go. No copy paste? =(

    However the vast majority of those fossils consist only of bones and isolated teeth. Complete skulls let alone complete skeletons are quite rare.

    Our quote above

    Theirs below

    What this book further attempts to do, bearing in mind that results from studies of small numbers of post cranial fossils have not been overly persuasive within the profession, is to carry out these studies using larger samples. This means that we can better know populations through averages and variations, and be less depndant on the vagaries of single, possibly far more average specimens. Such studies have to be done on teeth because these are the only anatomical parts that are available in such large samples. Using teeth means we lose the functional inferences that can be readily derrived from post cranial bones. But we gain from the marked improvement in same sizes.

    What we said was true, and although scientists may be using teeth to study population averages they do admit to about losing the "functional inferences that can be derrived from post cranial bones." And if I have been paying attention in science class, taking note of the changes over time is key to Evolution as.......well you get to see and infer how certain species evolved lol. Is it a misquote and deceptive? In this regard, you can definitely argue semantics. I think it could be a misquote but not so much deceptive. Will look into the 589 thing later.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit