waton, I don't see a high tolerance for crime among atheists, anymore than among theists. Just because one is against police brutality (that is, brutality done by the police) and manslaughter and murder done by the police, and against the death penalty, that doesn't mean one is against arrests and prison sentences for criminals. Atheists are more likely to be humanists than theists (and many humanists during the past 100 years tend to define humanism in such a way as to exclude belief in theism) and humanism tends to be against killing humans who are outside the womb (namely of ones who have been born). But paradoxically (to me at least) humanism tends to be in favor of people having the right to kill humans that are still in the womb (human embryos and even human fetuses that are not yet born).
Disillusioned JW
JoinedPosts by Disillusioned JW
-
44
Poll: Atheists overwhelmingly oppose the death penalty, but most Christians favor it
by Disillusioned JW insee https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2021/06/16/poll-atheists-overwhelmingly-oppose-the-death-penalty-most-christians-favor-it/ .
i am an atheist and i disapprove of the death penalty.
i remember michael dukakis, when he was a usa presidential candidate, saying i he was opposed to the death penalty - even for rapists and murderers.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
-
14
JW Science Quote Of The Day 8-27
by TD inin the 1979 movie, "the china syndrome" there is a scene right after swat team members have retaken the control room from jack godell.
(jack lemon) kimberly wells (jane fonda) nervously whispers to richard adams, (michael douglas) "the reactor is the biggest bomb in there!
this reflected a belief, common in the 1970's that commercial nuclear reactors were capable of going up in a mushroom cloud like an atomic bomb.. although no one can deny that accidents and malfunctions at nuclear power plants can potentially be catastrophic, these reactors are not capable of a bomb-like reaction.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Though you are correct in saying that thermonuclear is not the proper word to use for fission nuclear reactors, nonetheless fission nuclear reactors do generate enormous amounts of thermal energy (heat). That heat is then used to turn liquid water into steam to operate turbine electric generators which in turn generate electricity.
-
44
Poll: Atheists overwhelmingly oppose the death penalty, but most Christians favor it
by Disillusioned JW insee https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2021/06/16/poll-atheists-overwhelmingly-oppose-the-death-penalty-most-christians-favor-it/ .
i am an atheist and i disapprove of the death penalty.
i remember michael dukakis, when he was a usa presidential candidate, saying i he was opposed to the death penalty - even for rapists and murderers.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Rocketman123, the poll doesn't say that all atheists are against the death penalty but rather that an overwhelming majority of them are. Likewise it doesn't say that all Christians are for the death penalty but rather that most of them are. I probably should have made that more clear in the wording of my title for this topic thread, but instead I used nearly verbatim the wording of the atheist's article which I posted a link to.
-
44
Poll: Atheists overwhelmingly oppose the death penalty, but most Christians favor it
by Disillusioned JW insee https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2021/06/16/poll-atheists-overwhelmingly-oppose-the-death-penalty-most-christians-favor-it/ .
i am an atheist and i disapprove of the death penalty.
i remember michael dukakis, when he was a usa presidential candidate, saying i he was opposed to the death penalty - even for rapists and murderers.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Though generations become more conservative as they get older (except perhaps in the recent several years), the old people today are more liberal than old people of the same age group decades ago. Likewise people in their 20s and 30s today are more liberal than those in the same age groups decades ago. At least that is what polls of adult population of the USA say. Some of that change is attributed to access to information and ideas on the internet.
In my case while I was a teenager I was liberal regarding political views and human rights (despite being an active JW/[unbaptized JW]) and I have remained such, and in some aspects I have become even more liberal in those areas as I learned more. I also eventually became less "fundamentalist" and more theologically liberal in my interpretation of the Bible as a result of later reading what theologically liberal scholars of the Bible have written. After I learned more of the scientific evidence for biological evolution and the geological evidence that there was never a worldwide flood on Earth (at least not during the past 100 million years) I became an atheist and a philosophical naturalist.
I think the societal benefits that come from religious communities come from the promotion of standards of morality and ethics and the teaching of the benefits of such, as well as the promotion of some form of meditative and/or contemplative practice. I believe those characteristics can also be instilled in secular community organizations and in so-called nontheistic humanistic 'religions'. Two such 'religions' started by Jews (who were former rabbis, or who remained rabbis) are "Ethical Culture" and "Humanistic Judaism". Some people have called for "Humanistic Christianity" and even a nonsupernaturalistic "Secular Humanistic 'Christianity' ".
In my locality there is an ultra-liberal Presbyterian congregation in which one of the pastors is an atheist and he has announced to the congregation that he is an atheist. That congregation has allowed him to keep his position in the church. I visited the congregation one night when an atheist friend of mine (who is a medical doctor and a former Christian) gave a lecture there proving that science shows that biological evolution is true. The majority of the members of that congregation are elderly (including nearly all of those in attendance for the lecture about evolution). The focus of that congregation is not on theology but instead on other matters (I think it is on social justice matters). One pastor, minister, or elder of that congregation is a woman who said that Jesus was a man and never more than a man (never God or a god) and she referred to the findings of the Jesus Seminar. I think she is at least 50 years old.
-
44
Poll: Atheists overwhelmingly oppose the death penalty, but most Christians favor it
by Disillusioned JW insee https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2021/06/16/poll-atheists-overwhelmingly-oppose-the-death-penalty-most-christians-favor-it/ .
i am an atheist and i disapprove of the death penalty.
i remember michael dukakis, when he was a usa presidential candidate, saying i he was opposed to the death penalty - even for rapists and murderers.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
See https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2021/06/16/poll-atheists-overwhelmingly-oppose-the-death-penalty-most-christians-favor-it/ . I am an atheist and I disapprove of the death penalty. I remember Michael Dukakis, when he was a USA presidential candidate, saying I he was opposed to the death penalty - even for rapists and murderers. I was impressed by that view of his (though I was an active JW back then). I wished (and I still wish) he had defeated the Republican presidential candidate. What are your thoughts about the death penalty?
-
156
Remembering Rutherford
by Sea Breeze inhe seems to me to be the angriest and most ill-tempered of all the wt presidents, especially after his stint in prison and failed prophecies.. “regarding his misguided statements as to what we could expect in 1925, he [rutherford] once confessed to us at bethel, “i made an ass of myself.”” watchtower 1984 oct 1 p.24.
rutherford died at beth sarim on january 8, 1942, at the age of 72.
[220] cause of death was...carcinoma of the rectum..."[21] .
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Rocketman123, where have they explicitly claimed to be a prophet? I have don't recall them ever making such a claim (unless they made the claim long before the year 1950) - and I looked extensively to see if they made such a claim. To my knowledge the closest they came (at least since the year 1950) to claiming to be a literal prophet is that they did say in a Watchtower (or an Awake!) article from the 1970s that Jehovah's witnesses are a ' "prophet" ' but they had the word "prophet" in quote marks, indicating that they were claiming to be like a prophet, instead of literally a prophet. By writing and publishing such though, admittedly they came very close to claiming to be an actual literal prophet.
Since you say they claimed to be a prophet, I think that most likely you never were a JW, for JWs (and probably virtually all ex-JWs) don't believe they ever claimed to be literally a prophet.
Probably most (or many) ministers of the churches and most scholarly Christian authors of commentaries on the Bible believe they are guided by God's holy spirit in what they say (and interpret) about the Bible (including biblical prophecies), yet they disagree in some of what they say among themselves (especially among people of different denominations). By your definition that would make them false prophets, but the majority of Christian people don't consider them to be such.
-
156
Remembering Rutherford
by Sea Breeze inhe seems to me to be the angriest and most ill-tempered of all the wt presidents, especially after his stint in prison and failed prophecies.. “regarding his misguided statements as to what we could expect in 1925, he [rutherford] once confessed to us at bethel, “i made an ass of myself.”” watchtower 1984 oct 1 p.24.
rutherford died at beth sarim on january 8, 1942, at the age of 72.
[220] cause of death was...carcinoma of the rectum..."[21] .
-
-
Disillusioned JW
minimus, it is true that I need to "make sure of" certain things before accepting them as true, but not for all things. The stronger the claim and/or the greater significance to the claim to me, the more evidence I need to convince me to accept/believe the claim. If the claim is a strong one and/or a very significant one then I don't want to believe it upon hearsay (or second-hand) evidence, unless I consider that source of evidence to be reliable (such as a news organization that I trust).
By the way your statement of "make sure of all things" reminds me of the WT book called "Make Sure Of All Things - Hold Fast To What Is Fine" (1965 edition) and the Bible verse (1 Thessalonians 5:21 [1961 NWT edition]) it is based upon. I am impressed by that book (in regards to the approach it uses to convince people) because for the most part it merely quoted Bible verses rather than engages in argumentation/reasoning. It lets the Bible speak for itself, on specific topics.
Regarding whether the WT/JW religion is a cult, whenever I look up the Jehovah's Witnesses religion in a dictionary or an encyclopedia, no matter which dictionary or encyclopedia I use, the dictionary never says they are cult. Instead the dictionary or encyclopedia says they are a sect (or a more benign word or phrase is used instead). Furthermore, I own two college sociology textbooks. One of them mentions the JWs and when I look at what it and other college sociology textbooks say about the JWs they never say they are cult. Instead they say they are a sect, or use a more benign word or phrase - such as "a new religion".
One college sociology textbook which I own is called Experience Sociology: SOC 204 Sociology in Everyday Life, SOC 205 Social Change in Societies (copyright 2013). Pages 330-331 of that book says "Those with power in society--including established churches---sometimes label small religious communities whose beliefs and practices are at odds with the dominant culture as cults, often to discredit them." The italics and bold face in that quote are included in the book. That sentence in the book is the only place I saw the book use the word "cult".
The other college sociology textbook I own is called Essentials of Sociology - Fifth Edition (copyright 2002). On page 334 in a box called "Concept Summary: Distinctions Between Churches and Sects" it classifies sects as having the following characteristics. "Degree of tension with society" - "High"; "Attitude toward other institutions and religion" - "Intolerant; rejecting"; "Type of authority" - Charismatic; "Organization" - Informal; "Membership" - "Alienated", and "Examples" - Jehovah's Witnesses, Amish, Nation of Islam". Notice it lists the Jehovah's Witnesses as an example of a sect and notice that is its lists of the characteristics of a sect excellent fit the Jehovah's Witnesses.
Page 332 of the same textbook under the heading of "Sectlike Religions" has the following paragraph.
"Within the category of religious organizations that have greater tension with society there is great deal of variability. We can distinguish three levels of tension. First are cults, with the greatest tension, then sects, and finally established sects. The latter begin to approach institutionalization."
The subheading of "Sects" has the following two paragraphs.
"Within the general category of sectlike religions, those called sects occupy a medium position. They reject the social world in which they live, but they embrace the religious heritage of the surrounding society. The Amish are an excellent example. They base their lives on a strict reading of the Bible and remain aloof from the contemporary world.
Sects often view themselves as restoring true faith, which has been mislaid by religious institutions too eager to compromise with society. They see themselves as preservers of religious tradition rather than innovators. Like the Reformation churches of Calvin and Luther, they believe they are cleansing the church of its secular associations. However offbeat it may be in comparison to mainline churches, if a religious group in the United States uses the Bible as its source of inspiration and guidance, then it is probably a sect rather than a cult." [The boldface in that quote is by me, the boldface is not in the quoted passage of the book but the sentence is.] By that sociology college textbook [Essentials of Sociology - Fifth Edition (copyright 2002)] the JWs are explicitly called and defined as a sect and not a cult.
The edition of the high school textbook which I used in my high school's required course in government/civics is called "Magruder's American Governemnt - 1978" (copyright 1978). On multiple pages it mentions the Jehovah's Witnesses. On page 133 it says the following. "Many important religious freedom cases have been carried to the Supreme Court over the years by Jehovah's Witnesses, a fundamentalist group which very actively promotes its beliefs. Perhaps the stormiest controversy the sect stirred came from its defiance of compulsory flag salute requirements." Note it says it is a sect.
