Disillusioned JW

Joined

• started 27 topics
• posted 2,027 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Disillusioned JW

• 
  20

  For Born-Ins - If You Were 18 Again, What 7 Things Would You do Differently?

  by Sea Breeze in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  here's mine:.

  1. go immediately to college and study construction management.

  2. set up an ira and start contributing every year.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  How could someone at age 18 be in a financial position to start buying real estate?
  
• 
  75

  Is the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses REALLY the "faithful and discreet slave" of Matt. 24:45-47?

  by Roger Kirkpatrick in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  thesis: when someone who is given a responsibility mistakes that responsibility for authority, bullying is very likely to occur.. jesus spoke an illustration recorded at matthew 24: 45-51 which well illustrates this thesis.. jesus asked, “who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over all his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?

  happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so.

  truly i say to you, he will appoint him over all his belongings.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Hi enoughisenough. I agree entirely with your post in which you said "the text the use to shun those who disassociate".
  
• 
  141

  My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang

  by Sea Breeze in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.

  wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.

  that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Sea Breeze, the post you made, regarding the quote you made from the Institute, is interesting and informative.

  Anony Mous, your post about "the remnants of an explosion" is interesting and informative.
• 
  75

  Is the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses REALLY the "faithful and discreet slave" of Matt. 24:45-47?

  by Roger Kirkpatrick in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  thesis: when someone who is given a responsibility mistakes that responsibility for authority, bullying is very likely to occur.. jesus spoke an illustration recorded at matthew 24: 45-51 which well illustrates this thesis.. jesus asked, “who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over all his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?

  happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so.

  truly i say to you, he will appoint him over all his belongings.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Did Paul falsely claim to be an apostle of Jesus Christ?
• 
  75

  Is the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses REALLY the "faithful and discreet slave" of Matt. 24:45-47?

  by Roger Kirkpatrick in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  thesis: when someone who is given a responsibility mistakes that responsibility for authority, bullying is very likely to occur.. jesus spoke an illustration recorded at matthew 24: 45-51 which well illustrates this thesis.. jesus asked, “who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over all his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?

  happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so.

  truly i say to you, he will appoint him over all his belongings.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Om page 3 of this topic thread Vanderhoven7 listed examples which he says draw a contrast between Jesus and the JW governing body, but a number of those same examples can be shown to indicate that Paul disagreed with Jesus (at least with Jesus as described in the Bible). See 1 Corinthians 5:9-11. Therefore the following questions are very relevant to his post. Does the NT contradicts itself? Was Paul a false apostle of Christ? Were some of the narratives about Christ false and/or was Christ wrong in some of his actions and/or teachings?

  Notice that in 1 Corinthians 5:9-11 (ASV) Paul tells Christians to "have no company with fornicators" in regards to any man who is "named a brother", likewise in regards to those named a brother who is "an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner". Regarding all of them Paul (at verse 11 [ASV]) says "I write unto you not to keep company ... with such a one no, not to eat."

  In 2 Corinthians chapter 11 Paul warns against listening to those Christians who preach a different gospel than his. Likewise the JW/WT's governing body warns JWs against listening to those who preach a different gospel than that of the WT. In verses 13-15 Paul warns against listening to men whom Paul says "are false apostles, deceitful workers". In that category Paul is including those whom Paul says are ministers of Satan who "fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness"; and Paul says "even Satan fashioneth himself into an angel of light". The JW/WT governing body warns JWs from listening to those whom the governing body calls apostates, even saying that such ones are deceptive liars. The JW governing body is thus acting like Paul, when the governing body says not to listen those Christians who contradict what the the governing body claims is doctrinal truth.
  

  What about Charles Russell and the WT's governing body? Russell publicly debated some of those that were "claiming to be Jehovah’s representatives" and Russell "criticized their interpretation of scripture". The WT/JW and its governing body in there literature (and in their video broadcasts) criticizes many interpretations of scripture held held by numerous theologians (and other teachers) of Christianity. If the WT/JW and its governing body are wrong in those teachings and actions, then what about Paul? Was he also wrong in some of his teachings and actions?
  
• 
  78

  Do you believe in ghosts?

  by Country Girl in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i am posting this because i know there are many people that have had experiences that cannot be explained by natural means.

  i am a ghost hunter, as a hobby.

  my hobby is to disprove ghosts.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  enoughisenough, while you were sleepy you probably experienced a type of dream (or hallucination) - even if it was tactile only. Though you thought you were not quite asleep, you might have been asleep, or perhaps part of your mind was awake and part your mind was asleep.

  I never had the sensation of any spirit being cozying up to me.
  
• 
  78

  Do you believe in ghosts?

  by Country Girl in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i am posting this because i know there are many people that have had experiences that cannot be explained by natural means.

  i am a ghost hunter, as a hobby.

  my hobby is to disprove ghosts.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  I did a search on this site to see what people think about whether ghosts exist or not and as a result I found this old topic thread. I never ever experienced anything supernatural - nothing which I ever concluded was supernatural, yet I know people who claim to have had experiences which are hard to explain by naturalistic reasons. I've seen TV episodes in which people make extraordinary claims, but I don't believe that anything supernatural happened. Something else must have happened instead. I think that in many cases people's minds played tricks on them. I other cases I think people have faulty memories of what happened. In other cases I think people outright lied about what happened, or that someone played a hoax on them.

  I think a high percentage of people in the world are delusional, in regards to them having hallucinated (or dreaming) and being convinced that they experienced something supernatural instead, such as their thinking they experienced spirit being activity.
  

  I don't believe in ghosts or spirits and I don't believe in an afterlife.

  The first post at https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/15056/no-such-thing-ghosts might explain a lot of peoples' experiences.
  
• 
  20

  Is the WT right that the Lamb's marriage is after Armageddon?

  by Kosonen in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  the wt org claims that the lamb's marriage will happen after armageddon, despite the fact that revelation 19 very clearly says that the lamb's marriage happens after the destruction of babylon the great.

  and that after the lamb's marriage he with heavenly armies will go to destroy the wicked.. the wt claims that the order of events in revelation 19 is not really in that order referring to psalm 45. but i can't find in psalm 45 any explicit contradiction to revelation 19. .

  paragraph 10 in the following article shows the wt org's view point:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  ThomasMore, huh? When I wrote of possible past life on Mars I meant that Mars in the distant past (when there was ample liquid water on Mars) might have had microbial life.
  
• 
  20

  Is the WT right that the Lamb's marriage is after Armageddon?

  by Kosonen in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  the wt org claims that the lamb's marriage will happen after armageddon, despite the fact that revelation 19 very clearly says that the lamb's marriage happens after the destruction of babylon the great.

  and that after the lamb's marriage he with heavenly armies will go to destroy the wicked.. the wt claims that the order of events in revelation 19 is not really in that order referring to psalm 45. but i can't find in psalm 45 any explicit contradiction to revelation 19. .

  paragraph 10 in the following article shows the wt org's view point:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  If the book of Revelation is inspired by YHWH God (hypothetically speaking) does it even matter if people know in advance the timing of the Lamb's marriage? In other words, is there is any benefit for any humans to know such a detail, other than satisfying some curiosity?
  

  People are welcome to contemplate it and to debate it, but lately I have lost much interest in trying to figure out fine (that is, precise) details of Bible and the Apocrypha. Lately I have also lost a lot of interest in even learning particulars of the messages of the Bible and the Apocrypha. I have even lost much interest in a general study of the Bible and the Apocrypha - and in debating various interpretations (or understandings) of the Bible and the Apocrypha. Regarding study of the Bible and of theology, I have returned to my degree of interest of studying them to that which I had when I was 10 or 8 years old. Or, maybe right now it is even less than when I was those ages, since when I was 8 to 10 years old I at least believed in the Bible and in the biblical God (and I became enrolled in the theocratic ministry school at age 8), whereas now I am an atheist and a naturalist.
  

  For me, a large part of that is because I am a scientific naturalist and I thus have a much greater interest in matters which are testable and/or readily observable (such as efforts by NASA to send people to the moon and to Mars, and efforts to discover evidence of possible past life and possible present life on Mars and elsewhere beyond Earth). I am also more interested in learning knowledge which has the potential to benefit me in definite practical ways, such as financially and in regards to health. I now have very meager interest in debating, or discussing, theology with people. But I wish you folks well.

  Revelation is a very hard book to accurately and fully understand, even if hypothetically speaking it is true. Those of you who wish to study it, may you enjoy doing so. But, I no longer take the book of Revelation seriously.
  
• 
  38

  Replacing God?

  by punkofnice in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we seem to be if a more secular society here in the west, these days.

  i'm speaking from the uk.. with the lack of belief in god/s, i'm wondering if all the seeming (note: i said seeming!

  ), deification of people like greta thunberg, george floyd and celebs amongst others, if people who have no real belief system, are filling the gap left by god with people?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Hello punkofnice. In an earlier post when I asked if you disbelieve what you were taught in our school courses (especially science courses) it was for multiple reasons. The following are the reasons.

  (1) I was wondering if like me you accepted as true everything (or virtually everything) you were taught in those courses.

  (2) When I took the courses I saw no reason to doubt or disbelieve anything which was taught in them, with one exception. The one exception is that sadly because of the WT's influence I had high uncertainty about whether the high school biology textbook was correct in saying that biological evolution is true. (I wish that exception had not existed in my mind.) I believed everything the physics books, the chemistry books, the history books, the electronics books, the health and physical fitness books, the personal finance (or economics) book, the world history book [except about human evolution in prehistory, due to the WT's influence], the USA history books, and the other textbooks said. I did not know of any information which contradicted what they said (other than regarding evolution).
  

