Study with an Elder - propose a question.
Steve2 - One study every second week for almost one year now. The studies have gone nowhere in the grand sheme of things, as i find the explanations given to me lacking, or biased. Other discussions have been interesting – but that was only when we moved into philosophical questions about life.
As an example for what i find lacking and biased. The explanation for carbon dating which didnt align with the Orgs beliefs was that the water canopy consisted of water vapor/frozen water - and since water is a good protector against radiation, carbon dating was not to be trusted when looking at subjects like archeology.
Allright, i will adhere to your advice next time i bring this up – which wont be long. Thank you.
You can ask anything, but if you ask the "wrong" thing, you can be accused of apostasy and DFd for it.
Please explain, Biblically, the reason why someone who conscience allows him to accept a blood "fraction" is perfectly fine in the eyes of God, while a person whose conscience allows him to to accept a blood "component" is worthy of eternal destruction from that same God.
While you're at it, please explain, linguistically, the difference between a "component" and a "fraction" of a substance.
Ask them to read the parable of the goat and the sheep. According to WT doctrine, the sheep are the anointed ones and the goat are those that will be destroyed. Now, a JW who is not anointed (8 million are not), where does that person fit in this parable? Let them explain using the bible only....I truly wonder
Thanks CitizenofEarth. Studying every second week for a year - or for 26 "sessions" - Oh man! Either you or the elder is a devil for punishment.
Looks like the elder might be hanging on in there because you help him get his hours "in".
I get impression that your exchanges are softly-softly - I could not imagine the "bravest" elder returning so often if the questioning were gruelling.
My hunch is if you haven't piqued his curiosity by now, you won't ever.
So you may have to remind me why you are putting yourself through this. Someone earlier had said your girlfriend is a JW - I did not spend much time reading that. But does a relationship lie behind your quest to win over the elder?
Steve2 - His intentions are praiseworthy, as he considers me his brother and refuses to abandon me. I wouldn’t say the feelings are reciprocated, but I do consider him my friend, as he has helped me when I was younger and needed to get to the meetings. Now I haven’t been to the meetings for almost a year, only once or twice as far as I can recall. The questions I have raised have been some of the heavy ones from jw.facts, and the one with the kangaroos and Noah’s ark, but alas... To no avail. I will not go into a lengthy argument with him, since he is experienced in life, whereas I am only 18 years old. My age is on this point not to my benefit, as my lack of skill in the field of argumentation haven’t been used for more than.. well... A year. Yes – he has read CoC and many others, and have still somehow managed to keep his current mindset. To clarify - he is not a defender of the GB’s actions, but he is a defender of their claim to be the faithful and discreet slave.
I am putting myself through this because it keeps the questioners away. This is the minimal I can do, while keeping my parents. If my parents were forced to shun me it would destroy them completely – why? Well… that is something I can’t share here. I moved out on my own about 40 days ago, still have one more year in my hometown before I move on to further my education, so I am not so inclined to create havoc in my life atm. I do not have a girlfriend, but I do have a friend who is a girl, as I mentioned before in the context of what my daily life interest are - Which was misunderstood as girlfriend (maybe in the future… who am I to know).
My quest is not to win over the Elder, that would be his own choice. He is the strongest and most devout witness in this part of my country, so if he “fell” there would be a small revolution – I do not intend to be a part of a revolution unless they target my life, or the ones I hold dear.
QUESTION #1 - Why does our chromosome 2 seem like a result of end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes found in the chimpanzees?
"I am not convinced that evolution is true, but recently I've been talking to a friend who knows a lot about it, and he asked me a question that I find difficult to answer. If evolution is false, how do we explain chromosome 2 in the human genome which quite evidently seems to be a result of end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes. Here are the facts I can't explain:
1) Our chromosome 2 has almost identical DNA sequence to two separate chromosomes found in the chimpanzees, which indicates the aforementioned fusion.