The JWs are a sect which denies being a sect. They are also a very high control religious group which is now very cult-like, but they are still not a cult according the vast majority of sociologists (scientists of sociology) and according to me.
'I rest my case'.
-
156
Remembering Rutherford
by Sea Breeze inhe seems to me to be the angriest and most ill-tempered of all the wt presidents, especially after his stint in prison and failed prophecies.. “regarding his misguided statements as to what we could expect in 1925, he [rutherford] once confessed to us at bethel, “i made an ass of myself.”” watchtower 1984 oct 1 p.24.
rutherford died at beth sarim on january 8, 1942, at the age of 72.
[220] cause of death was...carcinoma of the rectum..."[21] .
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Hi minimus. Yes know that the WT has collected money since its beginning, but they classify such as donations rather than proceeds from sales.
minimus and Rocketman123, some of the WT's Kingdom Ministry issues and/or Kingdom Service issues say (in answer to questions) that when offering the WT literature JWs may give them away at no charge if the JWs discern that the person is sincere in asking for the literature and in not having the money to donate for them. The WT has to (I think) handle matters that way rather than truly sell the products, since the WT is registered as a tax-exempt nonprofit instead of as a for-profit. As a result, while engaged in field service I sometimes handed out WT literature at no charge and without donating my own money to compensate for not receiving a donation/contribution from the householder, except that when I obtained the WT literature in the KH I made a donation for it.
In later years (starting in the 1990s?) the WT stopped asking for specified donation amounts for products, including at the KH literature and magazine counters. They also instructed the JWs to stop asking for such while in field service, though to inform the householders that the work is supported by voluntary donations and to ask the people if they would like to make such a donation. Furthermore when we asked them if they wanted to make such a donation we informed them (at least some times) that making such a donation was not a requirement for receiving the literature. Years after I stopped going out in field service the JWs entirely stopped asking for donations from the public, offering the literature free of charge. However, maybe the WT expects individual JWs to make donations for the literature that is given away free of charge.
Rocketman123, I agree with you that the WT had been operating using a business model, at least (and especially) since the time of Rutherford until the time that they stopped asking a specified donation amount. But I don't believe they have entirely been operating from a business model after the time they stopped asking for specific donation amounts, and especially after they stopped asking for donations from the public.
minimus, corporations classified as nonprofits are allowed to receive donations including cash donations in exchange for handing out printed literature and other items. Since they are registered as a nonprofit I didn't think the word "commercialized" could be correctly applied them, since I thought the word "commercialized" can only be applied to for-profit entities. After reading posts in reply to my post I looked up on the internet the word "commercialized' in reference to nonprofits and I discovered that the the term can applied to them also. As a result I now believe that the WT, despite being registered as a nonprofit, is commercialized. I also know that the WT is listed in the wills of a number of people and that as a result the WT has obtained shares of stocks and mutual funds, and other assets from a number of people, probably even including shares of stock in companies which make weapons for the military.
I got baptized in my mid-teens and I was raised as a JW from infancy. While I was contemplating whether or not to get baptized I knew that many non-JWs consider the JW religion to be a cult. I asked myself 'is it a cult?'. I knew even then that the religion is very controlling, that its governing body claimed to be anointed of Jehovah God, that the WT claims its governing body receives a measure of holy spirit, and that in some (not clearly specified) way it claims to be directed by Jehovah. I also knew what the scripture in Deuteronomy says of the definition of a false prophet. I knew that the WT made false predictions (including being wrong about the significance of the year 1975) and that they have changed numerous doctrines of theirs. But I also knew that the WT (and its governing body) did not, unlike the top leadership of the LDS (Mormon) church and unlike the claim of Mohammed to have received a revelation from Allah by way of the angel Gabriel, claim to have a received a revelation from Jehovah. Since they did not claim to receive any revelations for God, then technically they had not spoken in the name of the god in the sense of being a prophet (or claiming to be a prophet) of the god - despite coming extremely close to such. I accepted the WT's narrow definition of the word "prophet" and their narrow definition of the word "cult". Using those narrow definitions I thus agreed with them that they are not a cult (though they have some characteristics of cults) and not a prophet and not a false prophet, despite their failed predictions and changed doctrinal teachings, and despite their being extremely controlling - including their labeling as apostate the JWs who openly disagree with them and including their disfellowshipping such JWs. I still believe that they are not technically a cult, except that they became virtually a cult after they said the governing body and only the governing body is the faithful and discreet slave.
