My jaw dropping OMG moment at the end of the convention
"On the other hand he was much more confident delivering what I think is the strongest JW argument for living in the "last days". That's the observation that WW2 is pretty much the worst war humanity can ever expect to fight without ending civilisation itself. So therefore the end must come before a future war escalates into nuclear holocaust and the end of humanity."
Again it's a non-sequiter.
But anyway let's start with WW2 and it's scale. Surprisingly there are wars from before 1914 that run it close in number of deaths and casualities.
The Taiping rebellion of the mid 19th centurty has various estimates between 20 and 100 million deaths.
The Three Kingdoms war of 3rd century AD has various estimates between 36 and 40 million.
The Mongol Conquests of 13th and 14th century come out at 30 to 40 million.
So plenty of wars to link to bible prophecy. And as a percentage of the world population these wars are "bigger" than WW2.
Now also why should a "future war escalate to a World War and thus to nuclear annhilation?" If it didn't 1962 and the 1970's and 80's when nuclear weapon stickpiles were three times as great? Just because it could doesn't mean it will.
And as mentioned above - we have had 72 years without war on the scale of WW2, WW1 and the wars I have mentioned above.
Not talking about number of casualties. Talking about the potential of technology to end civilisation that did not exist until the end of WW2 and now makes any future total war existential.
The secular equivalent of the JW argument is the often made observation that if there is a Third World War then the next world war after that will be fought using sticks and stones. Which is optimisic in terms of human survival.
So they're saying "the overlapping generation of the first generation will not pass away until all these things occur" try explaining that out in the ministry
nowwhat? it is worse: the last anointed generation will pass away until, or before all these things occur. it is an indefensible contradiction of Jesus.
Jws are not aware of that, do not understand it, can not defend it, do not need to, because nobody cares.
I think the official JW position now is that gay people are probably born that way but that they should deny themselves.
That's pretty much the unofficial position.
They can't bring themselves to actually state it so openly (since that would entail admitting they were wrong in the past), so they say things like "Even if certain persons are pre-disposed toward homosexuality, they should exercise self-control just like a diabetic may need to exercise self-control regarding diet, until they are in the new system".
That "even if" is about as close as they can get to openly admitting they were wrong for uncounted decades when they taught that homosexuals "chose" to be that way.
Sir82: they say things like "Even if certain persons are pre-disposed toward homosexuality, they should exercise self-control ..."
Is that a direct quote or your own paraphrase? If it's a quote, can you please provide the source?
I suspect any change is more of an unofficial, unwritten thing which of course would only add to the confusion.
"The fact is, millions of heterosexuals who wish to conform to the Bible’s standards employ self-control despite any temptations they might face. Their numbers include many who are single with little prospect of marriage and many who are married to a disabled partner who is unable to function sexually. They are able to live happily without fulfilling their sexual urges. Those with homosexual inclinations can do the same if they truly want to please God.—Deuteronomy 30:19."
Awake Dec. 2010 p22 ...on
The difference is that if a single or disabled brother or sister dreams about fulfilling their sexual desires if circumstances change they are committing no sin. A homosexual who dreams about fulfilling their desires is always committing a sin by the very thought. So the situations are not equivalent.
"Millions of heterosexuals ... are able to live happily without fulfilling their sexual urges. Those with homosexual inclinations can do the same if they truly want to please God" (Awake!, December, 2010, p. 22).
Translation: Millions of people live celibate lives because of situations beyond their control. If you are LGBTQIA, then you can and should too!
I'm not even going to touch how illogical and fucked-up this WT quote is on it's face. And Slimboyfat is absolutely correct that the "situations are not equivalent."
But what I DO want to point out is this: It is one thing to deny an "urge" or "temptation." It is quite another thing to deny who you are.
This is a key difference that--as far as I know--the WT has never addressed and shows a willful blindness in their adamant refusal to acknowledge.
A person can choose to wear colored socks or not. They can choose to wear tight-pants or not. We cannot choose to change who we are are our core. This is often manifest in behaviors, traits and mannerisms that are intrinsic to our identity and cannot be hidden or covered up by a "WT Approved" set of clothes.
The implicit message in WT propaganda remains the same: Deny yourself. Become as we are.
(Of course, this is true of all cults and is in fact one line of proof that a particular group is a cult.) This is why the WTBTS loves trotting out Romans 12:2 in relation to this and related issues:
And stop being molded by this system of things, but be transformed by making your mind over, so that you may prove to yourselves the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Scriptures like this seem to add legitimacy to admonitions to deny your true, authentic self. And if you still believe in the authority of the Bible, you will feel its pressure--insistent and unrelentingly corrosive to your soul.
slimboyfat: I don't think so. I think the official JW position now is that gay people are probably born that way but that they should deny themselves.
btlc: Recent articles about homosexuality.... Awake! October 8. 2003; Awake! December 2010
There's this one from last year - it was part of a three-page article which was discussed here previously (link at bottom)
Awake Issue 4, 2016
What Does the Bible Say About Homosexuality?
Is the Bible’s View Cruel?
What about people who have homosexual inclinations? Were they born that way? If so, would it not be cruel to say that it is wrong for them to act on their desires?
The Bible does not comment on the biology of homosexuality, although it acknowledges that some human traits are deeply ingrained. Still, the Bible says that certain conduct — including homosexual acts — must be shunned if we are to please God. — 2 Corinthians 10:4, 5.
Some would say that the Bible’s position is cruel. But their claim is based on the premise that we must act on our impulses or that sexual impulses in particular are so important that they should not — even cannot — be controlled. However, the Bible dignifies humans by stating that they can resist their urges. Unlike animals, they can choose not to act on their impulses. — Colossians 3:5.
Consider a comparison: Some experts say that certain behavioral traits, such as aggression, may have a biological cause. The Bible does not specifically comment on the biology of aggression, but it does acknowledge that some people are “prone to anger” and “disposed to rage.” (Proverbs 22:24; 29:22) Yet, the Bible also says: “Let go of anger and abandon rage.” — Psalm 37:8; Ephesians 4:31.
Few people would disagree with that advice or say that it is cruel to those who have aggressive tendencies. In fact, even those experts who believe that anger is rooted in a person’s genetic makeup work hard to help people control such tendencies.
Jehovah’s Witnesses take a similar position toward any conduct that conflicts with Bible standards, including sexual acts between two people of the opposite sex who are not married to each other. In all such cases, the Bible counsel applies: “Each one of you should know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, not with greedy, uncontrolled sexual passion.” — 1 Thessalonians 4:4, 5.
More discussion regarding this Awake article is here: