Posts by Awakened07

28

UN scandal, the defence!!! The Letter to Brant Jones

by whereami in

is this a legit excuse?

is this balanced and fair?

here is the link- http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/appendix_jonesletter.html.

Awakened07

As I've said before, I have personally never really looked into this matter, but I just Googled it, and came across a page that should cover most of what the view of 'apostates' are: http://www.randytv.com/secret/unitednations.htm ("disclaimer": I don't necessarily agree with everything there; I haven't read it all)

I think it's funny how they try to spin this around, though. The Watchtower are the ones who have always drilled into us how bad the UN is, and now suddenly (mostly in the comments by the other JWs, though), the 'apostates' are lambasted for claiming that the JW view of the UN is that it's evil!

-Maybe John should have included something about the scarlet beast actually feeding and otherwise helping small children around it, but them dying anyway? That would kinda have fit into how the beast of UN is evil, but at the same time does good deeds (albeit unsuccessful in the long run according to JWs).

One question remains though; why did they choose to disassociate themselves with the UN just after this was revealed? Actually, that question doesn't remain come to think of it, because it's answered in this letter: they did so because the news was revealed, and they didn't want anyone to think wrongly about their association with the UN.

Well - if there was absolutelynothing wrong or "dubious" or noteworthy about their "membership" (library card access?), then why not simply remain a UN NGO (DPI), and use the Watchtower to - in an article - explain all the things laid out in the letter above? That way they would have officially shown how they were not wrong, and how this all works, and how/why they could continue being a UN NGO. The above letter after all explains how it was all OK in the first place.

All this said, I think I should add that - in general, not necessarily pertaining to this case - as "apostates", it's very important that everything we say or 'reveal' is the absolute truth and current fact, and that we have proof to back it up (not saying we don't here). For instance, I've seen 'apostates' argue with active Witnesses that they sell their literature when they go door-to-door, and this ended a long time ago, at least where I live. Indirectly they may still 'sell' them, but only through contributions. It's important to have the current facts.

46

When was Jesus born?

by Anti-Christ in

the wt always put a lot of importance on the subject that jesus was not born the 25 of dec. now my question is why is there two different stories in the bible about jesus birth?

in luke 2 there is one story and in matthew there is an other.

in luke it says that jesus was born during a census when quirinius was governing syria but in matthew it says that he was born when herod the great was still alive.

Awakened07

Distinguish between the Bible and Jesus Christ
You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.
John 5:39 (New International Version)

But without the Bible, we would not know of Jesus Christ, right? You could say 'yes, we would', because he would have revealed himself to each and every one of us if it wasn't for the Bible, but still - where outside of the Bible do we learn about Jesus (who and what he is and was, I mean)? The Bible is where he chose to reveal himself to all of mankind, is it not?

If you're willing to disregard certain scriptures, then this becomes somewhat of a 'chicken or egg' question, IMO. Without the scriptures we wouldn't know about him (his personality and works, etc.), but now I hear that the scriptures aren't really important because he's omnipresent anyway, and reveals himself to us today. You could say "it's not 'either or', it's 'both and' ", both Jesus and scriptures. But then I don't see how one can disregard certain scriptures, or how to determine when we've suddenly disregarded too many scriptures.

46

When was Jesus born?

by Anti-Christ in

the wt always put a lot of importance on the subject that jesus was not born the 25 of dec. now my question is why is there two different stories in the bible about jesus birth?

in luke 2 there is one story and in matthew there is an other.

in luke it says that jesus was born during a census when quirinius was governing syria but in matthew it says that he was born when herod the great was still alive.

Awakened07

Why do you focus on this story differences ? Our belief in Him doesnt depend on what Luke, Matthew or someone else wrote. He stil lives with us today. He is omnipresent.

I think this is an important statement.

Is it safe to say that if - for some reason (for the sake of argument) - the entire Bible was shown to be false (or we take it out of history altogether), this would not matter one iota, because we would still know Jesus exists?

If not, how far can we go in discarding various biblical passages until we reach the limit?

26

What is your personal definition of evil?

by fedorE in

how do you see evil in general?

recently a book i came across people of the lie by a well known psychologist m. scott peck discussed evil and evil in some of his patients.

to him any harm whatsoever inflicted on another person is evil and a mental illness that can be cured.