For example, the WT and/or it's governing body never said (at least during my lifetime) something like the following. "The Lord Jehovah God spoke to us audibly (or in a vision) the following. 'Proclaim unto my people, my chosen witnesses the following. "The Lord Jehovah Gods says ... " ' ".
Though the WT nonprofit non-prophetic corporation is wealthy (and even profitable, despite being registered as a nonprofit or as not for profit), I need evidence that it's governing body (or some others in the corporation) are making a financial profit from the corporation and/or have obtained wealth from it. I agree that Rutherford did obtain person use of substantial wealth from the WT, if not actually obtained wealth from the WT. For example, his use of the Beth-sarim house and the expensive cars are personal use of wealth, even if the WT owned those assets instead of Rutherford. In fact Rutherford would likely benefit more by having the WT own those assets while letting Rutherford use them, than paying those assets to Rutherford as income to Rutherford. That is because if they were paid to Rutherford, then Rutherford would likely have to pay taxes on the income and he wouldn't be able to obtain as many tax deductions on the expenses of those items.
The books in the Rich Dad Poor Dad series urge people to start their own business in part because of the greatly increased tax benefits one can get by doing so. When conducting their business they can travel (at company expense), and drive a car (at company expense), and use a home (at company expense if they work from the home), with the business claiming a tax deduction for each of those items/categories and without the business person having to claim personal incomes for those items. At least such is one of the impressions I got from those books. Also corporate effective tax rates tend to be much lower than those for personal income taxes on wage/salary earnings of high income people. The WT has no income tax (at least not in general, but I read they now have to pay some tax to some government entity or entities).
-
150
Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?
by Vanderhoven7 inanybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Regarding the 70 years of servitude/bondage or desolation a number of Bible commentators believe that the biblical prophet was in error to predicting 70 years of such instead of 50 years. Some others though accepting the 70 years use a start date (for the count) that is 20 years earlier to thus be compatible with the archaeologically supported 587/586 B.C.E. date.
-
156
Remembering Rutherford
by Sea Breeze inhe seems to me to be the angriest and most ill-tempered of all the wt presidents, especially after his stint in prison and failed prophecies.. “regarding his misguided statements as to what we could expect in 1925, he [rutherford] once confessed to us at bethel, “i made an ass of myself.”” watchtower 1984 oct 1 p.24.
rutherford died at beth sarim on january 8, 1942, at the age of 72.
[220] cause of death was...carcinoma of the rectum..."[21] .
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Rocketman123, you say the non-profit WT corporation is commercialized but where it the evidence of such? I have seen no evidence of such. If it could be proven that it is run as a for-profit commercial entity and if such to be made widely known then JWs would stop contributing to it in droves. The WT is also not a false prophet in the biblical sense (rather than the common usage sense of the public today). I prophet is someone who received a revelation/communication directly from God (or a god or spirit) and then told others the message; and a false prophet is someone who falsely claimed to be such a prophet. The WT has never made such claims after I was born (and only a couple of so times in their entire history did they possibly make such claims). The false predictions that they made were merely interpretations of what the scriptures say, not alleged new revelations. I guess you were never a JW since you don't see anything good in the organization and since you make some false claims about it. I also don't consider them to have been a cult prior to the year 2010, but lately they are acting considerably cult-like. I won't take the time to address your other accusations about them.