Based upon the science articles and books I have read I believe there is microscopic life of some kind (maybe bacteria or something like it, fungi, and/or a taxonomic kingdom that doesn't exist on Earth) on Mars, more than five decimeters below the surface in some areas and/or in a cave (if Mars has caves).
Disillusioned JW
JoinedPosts by Disillusioned JW
-
23
Is There Life On Mars?
by LoveUniHateExams inno, i'm not talking about the david bowie song, i'm asking does life exist on mars?.
opportunity rover (the one before the present one) took photos of strange, puffball-like sphericals seemingly sprouting on the martian surface.. these photos aren't conclusive evidence but it is an exciting area to investigate.. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-9546225/scientists-claim-evidence-fungi-red-planet.html .
-
-
-
61
Awake Magazine - No Longer Being Printed?
by JWTom insomeone made reference in another post that the awake magazine had ceased publication.
maybe i missed it since i have not been on here as much in the last 6 months.
is this true?
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Regarding "Got rid of DOs" what is meant by "DOs"?
Is it really true that practically all the young JWs are leaving once they turn 18 years old?
Before the Society downsized (and dumbed down) the science content of the 'Awake!" I appreciated the bound volumes of the Awake! more than the vast majority of the other books of the WT Society. I sold off nearly all of my WT bound volumes but I retained bound volumes for the years 1966 - 2008 (many of those I bought used after I stopped attending the Kingdom Hall).
Regarding the Babylon the Great Has Fallen book I sold my copy of it on eBay years ago, but now I kind of miss it (though I can read it online and on the WT CD-ROM library). I had bought my copy at a thrift store because when I tried to order it (or was that the Then is Finished the Mystery of God book instead?) from the Society more than 20 years ago it was too late since the WT had ceased publishing it. Yesterday I noticed that nice condition copies of it sell for at least $15 (including shipping costs) on eBay. Maybe I once had a copy of the Babylon the Great Has Fallen when I was under 10 years old; I'm not sure.
Kingdom Halls will probably reopen soon since things are starting to turn somewhat back to normal now that much of the USA population has received a Covid-19 vaccination.
-
40
What is your status (as of today) as a Jehovah's Witness?
by RULES & REGULATIONS inactive believer...still attend meetings, go out in field service, believe it's ''the truth''.
active non-believer... go to meetings and field service to please family... living a double life .
inactive believer...don't attend meetings but believe it's the truth, one day might go back to kingdom hall.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
I am in category number 4.
I want a very high percentage of human society, especially in my country, to voluntarily become nonreligious and to not believe in the supernatural (nor any superstitions) at all, but with people living by some version of the golden rule. I think about how Christianity/Christendom held back scientific, technological, and social progress for about 1,000 years and I imagine what human society would now be if Christianity had never existed. See https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/15567 .
-
39
I Will Give President Biden Credit
by minimus inhe’s really implementing the democrats agenda!
he’s wasting no time !.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Correction: In my prior post where I said "... my sisters ..." I meant to say "... my sister ...". The last paragraph of my prior post should probably be re-punctuated and reworded as the following:
"I know a number of poor people in my community who are receiving government assistance of various kinds. Many of them are over 70 years old with infirmities, or are both over age 70 and are retired. Many though under age 60 are: physically disabled (sometimes from a severe accident) or mentally ill; or have major health problems, such: as diabetes (sometimes due to their dietary choices, but sometimes due to their genetics), obesity (sometimes due to their eating habits but not always), or lung disease (most of these are smokers of various substances). Some have lost their job/career and their house (or apartment unit) and are wanting to obtain a good job and a house (or apartment unit) again. Some of them vote for Republican Party candidates and some others of them vote for Democratic Party candidates. Some have a college/university degree (and some of those once had a high paying highly skilled job, such as having been a computer software programmer) and some others never attended a college/university." To me, some seem of be low intelligence but some others seem to be of high intelligence, whereas most seem to be of 'average' intelligence. Some of the ones working full-time at my place of work are single parent mothers whose boyfriend or husband left them and their child (and in other cases maybe the mothers thought it was best to leave the father of their child/children)."
The vast majority of the homeless ones I see living 'on the street' (many in tents) are men and I wonder why that is the case.
