jst2laws

Joined

• started 111 topics
• posted 2,511 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by jst2laws

• 
  239

  Watchtower Gives Up Explaining 607 BCE Date!

  by VM44 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this is a very important observation, that the watchtower has not tried to explain in print why 607 bce is the year for the destruction of jerusalem for the last 17 years!!!.

  all that the watchtower has done over most of the last two decades is to repeat over and over the year "607bce" in its publications as if it is an unquestioned fact!.

  the last time an explaination for the year was attempted by the watchtower was in 1988 when the "insight" volumes were published, but since then, no explaination for the validity of the year has appeared in print.. this must mean something, but what?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  jst2laws

  Jeffro,

  Excellent post.

  Woodsman,

  You don't sound like a woodsman. Must have had a little college before heading for the woods. Welcome to the board.

  Itsupport

  Nail driven home.

  Steve
• 
  26

  Stuck here in NOLA

  by Bryan in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  well, i came here to pack up the apartment and the crazy storm has inched it's way a little more east every day.

  so now i'm stuck.

  the winds started last night.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  jst2laws

  Hey Bryan,

  When will you get a break? Hope the power stays on for you. The video worked fine for me.

  At least FEMA is all over your area. You will not have to waite a week.

  Steve
• 
  42

  Another newbie here...

  by tall penguin in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my apologies in advance for the long post.

  this is the story i thought i'd be taking to my grave so just to have the chance to put it out there feels so freeing.

  thanks for listening.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  jst2laws

  Glad you are here, TallPenquin,

  I really enjoyed reading your history. It is good for others who relate to your experience too.

  I feel happier these days although the anger, grief and hurt sometimes overwhelm me. It is the realization that I made so many bad decisions based on wrong information and as a result suffered so much pain and abuse and have lost so much time.

  Some day you will not feel this pain. In fact, some day you may look back at this period of your life as a training period and opportunity to grow. Life is not going to be all fun. If we learn from the painful part we eventually evolve spiritually and emotionally to where we would not give up a moment of the past for fear it might change the present. I hope you find it this way.

  Steve
• 
  22

  Hi

  by karly in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i read and lurk mostly around here but i sure could use some help.

  a couple of really terrible things happened to me and my family recently.. i would like to talk about it but i am afraid to reveal details because i have been attending meetings again to help someone dear to me.

  but, i am having such a hard time handling my emotions, i just don't know what to do with them anymore.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  jst2laws

  Karly,

  Feel free to PM me if you would like.

  Steve
• 
  18

  JUST WANTED TO SAY THANX EVERYONE!

  by stillAwitness in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  just wanted to say thank you to everyone who took the time out to post encouraging words in my topic on "college or pioneer?

  " i got over 4 pages of responses!

  i printed them all out and keep them in my book bag and read them when i need the encouragement.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  jst2laws

  Good for you stillAwitness,

  I'm 57 years old, but when I was 17 I signed up for Bethel and also for the community college just in case Bethel didn't call. In a few months Bethel called>

  But I got my Bethel education. Six years not wasted. If it weren't for that education, I might still be a JW.

  So learn from my experience, and go to college. The WT is right about a college education. It will take you out of the "truth" even faster than a Bethel education. And once you are out, you can get a decent job.

  Steve
• 
  12

  Bicycling

  by Cygnus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  as i am without an automobile, i am going to buy a cheap bicycle tonight.

  anyone here use a bicycle as a primary means of transportation?

  any comments are welcome.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  jst2laws

  Yes,

  In fact it was my only transportation in NY(where you seem to be) for many years, aside from the subway. I used to story my bike in the machine shop metal racks at Bethel and take of on Saturday afternoon for a week end ride. It is great in NY. If you ignore the stop lights you can keep up with the traffic through Manhattan. I had a car for about a year in NY but hated the parking problems and licencing and inspections.

  Steve
• 
  15

  Jewish Oral Circumcision Kills Child

  by ISP in

  1. social
  2. current

  city questions circumcision ritual after baby dies

  edward reed

  mayor michael r. bloomberg met with orthodox leaders and health officials at city hall on aug. 11 to discuss a practice that some rabbis consider integral to god's covenant with the jews requiring circumcision.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  jst2laws

  Dorayakii,

  not to sound all "dubby", but surely this practice goes against the Mosaic Law of not eating blood...

  Not even these dangerously conservative jews interpret the Mosaic law on blood as literally as the JW's. As discusting and harmful as this practice is, if it were not for government intervention in the case of children we would be reading about the JW's every day regarding needless deaths of children.

  Steve

  How you doing KatieKitten
• 
  21

  Thou Shalt Not Consume Peanut Butter Before Thy God!

  by Swan in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  here's what i don't get about some religions.

  maybe someone could explain it to me.

  okay, hypothetically, let's say you belong to a religion where one of the "rules" is that you shouldn't eat peanut butter.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  jst2laws

  Andi

  This is not meant to be a suggestion that all religious people are ;blind to scientific evidence but their way of arriving at what is to be considered a fact is different. I am into science, but I also recognize that INTUITIVE knowledge has its place. It is just that the two must remain separate, science cannot claim to understand spiritual or intuitive meaning of things and religion should not claim to be scientific.

  Steve,

  I really like this; I've never seen it worded quite like this and I appreciate what you're saying.I really like this. I've never seen it worded quite like this and I appreciate what you're saying.

  I'm relieved. I wanted to say it but didn't want to offend.

  Science examines the structure of things. Spirituality is not so concerned with structure, but meaning and value.

  Unfortunately, religion often gets in the middle and tries to play both sides with a dogma that must be accepted by faith.

  I think this is where thinking, although naturally spiritual people, have a problem with religion.

  Steve
• 
  21

  Thou Shalt Not Consume Peanut Butter Before Thy God!

  by Swan in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  here's what i don't get about some religions.

  maybe someone could explain it to me.

  okay, hypothetically, let's say you belong to a religion where one of the "rules" is that you shouldn't eat peanut butter.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  jst2laws

  Tammy,

  Great idea for discussion.

  To me the difference is not who's science is most valid but it is about religion being based on faith rather than science.

  Often the most unsupportable premise is most enthusiastically evangelized. It is difficult for true believers to separate their belief based on faith from rational deductions based on facts. Because of the SPIRITUAL nature of the belief system it seems extremely important for the believer to win converts. This is at least based in a good motive.

  However, when facts are presented to the Peanut Butter Evangelist that are contrary to their faith you can anticipate resentment, as well as a claim of religious oppression. However, knowing this to be so, it puts to burden on the peanut butter rationalist to be VERY careful in how they convey facts. You are not debating interpretation of evidence, but you are questioning a person's entire belief system, their WAY OF KNOWING. The religious way of knowing is "God says so" and the rationalist way of knowing is (theoretically) based only on facts.

  The difference is NOT about the facts but the source of what one views as facts.

  I hope I have not been too blunt in this analysis. This is not meant to be a suggestion that all religious people are blind to scientific evidence but their way of arriving at what is to be considered a fact is different. I am into science, but I also recognize that INTUITIVE knowledge has its place. It is just that the two must remain separate, science cannot claim to understand spiritual or intuitive meaning of things and religion should not claim to be scientific.

  Steve
• 
  25

  Evacuating

  by Bryan in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  okay, we're off to houston.

  this thing is just too close to call.. .

  bryan.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  jst2laws

  Bryan,

  I need an ApostaDrink!

  Now that DOES sound like a strong drink. Get where you're going first.

  Life's a Journey.

  Steve