2) Normally a chromosome has one centromere, but our chromosome 2 has one additional vestigial centromere, which, again, indicates that our chromosome 2 was a fusion of 2 other ancestral chromosomes.
3) Normally a chromosome has telomeres at each end, but our chromosome 2, in addition to that, has extra telomere sequences that are located far from the ends of the chromosome, and that also indicates a fusion.
How does the creationist model explain those three observed facts?"
QUESTION #2 - Why does Deut. 22.28–29 force rape victims to marry their rapists?
"I understand that Christians are not under the law of the Old Testament. Hence, I would never uphold that rule. But what I find really uncomfortable is, not the fact whether we have to follow it since quite clearly I would never do so, but the fact that this law is in the Bible. I wholeheartedly believe that the Bible was inspired by God because this is the only way to explain how unique it is. However, if God inspired the Bible, including the Old Testament, why does this law force rape victims to marry their rapists? Why did God inspire Moses to write this down?"
The usual apologetics is that the law says "if they are discovered," which supposedly indicates that the woman and the man were both giving consent to sex. Question his logic. Say that, to you, it seems as if it were merely indicating that the rapist was found raping the victim, and that's all. Ask him why he thinks it indicates consent. (This is something I really cannot understand. How the hell do you conclude that the woman was consenting based on such an ambiguous phrase?) Another fact is that it is not even certain whether the original Hebrew said "they." In the LXX, the phrase is translated as, "and he is discovered." (Focus also on the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses often make appeals to the LXX because they believe it's accurate [whenever it suits them]. Why ignore the LXX here but not in other parts?) Additionally, the passage uses the Hebrew word taphas when it says "seize." The word taphas meant literally to seize someone by force. The passage is not talking about seduction because in Hebrew, there was a different word for "seduce," and it was pathah. (This is why this law is not a repetition of Exod. 22.16–17. The claim that Deut. 22.28–29 is a repetition (or that sex was consensual) was debunked by Professor Bernard Jackson, who has actual expertise in the Jewish law.)
QUESTION #3 - Why does Exod. 21 support slavery?
Before you ask the question, get familiar with Matt Dillahunty's videos on slavery in the Bible. He explains the issue quite well, far better than I ever could. Also, learn about the usual apologetics, such as the letter to Philemon, and why it does not mean that the Bible condemns slavery. Most importantly, keep in mind that something to ask is this: "I understand that the letter to Philemon quite clearly condemns slavery, but I have a different issue. When we look through Exod. 21, it's also evident that this chapter supports slavery. If God inspired the Bible, why didn't he make his opinion on slavery very clear? Because it's not clear at all. In Exod. 21, it is extremely obvious that God supports it, while in the letter to Philemon, his opinion is quite different." (And, again, see how Matt Dillahunty debunks the apologetics Christians use to explain away Exod. 21.)
Could you explain where Jesus talked about an invisible presence? And why would it last more than a 100 years?
The problem is JW can explain any problem away, including the slavery and contradictions in the Bible. Go too hard in on the evidence and they'll ask you where you found it and whether you are an apostate.
It's really simple for a JW to answer the questions - you either accept this apologetic or if you corner us, you're an apostate and not worthy of further interaction. Any resistance to the ideology further cements their idea they are the chosen ones and any doubts are evil.
I don't see why you have to have questions for a study, if you have any history in the organization, he must know by now that you're getting your information elsewhere or he is extremely dense and anything you've asked or explained goes extremely far over his head. If you don't have a history (new one) I don't see why you would continue this.
"Brother----, as we know, 'God's people should be neutral in all political issues right? So may I respectfully ask, how did you reconcile the fact that the society were members of the United Nations (the scarlett coloured beast in revelation), and agreed to all their charters, goals, aims and mission statements?"
"and, how did you feel when you found out that kingdom halls in many south American countries fly the national flag in order to avoid a small monetary fine, while in the past witnesses were persecuted and died for much less?"
"I am finding it hard to reconcile such issues, so brother-----, HOW do you do so?"