Posts by alice.in.wonderland

156

Worldly Shunning

by alice.in.wonderland in

i hear quite a bit of criticism about jehovah's witnesses enforcing 1 corinthians 5:9-13. while jehovah's witnesses have a formal system of maintaining the organization's core values; egocentric, self-worshiping secularists have an informal system of rejecting those of whom they have nothing in common with.

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-390-religion.aspx.

most major religions have believed in the existence of a supernatural realm, a realm beyond the natural world of physical objects and bodies governed by causal laws, the world we perceive with our senses and can study by rational methods.

alice.in.wonderland

"says who?"

Objectivism has been very popular in the business community and on a personal level for many people, but recent events have changed things some.

http://www.newsweek.com/2008/12/09/who-is-to-blame.html

Who Is To Blame?

Some point to Alan Greenspan. But his hands-off approach to the economy originated with Ayn Rand.

It's not easy being Alan Greenspan these days. As the former Federal Reserve chairman, he urged government regulators to take a light touch while banks like Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers buried themselves—and the economy more generally—under a mountain of debt. Now that his reputation is plummeting faster than the stock market, he's been forced to admit a "flaw" in his hands-off ideology.

Of course, things look entirely different to members of "free-market advocacy groups," as they like to be called. One such group is the Ayn Rand Institute, named after the matriarch of the movement, whose antigovernment and anti-regulation views are embodied in her best-selling novels "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead." Indeed, Greenspan himself was a friend of Rand's, and a devotee of her extreme free-market philosophy, known as Objectivism. NEWSWEEK's Barrett Sheridan spoke with the head of the Ayn Rand Institute, Dr. Yaron Brook, about why he defends free markets while much of the rest of the world has turned away from them, and what he thinks of Greenspan today.

156

Worldly Shunning

by alice.in.wonderland in

i hear quite a bit of criticism about jehovah's witnesses enforcing 1 corinthians 5:9-13. while jehovah's witnesses have a formal system of maintaining the organization's core values; egocentric, self-worshiping secularists have an informal system of rejecting those of whom they have nothing in common with.

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-390-religion.aspx.

most major religions have believed in the existence of a supernatural realm, a realm beyond the natural world of physical objects and bodies governed by causal laws, the world we perceive with our senses and can study by rational methods.

alice.in.wonderland

"I don't consider them to be things to throw away when they become unpractical."

I don't either.

"That was not the focus of the article and I find it curious how you're trying to make it fit into whatever point you're trying to push here."

I did gather from the article “If a person has no practical value to another person, dismiss them from your life.”

Objectivism is a popular philosophy that is code language for “let society be damned.” This is a common trend in the world with or without some empty philosophy telling you to do so. Jehovah's Witnesses shunning isn't out of selfish motives. They don't like it.

http://objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-406-FAQ_Virtue_Selfishness.aspx

What does Ayn Rand mean when she describes selfishness as a virtue?

Ayn Rand rejects altruism, the view that self-sacrifice is the moral ideal. She argues that the ultimate moral value, for each human individual, is his or her own well-being. Since selfishness (as she understands it) is serious, rational, principled concern with one's own well-being, it turns out to be a prerequisite for the attainment of the ultimate moral value. For this reason, Rand believes that selfishness is a virtue.

Rand writes, "[A]ltruism permits no concept of a self-respecting, self-supporting man—a man who supports his own life by his own effort and neither sacrifices himself nor others … it permits no concept of benevolent co-existence among men … it permits no concept of justice"

156

Worldly Shunning

by alice.in.wonderland in

i hear quite a bit of criticism about jehovah's witnesses enforcing 1 corinthians 5:9-13. while jehovah's witnesses have a formal system of maintaining the organization's core values; egocentric, self-worshiping secularists have an informal system of rejecting those of whom they have nothing in common with.

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-390-religion.aspx.

most major religions have believed in the existence of a supernatural realm, a realm beyond the natural world of physical objects and bodies governed by causal laws, the world we perceive with our senses and can study by rational methods.

alice.in.wonderland

"I don't understand this article to be about "worldly shunning" at all."

If a person has no practical value to another person, dismiss them from your life. You didn't derive this point from reading this? I see people do this often out of selfish motives whether someone is family or not. I don't necessarily do that.

156

Worldly Shunning

by alice.in.wonderland in

i hear quite a bit of criticism about jehovah's witnesses enforcing 1 corinthians 5:9-13. while jehovah's witnesses have a formal system of maintaining the organization's core values; egocentric, self-worshiping secularists have an informal system of rejecting those of whom they have nothing in common with.

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-390-religion.aspx.

most major religions have believed in the existence of a supernatural realm, a realm beyond the natural world of physical objects and bodies governed by causal laws, the world we perceive with our senses and can study by rational methods.

alice.in.wonderland

"Most inactive JW's have no problem associating with DF'd persons whether it's family members or on forums full of ex-JW's. They justify not following the GB's instructions for hypocritical reasons. The shunning begins when the inactive JW get 'righteous' regularly attends meetings and FS."

It's not the “GB's instructions,” it's taken from 1 Corinthians 5:9-13:

In my letter I wrote you to quit mixing in company with fornicators, not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world. But now I am writing you to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Do you not judge those inside, while God judges those outside? “Remove the wicked [man] from among yourselves.” 1 Corinthians 5:9-13
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrisy

a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.

It's not hypocritical to defend an organization if others are publicly defaming it by distorting the truth, even if they're not actively engaged in it. How can someone condemn a person for shunning and then call them hypocritical for not shunning?

156

Worldly Shunning

by alice.in.wonderland in

i hear quite a bit of criticism about jehovah's witnesses enforcing 1 corinthians 5:9-13. while jehovah's witnesses have a formal system of maintaining the organization's core values; egocentric, self-worshiping secularists have an informal system of rejecting those of whom they have nothing in common with.

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-390-religion.aspx.

most major religions have believed in the existence of a supernatural realm, a realm beyond the natural world of physical objects and bodies governed by causal laws, the world we perceive with our senses and can study by rational methods.

alice.in.wonderland

"Your own website makes it clear that you should only be contacting your DFd mother for essential family business."

It depends on the situation. In your case I would have to convince you that a supreme being exists and go from there. This can be accomplished if you're not disfellowshipped.

156

Worldly Shunning

by alice.in.wonderland in

i hear quite a bit of criticism about jehovah's witnesses enforcing 1 corinthians 5:9-13. while jehovah's witnesses have a formal system of maintaining the organization's core values; egocentric, self-worshiping secularists have an informal system of rejecting those of whom they have nothing in common with.

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-390-religion.aspx.

most major religions have believed in the existence of a supernatural realm, a realm beyond the natural world of physical objects and bodies governed by causal laws, the world we perceive with our senses and can study by rational methods.

alice.in.wonderland

As for me, I have a disfellowshipped mother I associate with.

156

Worldly Shunning

by alice.in.wonderland in

i hear quite a bit of criticism about jehovah's witnesses enforcing 1 corinthians 5:9-13. while jehovah's witnesses have a formal system of maintaining the organization's core values; egocentric, self-worshiping secularists have an informal system of rejecting those of whom they have nothing in common with.

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-390-religion.aspx.

most major religions have believed in the existence of a supernatural realm, a realm beyond the natural world of physical objects and bodies governed by causal laws, the world we perceive with our senses and can study by rational methods.

alice.in.wonderland

I hear quite a bit of criticism about Jehovah's Witnesses enforcing 1 Corinthians 5:9-13. While Jehovah's Witnesses have a formal system of maintaining the organization's core values; egocentric, self-worshiping secularists have an informal system of rejecting those of whom they have nothing in common with.

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-390-Religion.aspx

Most major religions have believed in the existence of a supernatural realm, a realm beyond the natural world of physical objects and bodies governed by causal laws, the world we perceive with our senses and can study by rational methods. Some religions posit a personal god (or gods); others believe in impersonal supernatural forces. (See George Walsh, The Role of Religion in History, chapter 1.) Objectivism rejects any notion of the supernatural as incompatible with the objectivity and regularity of nature as identified by reason. There is no credible evidence of miracles, magic, or other supernatural phenomena in nature.

The dominant forms of religion in our culture posit a personal god, a Supreme Being, who created the world, is omnipotent and omniscient, imposes moral duties on man, and expects worship. Those who accept this idea have the burden of showing why such a hypothesis is necessary. In this regard, Objectivists are atheists because the arguments for the existence of such a being are not sound. Objectivists reject the existence of God for the same reason they reject the existence of elves, leprechauns, and unicorns: because there is no credible evidence of such beings.

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/cth-32-541-FAQ_Objectivism_Family.aspx

Objectivism holds that the fundamental standard for all relationships is the trader principle. This principle holds that we should interact with people on the basis of the values we can trade with them - values of all sorts, including common interests in art, sports or music, similar philosophical outlooks, political beliefs, sense of life, and more. Trade, in this broad sense, is the only proper basis of any relationship—including relationships with members of our families.