-
39
I Will Give President Biden Credit
by minimus inhe’s really implementing the democrats agenda!
he’s wasting no time !.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Anony Mous, thanks for your post stating the documentation for your views. I notice that while we agree that certain government policies are in place (such as section 8, child support, tax breaks and other left-wing policies), we differ greatly in our ideas of the interpretation of the policies. I perceive the intent of the policies you mention to be what the politicians/government saying they are for, namely to help people who are in need and in dire straits. You instead perceive they are for something radically different, namely to keep people in need and in dire straits - to trap them into remaining in such a deplorable state. It is like, figuratively speaking, that we are living in two different worlds. We do agree however that one of the reasons for these programs by the Democrats is to gain and keep voters. It will likely be hard for us to reach agreement/consensus as to what is the intent of these programs.
Maybe part of the reason we see things differently (besides us probably coming from very different social-economic demographic backgrounds), is that I tend towards interpreting written and spoken statements very literally and I tend to believe people mean what they say, unless I later discover evidence that they are untrustworthy. [My literal thinking approach when applied to understanding the Bible is one of the main things which led me to eventually disagreeing with many of the Watchtower's interpretations of biblical prophecies and thus also to me ceasing to believe in their religion.]
President John Kennedy said he wanted to help struggling people and President Lyndon B. Johnson said he wanted to create a society in which poverty would be eradicated. Johnson said he wanted to create a great society. As a result many government spending programs, with the stated aim of helping poor people, were created during the Johnson administration. Me, my sisters, my mother, and mother's mother and step-father (all JWs, except that I am now unofficially an ex-JW) believe that the programs were created to help people - not to hold them back from making progress.
I know a number of poor people in my community who are receiving government assistance of various kinds. Many of them are over 70 years old with infirmities, many though under age 60 are physically disabled (sometimes from a severe accident) or mentally ill. Some have major health problems, such as diabetes (sometimes due to their dietary choices, but sometimes due to their genetics), obesity (sometimes due to their eating habits but not always), or lung disease (most of these are smokers of various substances), Some have lost their job and their house or apartment and are wanting to obtain a good job and a house or apartment again. Some of them vote for Republican Party candidates and some others of them vote for Democratic Party candidates. Some have a college/university degree (and some of those once had a high paying highly skilled job) and some others never attended a college/university.
-
39
I Will Give President Biden Credit
by minimus inhe’s really implementing the democrats agenda!
he’s wasting no time !.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
road to nowhere, thanks for the information about "woke". I notice that https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/woke-what-mean-meaning-origins-term-definition-culture-387962 says woke ".... means to be awake to sensitive social issues, such as racism." Maybe the publishers of "Awake!" should begin publishing a companion magazine called "Woke!" He he, ha ha. Or maybe they should publish one called "Alert!"
-
39
I Will Give President Biden Credit
by minimus inhe’s really implementing the democrats agenda!
he’s wasting no time !.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Correction: It was not while I attended college that I purchased a scientific book and science magazines which had articles in support of evolution, but while I was in high school. The book was a Science Year volume by World Book. I purchased the Science Year within one year after my JW mother purchased the then current The World Book Encyclopedia set (primarily intended for use by my sister and I, but also for my mom). [I made some use of the Encyclopedia set for school reports.] When mom bought the set my sister and I were not yet baptized and not even yet 15 years old. When I bought the Science Year and the subscription to a science magazine it was about one year before I became baptized.
-
39
I Will Give President Biden Credit
by minimus inhe’s really implementing the democrats agenda!
he’s wasting no time !.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Anony Mous, when I said Jews and Hindus (in terms of the percentage of their members) in the USA are highly educated, I wasn't singling out those who are conservative. However I wouldn't be surprised if conservatives, in addition to liberals, of Jews and Hindus are highly educated.
That which I read of wokism on this site is puzzling to me because I don't know what it is; it is alien to me. I hadn't come across that concept until about a couple of weeks ago, and I've only encountered it on this site. I am familiar with the concept of people metaphorically "waking up", such as in the sense of realizing that some beliefs they have are false and that it is time for them to abandon them. But it is not clear to me that wokism refers to such. I am familiar with the ancient Gnostic Christian spiritual concept of waking up, namely in their belief that one has an immortal spirit/soul which is trapped in the fleshly body and that there is a way it can escape the body and ascend to the heavenly realm and return to the supreme true God (one who is not Yahweh of the Hebrew Scriptures) and that according to the Gnostics there is a way that people learn such is true. But I doubt that wokism refers to such, but perhaps I am wrong about that. Furthermore, I don't see "waking up" (other than the above mentioned Gnostic concept) or wokism being promoted as a religion. I am thus extremely puzzled that you claim Democrats are trying to make wokism a state religion. I guess I will have to research wokism on the internet with the aid of my favorite internet search engine.