Awakened07

If you remove every and any living being from the universe (and beyond, if there is a beyond), would 'evil' then still be present? Is it an invisible 'force' that simply exists on it's own?

-To me, evil must be something that is perpetrated by living beings. I don't believe in demons any more, but if we for the sake of argument say they do exist, I do not believe 'evil' in them is an invisible, mysterious 'force', but rather simply the act of destructive behavior (knowingly and willingly, of course). And the same goes for any self aware, intelligent creature on earth (otherwise known as humans). 'Good' is to me constructive, 'evil' is destructive, in it's simplest terms. If you harm someone, or something someone has built up/made, you are doing something evil; something destructive. These destructive acts are done out of egotistical reasons, while good and constructive acts are usually done out of... uhm... my English fails me here, but the opposite of egotistical reasons.

Sorry if I'm stating the obvious, but you have to start somewhere.

57

Were the Dinosuars on Noahs Ark? Watch. 1973 = Yes!!!

by Witness 007 in

watch.

1973 july 15 p.7 "questions from readers.

when did the dinosuars become extinct?".

Awakened07

Hmmm.... this is very strange. I seem to remember the head of a Brachiosaurus, not a T-Rex. Different language versions? Another book altogether?

57

Were the Dinosuars on Noahs Ark? Watch. 1973 = Yes!!!

by Witness 007 in

watch.

1973 july 15 p.7 "questions from readers.

when did the dinosuars become extinct?".

Awakened07

i really wonder how could he feed each animal since each animal has its own unique food, and how could he store these supplies inside the arc without being rotten, where to get fresh water, how could he attend to disposal of waste. Moreover each animal has its own habitat and unique environment, so how could he regulate temperature,humidity etc..? the bible also states that noah took a sample for each kind of animal. this is imposible since there are animals found on other places which are not found in noah's continent. if he was able to circumnavigate the entire globe to get a small sample for each kind, then he will be faced with the problem of logistics to transfer them to the arc.

Remember that every living thing back then were herbivores, so all Noah needed to bring was plants and grass etc. Back then there were only a few 'kinds' of animals within a confined area of the globe (it's only ~1500 years after creation, you know), and all the variety of today comes from them (but no evolution occurred!). Any other questions you may have, are answered by one simple statement: God took care of that.

So there - try to come back with science against that! God can do anything.

Of course - God could have simply put a force field around every living creature he decided to spare, or used a completely different method than a flood, but then Noah wouldn't have been tested, and wouldn't have had much to do with his time.

75

Ask Jehovah anything you'd like...

by nvrgnbk in

jw
friends

bet you he doesn't answer.. (this wager does not include the ongoing conversation between jehovah and jcanon).

Awakened07

Actually, there's nothing wrong in asking Jehovah questions; in fact sometimes we have to ask him questions, because although he's the almighty Creator of the universe, he doesn't think things through all the time, and can need some input from imperfect humans.

The precedence for this is in the Bible, for instance:

"And the LORD said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it [is] a stiffnecked people: Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation. And Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, LORD, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand? Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit [it] for ever. And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people." (Exodus 32:9 - 14, KJV)

Abraham did the same:

"And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked? Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that [are] therein? That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which [am but] dust and ashes: Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for [lack of] five? And he said, If I find there forty and five, I will not destroy [it]. And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there shall be forty found there. And he said, I will not do [it] for forty's sake.And he said [unto him], Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there. And he said, I will not do [it], if I find thirty there. And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he said, I will not destroy [it] for twenty's sake. And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy [it] for ten's sake." (Genesis 18:23 - 32, KJV)

-You could of course say that Jehovah of course knew these things and never intended to eradicate them all, and was only testing Moses and Abraham to see how they would react. But what then if they had said nothing against him? He'd look pretty stupid then, wouldn't he?: "Erm - actually I didn't mean that - it was kinda a test to see if you would correct me or not... You were supposed to correct me. But you didn't so... erm... Oh well - I can't very well smite you for it since you're Moses/Abraham, but consider this a warning". I kinda doubt that would've been the resulting story in the Bible.

