for the holidays my girlfriend and i had planned to travel home and enjoy some time in our home area and visit with all our families.
she has several siblings and both our parents are divorced and living separately so it was a really busy time traveling around visiting each home.
my girlfriend was never a jw, but as for me i have been df'd for about 7 years now.
In that case it might be because of the recent WT. It was very strong, and you had JWs with DFed relatives answering up affirming the policy.
WT has a lot to answer for.
Best to see the good in your Gran for disobeying the WT all these years. It must be difficult sometimes.
for the holidays my girlfriend and i had planned to travel home and enjoy some time in our home area and visit with all our families.
she has several siblings and both our parents are divorced and living separately so it was a really busy time traveling around visiting each home.
my girlfriend was never a jw, but as for me i have been df'd for about 7 years now.
It's probably just because she heard your girlfriend is pregnant. Even non-JWs who are old fashioned (and old) can be funny about that. Apart from anything else she might find it embarrassing. But she will probably adjust. The fact that she's wanted to talk to you all these years is a good sign, and much better treatment than many former JWs experience. I'd suggest it's far too soon to give up on your Gran. Situations can be complicated, and WT is only one factor among many.
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
Matt 26 50 Jesus replied, “Do what you came for, friend.”
Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. 51 With that, one of Jesus’ companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.
52 “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilledthat say it must happen in this way?”
Acts 15:14 Symʹe·on has related thoroughly how God for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name. And with this the words of the Prophets agree, just as it is written: After these things I will return and raise up again the tent of David that is fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins and restore it, so that the men who remain may earnestly seek Jehovah, together with people of all the nations, people who are called by my name, says Jehovah, who is doing these things, known from of old.'
Revelatio. 4:11 You are worthy, Jehovah our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things; and because of your will they came into existence and were created.”
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
I agree.
Except I think there might be a real God behind the Bible. A lot of it is human interpretation a d myth of course. I found James Barr on the subject helpful. A lot of former JWs have found James Barr useful for his books on the "fundamentalist" outlook. Which describes JWs very well. But he also defended a liberal reading of the Bible in books like this:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/History-Ideology-Old-Testament-Millennium/dp/0199280533/
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Escaping-Fundamentalism-James-Barr/dp/0334003857/
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
It is possible there is nothing behind it, it just is. It just doesn't seem very likely that's all.
I find I agree completely with Krauthammer on this topic, although I agree with him about little else. (I wrote an essay about him once as a seminal neocon for an assignment)
Krauthammer says the idea that humans are able to answer such questions is dubious. And that atheism is one explanation among many, and doesn't seem very likely as an explanation.
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2013/12/23/i-dont-believe-in-god-but-i-fear-him-greatly-krauthammer-explains-his-thoughts-on-religion
“I feel the way that I think Newton once said. I feel like a snail on the side of a great ocean and the idea that I can understand a notion like God or humans can as if we’re expecting a snail to understand the motion of the tides through calculus and physics,” he said.
Krauthammer added, “That’s not possible. So I see the same kind of intellectual gap in the capacity of humans to understand in any deep sense about theology of God as for a snail to figure out how the tides work.”
“I’m not at all an atheist. I mean, of all the possible theologies, atheism is the least plausible,” he said at the time. “I mean, you’ve got to explain the existence of the universe, and to assume it invented itself or created itself is rather odd.”
Krauthammer added, “I mean, the only important question, the most important question is why is there or can there be anything, and how can there be consciousness? Atheism is not an answer that is plausible in any way to me.”
Exactly so. Two weeks ago at church we had an open discussion about whether religion is a crutch. We all agree that it was, but that various things in life can be a crutch. Atheism is a crutch as well, for those who find comfort in a universe that doesn't have meaning. We also discussed whether different kinds of religion can be a crutch more or less. Some tend to think liberal traditions, like Unitarianism or universalism are less crutch-like than more fundamentalist beliefs, but we agreed this may be wishful thinking. Unitarianism has been described as, "the featherbed for the falling Chrisitan".
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
How is the thing in itself an explanation?
Isnt that like saying a car is because “a car”? What does that mean?
If not God, then what?
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
I am not saying the rules are subjective. (In fact that they are objective is the point) I am saying the feeling that they require some explanation may be subjective. Although actually I find it difficult to understand the view that they don’t require explanation.
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
Morph you’re one of the ones who think WT has found a sustainable alternative model based on real estate or some such? And you puts words in my mouth I never said. Need I say more?
Crow, it seems to me the rules of the universe call for some sort of explanation. If you don’t think so, there’s little point arguing about it. It’s like arguing whether the sunset is beautiful. If you don’t feel it, then you can’t be convinced to feel it.
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
Why does reality exist in such a way that there is the relationship we call Pi?
Reality seems to be strained through a sort of order that calls out for an explanation.
https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6314606905524224/piano-inevitable
in the discussion about race i adopted a position i am not entirely comfortable with.
i think there is a sense in which it is useful to distinguish categories of description that can be fruitfully defended (apples and bananas) and those that cannot (caucasian or other racial descriptions for example).
but there is a more fundamental sense in which i believe that everything is socially constructed, every single line you can think of.
Why is Pi the value it is and not some other value? Could it be otherwise? To me God is the one for whom even these building blocks of reality are not taken for granted.
Where is the equivocation?