I read news articles saying that local governments in the USA (mostly ones with Republican majorities) are trying to impose some aspect of Christianity (or religion in general) on people on government properties, and in other cases to "...foster discrimination or create special privileges for religious people and organizations". The organization called American Atheists sends me action alert emails in regards to this, saying American Atheists requests my help to stop the politicians from doing such things. [See https://www.atheists.org/activism/ , https://www.atheists.org/activism/state-legislation/ , and https://www.atheists.org/news/ .] American Atheists engages in letter writing campaigns to such politicians and in lawsuits if necessary, and in many cases they have succeeded in getting the politicians to back down from their crossing the line of separation of "church and state". I am thus very puzzled that you say"... at least Republicans know they cannot make a state religion ...".
I am also very puzzled by you thinking that the Democrats are racists (to me they as a group are not) and that they want to keep black people from making progress and that they want to keep them on what you said is the "Democratic Plantation". I plan to ask you questions about that topic later in order to understand how you came to your views on that matter, since maybe you know something about that matter that I don't and since thus you might be right on that matter. However your use of the expression "Democratic Plantation" seem to be an intention to 'push some people's buttons', but perhaps I am mistaken on this. Personally, I have to excise great restraint from getting very riled up when reading the expression "Democratic Plantation" - an expression which is very inflammatory to me.
There are some liberal/progressive Democratic party policies that I am uncomfortable with, even though I am a liberal/progressive Democrat. I do think that some of former President Trump's policies were good, but I was intensely disturbed by much of his rhetoric. It was much of his rhetoric (including what I considered to be bold faced outright lies, even dangerous lies - even ones which I think incited (or contributed to an outbreak of) an insurrection at the USA Capitol building - which primarily made me intensely angry with him and caused me to want him out of public office forever.
Much of the rest you said in your post I do agree with. Regarding what you say "... predicts success 95% of the time .." I am fascinated by that idea and would like to know what you consider to be evidence in support of that idea (regarding the number of parents one has and the timing of having a kid). I have long thought that the factors you mention confer economic benefits, but I was not aware that that the first two you mention do so to the extent that you allude to.
Rocketman123, though I am politically liberal I can relate to what you said in your post about what you support in politicians and what you don't support in politicians.
-
48
An Expert Explains the Beginning of Christianity with Dr Richard Carrier
by Rocketman123 inhere is an interesting discussion about how christianity probably began.
hierarchical political interest may have been involved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=civ8gscbo_g.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
slimboyfat, when one considers that the first president (Russell) of the WT corporation was a skeptic for a period of time before founding the WT and when one considers that the the second president (Rutherford) of the WT corporation was an atheist for a period time before becoming affiliated with the WT, it is not very surprising that some liberal scholars, reading the New Testament without a faith commitment to uphold, come to some conclusions that are similar to JWs. Consider the following evidence of the above claims about Russell and Rutherford.
The WT book from 1959 called Jehovah's Witnesses In the Divine Purpose, which is about the WT's/JW's history, on page 14 quotes Charles Taze Russell as having said the following about himself: "Brought up a Presbyterian, indoctrinated from the Catechism, and being naturally of an inquiring mind, I fell a ready prey to the logic of infidelity, as soon as I began to think for myself. But that which at first threatened to be the utter shipwreck of faith in God and the Bible was, under God's providence, overruled for good, and merely wrecked my confidence in human creeds and systems of Bible interpretations." Russell also said that listening to a speaker of the Second Adventists enabled Russell to reestablish his "... wavering faith in the Divine Inspiration of the Bible ...."
The 1955 edition of the WT book called Qualified To Be Ministers on pages 298-299 say regarding Russell : "... although brought up a Presbyterian he joined the nearby Congregational Church, because it was more liberal. ... The doctrines of predestination and eternal punishment gave him particular difficulty, and by the time he was seventeen he had become an avowed skeptic, discarding the Bible and the creeds of the churches." Page 299 also quotes the same content I quoted above from the Divine Purpose book.
The 1974 WT book book called 1975 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses on page 35 says the following about Russell when Russell was in between the ages of 12 and 17: '... Russell was spiritually troubled. Especially was he concerned about the doctrines of eternal punishment and predestination. He reasoned: "A God that would use his power to create human beings whom he foreknew and predestinated should be eternally tormented, could be neither wise, just nor loving. His standard would be lower than that of many men." (1 John 4:8) Nonetheless, young Russell continued to believe in God's existence. His mind beleaguered by concern over doctrine, he examined the various creeds of Christendom, studied leading Oriental religions--and experienced grave disappointment. Where was truth to be found?'