Many people are indoctrinated with the belief that we must automatically love family members simply because they are family. This is the view expressed in bromides like "They're still family" or "Blood is thicker than water." This view is not compatible with the trader principle, since we may not gain any values from certain family members, and hence may not love—or even like—them.

There is a distinction between the family that we are born into and have no choice about—parents, siblings, relatives—and the family we can choose for ourselves—a spouse. Since the former relationships are unchosen, it would be a rare coincidence if we could truly love each member of our family for who they are. The likelihood of being born surrounded entirely by people with whom we share core values is not very high. Affection for our family members would be a genuine reflection of shared values only if we could imagine feeling this affection even if they weren't family.
------------------------------

I've known many who are rejected by certain family members after becoming one of Jehovah's Witnesses. Religion and politics are very divisive. Considering the fact that you can get reinstated, the formal system seems better than informally cutting someone off. This “informality” doesn't allow for any dependable way to be reunited with friends or family.

4

Rutherford and Russel were SPIN DOCTORS?!

by confliction in

jw
friends

in public relations, spin is a form of propaganda, achieved through providing an interpretation of an event or campaign to persuade public opinion in favor or against a certain organization or public figure.

while traditional public relations may also rely on creative presentation of the facts, "spin" often, though not always, implies disingenuous, deceptive and/or highly manipulative tactics.[1].

politicians are often accused by their opponents of claiming to be honest and seek the truth while using spin tactics to manipulate public opinion.. because of the frequent association between "spin" and press conferences (especially government press conferences), the room in which these take place is sometimes described as a spin room.

alice.in.wonderland

Bill, you didn't give a reason why they were spin doctors, you just said they were.

22

Neither the Bible or Dictionary support the new light on the Generation

by wasblind in

according to the governing body, the anointed who were on hand in 1914 will overlap the lives of todays anointed.

these two groups make up one generation.. "bull".

the bible supports the dictionaries definition of generation, matthew 1:1-17 shows abraham, isaac and jacob as three separate generations, verse 17 says: "all the generations, then, from abraham until david were fourteen generations.. the dictionaries definition say: all people born around the same time; a single stage in the descent of a family or group.

alice.in.wonderland

Google “overlapping generations.” There are various usages of this. All I see is they made reference to overlapping generations and contemporaries bearing witness to different events. Unless the last days lasted no longer than 70 or 80 years, there could not be one generation. People mock new teachings even though only the test of time can define some of these concepts. Did the April 15th, 2010 issue of The Watchtower say it replaced generation as a concept that refers to attributes of someone's personality as explained in the of November 1, 1995 issue of the Watchtower or Philippians 2:14-16?

Keep doing all things free from murmurings and arguments, that you may come to be blameless and innocent, children of God without a blemish in among a crooked and twisted generation, among whom you are shining as illuminators in the world, keeping a tight grip on the word of life, that I may have cause for exultation in Christ’s day, that I did not run in vain or work hard in vain. Philippians 2:14-16

"Crooked and twisted generation" doesn't apply to you if you are not crooked and twisted, even if you were born at the same time.

22

Neither the Bible or Dictionary support the new light on the Generation

by wasblind in

according to the governing body, the anointed who were on hand in 1914 will overlap the lives of todays anointed.

these two groups make up one generation.. "bull".

the bible supports the dictionaries definition of generation, matthew 1:1-17 shows abraham, isaac and jacob as three separate generations, verse 17 says: "all the generations, then, from abraham until david were fourteen generations.. the dictionaries definition say: all people born around the same time; a single stage in the descent of a family or group.

alice.in.wonderland

Considering the reasoning here, the term generation would have to be rounded off to the nearest second to constitute the same generation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_X

Generation X, commonly abbreviated to Gen X, is the generation born after the baby boom ended, ranging from 1961 to 1981.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Y

Generation Y, also known as the Millennial Generation, describes the demographic cohort following Generation X. Its members are often referred to as Millennials or Echo Boomers. As there are no precise dates for when the Millennial generation starts and ends, commentators have used birth dates ranging somewhere from the mid 1970s to the early 2000s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Z

Generation Z is one of the names used for the First World or Western generation of people born between the mid-1990s and the late 2000s. Relatively little is firmly established about its composition, character, and even name.

It should be obvious that Matthew 24:34 was for the purpose of bearing witness to events as history can be altered if there are no living witnesses.
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007273

Combating Holocaust Denial: Origins of Holocaust Denial