"It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step".
OK... but in that case it doesn't belong to any other man (or men) to direct his step either.
i have been accused recently of "trying to direct my own step" because of my questioning the org and refusing to come back to the "truth" for the past 6 years.
i personally still believe in god, i just doubt that he is behind the jw org, that's all.
why is that so hard for jw's to understand?
"It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step".
OK... but in that case it doesn't belong to any other man (or men) to direct his step either.
where is the garden of eden?.
i don't mean where in the world, i mean where in history.
adam and eve get booted out of this place.
Ah, the flood destroyed the garden. Of course! :)
That still leaves two thousand years of human history (Eden to flood) where humans could have tried to get to the fruit though. The prize is eternal life for crying out loud! Surely Adam and all his descendants would be camped out in front of the garden, desperately trying to find a way in. We would have tales, passed down into history, of the hero Zog who managed to get over the wall but was mauled by a vegetarian lion inches away from the tree.
I guess my point is the Eden story has all the characteristics of a fable. And if it is a fable (which it is) then the fall of man is allegorical (not true) and the ransom sacrifice is not required and all Christian religions are no more valid than a Harry Potter fan club.
where is the garden of eden?.
i don't mean where in the world, i mean where in history.
adam and eve get booted out of this place.
Where is the garden of Eden?
I don't mean where in the world, I mean where in history.
Adam and Eve get booted out of this place. A place which is not only a pretty nice place to live, but it has a tree in it which gives you everlasting life.
Yes it's guarded by angels and levitating fiery swords, but surely people would have been trying to get in and get the fruit? The garden and the tree of life just disappear out of the narrative, almost like it was a fable.
If there was an actual Eden with an actual tree of life in it then surely the history of humanity would have been one of desperately trying to break back into Eden?
Yes, ok, maybe the angels defending the garden might have been a bit trigger happy and killed those that tried but I bet you that every generation would at least raise one hero who would try and reach the prize. If such a place existed.
Thinking about it. What does the tree of life do in the story? God creates the garden of Eden and puts the tree of life and the tree of knowledge in it. The tree of knowledge has its fruit eaten by Adam and Eve, but no-one eats the tree of life's fruit. It's created and disappears without fulfilling any purpose at all.
The only place you see ridiculously powerful artefacts appear and then disappear like this is in badly written fiction where the hero in book one finds the sword of ultimate power but then in book two has to lose it again otherwise he would have it too easy.
i did not see a newbs thread to introduce myself, so my apologies if i'm in the wrong place.
i was a 3rd generation born in witness for 30 years until i was disfellowshipped back in 2007 for making a mistake.
my entire life up until that point was based on and circled around the society, and even though at first i really enjoyed my freedom (i still do), the fact is that i'm still struggling with cognitive dissonance, resentment, and loneliness.. i miss my family all the time.
Welcome NinaCee!
If you're still struggling with Cognitive dissonance, then that must mean that part of you still believes there's some truth in the JW religion. Using resources like this forum and JWfacts.com should ease that dissonance as you'll find out that on every important point, they are completely wrong.
A possessive husband is whole nother ball of wax. You count yourself lucky to have him, but does he count himself lucky to have you? If he does then he should be prepared to be a little less possessive as it's harming your other friendships.
welcome again!
what is your understanding on the earth remain forever???
today it's a fact (99,999%) that the earth will be consumed by the sun in the future be it 3 million or 3 billion years.
a topic we have been discussing here on paradise earth in the last two or three days and i notice no believer chimed in.
My argument would be that:
One generation passes away, and another generation comes;
But the earth abides forever. - Ecclesiastes 1:4 New King James Version
Is clearly talking about the people of the earth when it uses the phrase "the earth".
A generation passes away, a Generation comes but the people abide forever, is obviously the meaning.
So gods people will exist forever, but the planet will eventually be destroyed. So where will they live? Well, when the time comes we can look to the bible for a historical precedent of what will happen. Clearly, just as in the days of Noah, god will instruct his people to build some kind of space Ark. This will also be a good opportunity for god to have another cull of people he doesn't like. And animals he doesn't like, and plants...
And just like another bible story he will lead his chosen people, in their space ark, to a new land, a land flowing with (alien) milk and (alien) honey, where they can butcher the inhabitants and take possession and live happily until that planets sun also goes nova and they move on again and again...