See also pages 42-43, 122, and 126 of the 1993 WT book called Jehovah's Witnesses--Proclaimers of God's Kingdom.Regarding Joseph F. Rutherford the October 1, 1997 issue of "The Watchtower" on page 6 says the following under the heading of "Atheism No Bar to Jehovah's Personal Interest (note that in the quote below I have added bold face for emphasis)":
'Joseph F. Rutherford was the second president of the Watch Tower Society. He was baptized in 1906 as a Bible Student--the designation Jehovah's Witnesses were then known by--was appointed the Society's legal counsel the following year, and became its president in January 1917. Yet, at one time this young lawyer was an atheist. How did he become such a motivated Christian servant of Jehovah?
In July 1913, Rutherford served as chairman of an International Bible Students Association convention held in Springfield, Massachusetts, U.S.A. A reporter from the local newspaper, The Homestead, interviewed Rutherford, and the account was reprinted in the souvenir report of that convention.Rutherford explained that at the time he planned to marry, his religious views were those of the Baptist denomination, but those of his wife-to-be were Presbyterian. When Rutherford's pastor said that "she was going to hell fire because she had not been immersed and that he was going straight to heaven because he had been, his logical mind revolted and he became an atheist."
It took Rutherford several years of careful research to rebuild his faith in a personal God. He worked, he said, from the premise that "that which cannot satisfy the mind has no right to satisfy the heart." Christians "must be sure that the Scriptures in which they believe are true," Rutherford explained, adding: "They must know the foundation on which they stand."--See 2 Timothy 3:16, 17.
Yes, it is possible even today for an atheist or an agnostic to search the Scriptures, build up faith, and develop a strong personal relationship with Jehovah God. After a careful study of the Bible with the aid of the Watch Tower publication Knowledge That Leads to Everlasting Life, one young man confessed: "I did not believe in God when I started this study, but now I find that knowledge of the Bible has turned my whole thinking around. I am beginning to know Jehovah and to trust in him." ' [The next section (under the heading of' "The Fool" and God') of that WT article bashes atheists, suggesting that in all cases that their atheism stems from a "moral deficiency" and a "lack of sense".]It was by reading that article in 1997 that I learned that Rutherford had been an atheist for a period of time before he became baptized as a Bible Student and before he became the second president of the WT corporation. A few years later I stopped attending JW congregational meetings, except on rare occasions (such as the Memorial for a number of years), largely in order to do an independent minded study of the Bible and of the WT/JW history. That research was so I could find out if the WT/JW religion has a number of false doctrines and so I could discover more doctrines of the Bible than I already knew.
As a side note, WT literature sometimes depicts nudity (sometimes full nudity and sometimes partial nudity). For example page 7 of the WT article has an illustration which includes a depiction an adult female angel in heaven with bare (and not obscured) firm breasts. Revealing examples (in regards to women) are shown on pages 29, 117, the full color illustration page immediately before page 193, and 324, of Rutherford's 1937 book called Enemies. A another revealing example is on page 316 of Rutherford's 1940 book called Religion, and the illustration of demons on page 72 of the same book.
-
48
An Expert Explains the Beginning of Christianity with Dr Richard Carrier
by Rocketman123 inhere is an interesting discussion about how christianity probably began.
hierarchical political interest may have been involved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=civ8gscbo_g.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
pistolpete,by "one more in line with agnosticism and atheism" I didn't mean closer to agnosticism and atheism than theism and the belief that the Bible is a god's word. I meant somewhat closer to agnosticism and atheism than it previously was. By saying some parts of the Bible are no longer considered literally true, but now only considered true in an allegorical sense, the Christian view has moved in a direction towards an atheistic view, since atheists have been saying for centuries that parts of the Bible are not literally true.
By theologically modernist view I am referring to what in the early 1900s became called "Modernism". See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Christianity which says "Modernist theologians approved of radical biblical criticism and were willing to question traditional Christian doctrines, especially Christology." In doing so, even while believing the Bible is inspired by God, their ideas are closer to atheism to a greater extent than were those theologians who were not modernist in their theology. That is what I mean.
Though some sources suggest that Modernism was confined to some Catholic theologian, in actuality Modernism was also embraced by some Protestant theologians. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalist%E2%80%93Modernist_controversy which says "By the end of the 1930s proponents of Theological Liberalism had, at the time, effectively won the debate,[2] with the Modernists in control of all Mainline Protestant seminaries, publishing houses and denominational hierarchies in the United States."