27

Sad Sept KM QB part tonight. They have a plan. Sad.

by oompa in

jw
friends

the question does say it is witnesses getting these study groups up.

one scripture you will not hear during the part is the one scripture jesus himself spoke of small groups getting together, this one:.

matt 18:20 "for where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there i am in their midst.".

Awakened07

It's interesting to see how the mind works. They're interpreting this article like they're interpreting the Bible; "It can't mean this, so it has to mean this", when it's plain as day what it actually says.

They won't get away with the "it's about groups of people", because the article does state that "It is commendable for individuals to want to use their thinking ability in support of the good news. However, no personal pursuit should detract from what Jesus Christ is accomplishing through his congregation on earth today." ... "For those [individuals?] who wish to do extra Bible study and research, we recommend that they explore [our publications]".

In other words: "It's great that you as individuals do research, but not if it turns out to go against what the WBTS teaches (how would one know before one started the research?), and if you must research, you should use only our publications".

-Yes - I can interpret too... Only, this I would say is a correct assessment.

By the way - has the WBTS ever said "You must do this and this?" Isn't it always "we do not recommend or endorse" etc.?

Yet all JWs know what that means.

23

Mob Mentality

by snowbird in

jw
friends

do i detect a spirit of intolerance on the beloved jwd board?

some posters can speak about anything and get a gaggle of positive responses.

others get beaten down for simply expressing a different viewpoint.

Awakened07

Do I detect a spirit of intolerance on the beloved JWD board? Some posters can speak about anything and get a gaggle of positive responses. Others get beaten down for simply expressing a different viewpoint.

If what you are saying is that topics and posts by non-believers get many positive replies and stand un-refuted, while those made by Christians or people of other faiths get negative, 'bullying' replies, then yes, I can see that happening at times.

But I think this is a natural dynamic of a discussion forum like this. When I first came here, I for some reason thought most posters would be non-believers, and I expected no active Witnesses. So I may have been more assertive in my posts than I perhaps should have been, because I didn't think my views could hurt anyone's feelings.

That said, it's not the job of non-believers to refute their own claims, or vice versa - it's everyone's job to express their views, and then "the other side"'s 'job' to refute (if they want and can).

If Christians and others of other faiths had their own threads and non-believers had their own threads, then this wouldn't be a discussion board at all anymore.

When we read something that goes against our beliefs, it often feels like a direct attack on our own person, when it is not meant that way. If for instance I simply state what I believe (or don't believe) and why, that will be very innocent in my eyes, but may be seen as a direct attack on some one else's personal beliefs, and thus their person. It's easy to lash out when that happens. I've tried not to all the time go into a thread that I disagree with in order to "refute" it, but some times I may feel that what's said is erroneous and I have to try and correct it. But it goes both ways (or at least should).

I've written things here that I thought were well thought out at the time, but it turned out I had put my foot in my mouth, more or less.

We all need to grow a thicker skin on a discussion forum like this, because we will come across views that go against our own, and we may have to correct our view. It can be a bit humiliating and embarrassing, but that's how we learn, isn't it?

(I had to write this post twice, because I was kicked back to the forum as I attempted to erase a word with the Backspace button...)

30

Golden Age = In Paradise we will fly around like Superman!!! Cool!!

by Witness 007 in

gold.

age aug 25 1926 p.751 "negative gravitation...you may have wondered how accidents will be avioded in christs kingdom, since we are told nothing will hurt or destroy.

scientists tell us there is enough atomic energy in one finger-nail to propell a battleship.

Awakened07

First I'd like to thank you for your threads, Witness 007, they're always entertaining.

The question of how accidents will be a thing of the past is an interesting one. I remember asking that when I was a kid; what would happen if a guy is out in the woods and a tree falls on him, for instance [would it make a sound? ] ? The answer was of course that everything would be perfect then, so the trees wouldn't fall over, AND/OR we'd of course be perfect, and know how to avoid such situations, AND/OR the angels would protect us against such things. Voilà!

However - the jet-pack thing sounds much cooler - wish they had kept that. Then again; what if you over-shot while being down that elevator shaft? *splat* against the ceiling.