  (3) What I was taught in the various textbooks was what was considered established facts and I was in school to learn facts and well supported theories and to become educated. I wanted to grow in knowledge and learn truths and I thought a great way to do such was by studying books, including textbooks. I also wanted to get very good grades in school.
  

  (4) Today the widespread consensus (that is agreement) of climate scientists that human caused climate change is now taking place is now scientifically an established fact. That established fact is now taught in physical geology textbooks. For example see https://opentextbc.ca/geology/part/chapter-19-climate-change/ which part of chapter in a college geology textbook. It says the following.

  "A significant part of this chapter is about the natural processes of climate change and how they work. It’s critically important to be aware of those natural climate change processes if we want to understand anthropogenic climate change. First, this awareness helps us to understand why our activities are causing the present-day climate to change, and second, it allows us to distinguish between natural and anthropogenic processes in the climate record of the past 250 years." [The boldface in that quote is mine.]

  See also https://opentextbc.ca/geology/chapter/19-1-what-makes-the-climate-change/ which says the following.

  "There are two parts to climate change, the first one is known as climate forcing, which is when conditions change to give the climate a little nudge in one direction or the other. The second part of climate change, and the one that typically does most of the work, is what we call a feedback. When a climate forcing changes the climate a little, a whole series of environmental changes take place, many of which either exaggerate the initial change (positive feedbacks), or suppress the change (negative feedbacks).

  An example of a climate-forcing mechanism is the increase in the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere that results from our use of fossil fuels. CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere and leads to climate warming. Warming changes vegetation patterns; contributes to the melting of snow, ice, and permafrost; causes sea level to rise; reduces the solubility of CO2 in sea water; and has a number of other minor effects. Most of these changes contribute to more warming. Melting of permafrost, for example, is a strong positive feedback because frozen soil contains trapped organic matter that is converted to CO2 and methane (CH4) when the soil thaws. Both these gases accumulate in the atmosphere and add to the warming effect. On the other hand, if warming causes more vegetation growth, that vegetation should absorb CO2, thus reducing the warming effect, which would be a negative feedback. Under our current conditions — a planet that still has lots of glacial ice and permafrost — most of the feedbacks that result from a warming climate are positive feedbacks and so the climate changes that we cause get naturally amplified by natural processes." [The boldface in the last sentence of the quote is mine.]

  For another college geology textbook source see https://opengeology.org/textbook/15-global-climate-change/ and note what it says in chapter 15 under the section called "15.4 Anthropogenic Causes of Climate Change". It says in part the following.

  "As shown in the previous section, prehistoric climate changes occur slowly over many millions of years. The climate changes observed today are rapid and largely human caused. ...

  By the end of the 1900s and into the early 2000s, scientists solidified the Theory of Anthropogenic Climate Change when evidence from thousands of ground-based studies and continuous land and ocean satellite measurements mounted, revealing the expected temperature increase. The Theory of Anthropogenic Climate Change is that humans are causing most of the current climate changes by burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas. ...

  The overwhelming majority of climate studies indicate that human activity is causing rapid changes to the climate, which will cause severe environmental damage. There is strong scientific consensus on the issue. Studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent of climate scientists agree that climate warming is caused from human activities. There is no alternative explanation for the observed link between human-produced greenhouse gas emissions and changing modern climate. Most leading scientific organizations endorse this position, including the U.S. National Academy of Science, which was established in 1863 by an act of Congress under President Lincoln. Congress charged the National Academy of Science “with providing independent, objective advice to the nation on matters related to science and technology.” Therefore, the National Academy of Science is the leading authority when it comes to policy advice related to scientific issues.

  One way we know that the increased greenhouse gas emissions are from human activities is with isotopic fingerprints. For example, fossil fuels, representing plants that lived millions of years ago, have a stable carbon-13 to carbon-12 (13C/12C) ratio that is different from today’s atmospheric stable-carbon ratio (radioactive 14C is unstable). Isotopic carbon signatures have been used to identify anthropogenic carbon in the atmosphere since the 1980s. Isotopic records from the Antarctic Ice Sheet show stable isotopic signatures from ~1000 AD to ~1800 AD and a steady isotopic signature gradually changing since 1800, followed by a more rapid change after 1950 as burning of fossil fuels dilutes the CO2 in the atmosphere. These changes show the atmosphere as having a carbon isotopic signature increasingly more similar to that of fossil fuels.

  ... Unfortunately, despite scientific consensus, efforts to mitigate climate change require political action. Despite growing climate change concern, mitigation efforts, legislation, and international agreements have reduced emissions in some places, yet the less developed world’s continual economic growth has increased global greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, the years 2000 to 2010 saw the largest increases since 1970."