This doesn't answer what happens at the eventual heat death of the universe, but I'm tired now and am going to stop. :)
if jws want to inflict shunning on members who want to remain -- knock yourselves out.
but if someone wants to leave - dont believe in an evil almighty god, bible ...or just dont agree with the rules- they should be free to leave- even after being 'disfellowshipped'.
i think it was pre 1980 that you could disassociate yourself without shunning repercussions.
Think about what you're asking ... the Government would what, mandate that you get to go to someone's BBQ? It's simply unworkable and impractical and would be impossible to draw up legislation that wouldn't impact a million and one other aspects of life.
I disagree Simon. The aim would be to prevent an organisation having an official policy of shunning, not whether an individual is allowed at another individuals BBQ.
The target is the Organisation policy and I think a government could take action, especially as it is (supposed to be) a charitable organisation.
The end result might end up the same. Brother Shunsalot still doesn't invite you to his BBQ, but Sister Shuns-cos-she-has-to would now be able to invite you round.
i am agnostic.
i will count how many agnostics, atheists and christians that are reading this forum regularly.
please answer my question.
Technically agnostic.
In practice atheist.
in 1967 richard avedon published a poster of his portraits of the beatles.
my jw aunt attacked it for being spiritualistic!
the "third" eye on george's palm was spiritualistic!
No Dungeons and Dragons allowed in our house. I fought really hard for it as well, as I loved it as a kid. Eventually all my books had to be burnt. :(
“the bbc is right to recognise that the libel that catholics said and did nothing against nazism is precisely that, a collective libel.
i am grateful to them for doing so.”--lord alton of liverpool.. so reported the catholic herald (uk) on friday, 9th of december 2016 after the bbc admitted it greatly underestimated the catholic church's opposition to hitler during the shoah.. the bbc’s internal watchdog has found that a programme wrongly accused the catholic church of “silence” about the holocaust.. after pope francis’s visit to auschwitz in july, bbc one’s 6pm news bulletin carried a report which stated: “silence was the response of the catholic church when nazi germany demonised jewish people and then attempted to eradicate jews from europe.”.
in response, the cross-bench peer lord alton of liverpool and fr leo chamberlain, the former headmaster of ampleforth, made an official complaint.. nearly six months later, the bbc’s editorial complaints unit has now concluded that the item was unfair.
1. 2,000 to 5,000 deaths plus countless thousands deprived of their possessions and their homes specifically because they were Jewish or thought to be relapsed New-Christians (who had reverted to Jewish ways).
2. The inquisition was instituted under the authorisation of Pope Sixtus IV. Here's a quote:
Thus it befell that by order of the Catholic Sovereigns their Orator at
the Pontifical Court, D. Francisco de Santillana, applied to Sixtus IV
for a bull that should empower Ferdinand and Isabella to set up the
tribunal of the Inquisition in Castile, to enable them--as Bernaldez
puts it--to proceed to the extirpation of heresy “by the way of
fire”--_por via del fuego_.
I'm not particularly anti-Catholic, but to say that their history is one of promoting human rights for all people is just wrong.
“the bbc is right to recognise that the libel that catholics said and did nothing against nazism is precisely that, a collective libel.
i am grateful to them for doing so.”--lord alton of liverpool.. so reported the catholic herald (uk) on friday, 9th of december 2016 after the bbc admitted it greatly underestimated the catholic church's opposition to hitler during the shoah.. the bbc’s internal watchdog has found that a programme wrongly accused the catholic church of “silence” about the holocaust.. after pope francis’s visit to auschwitz in july, bbc one’s 6pm news bulletin carried a report which stated: “silence was the response of the catholic church when nazi germany demonised jewish people and then attempted to eradicate jews from europe.”.
in response, the cross-bench peer lord alton of liverpool and fr leo chamberlain, the former headmaster of ampleforth, made an official complaint.. nearly six months later, the bbc’s editorial complaints unit has now concluded that the item was unfair.
TTWSYF, I'm currently reading a history of the inquisition in Spain and I'm afraid that the Catholic church at that point in their history was actively depriving Jews of their basic human rights and their lives on a horrific scale.
They have more blood on their hands than the JW's, but then they had (and have) vastly more power and influence as well.