Posts by MarcusScriptus

117

If God truly loved humans...why not reveal himself ? So that they could make an informed decision ?

by smiddy in

we learn from the bible that god spoke to adam ,then certain faithful ones,then after moses only the preisthood that was established,and individuals, raised as prophets,and this by the way is only a a small select group on the planet.never mind about other groups of humans.

fastforward to the era of christ ,again, god is only dealing with a small select group to advise and admonish.during the time from moses to christ he was only dealing with what became one small nation.the rest of humankind were left to their own devices.fastforward down to this 21st century we have no guidance/instruction/prophets to instruct or guide us.

( i know this is where jw`s would say but we have been preaching & teaching you god`s truths since 1879 ) all i can say their, is take your head out of the sand and look at all the changes ,corrections adjustments,re-adjustments,reversals,and failed expectations of prophecy you have published over this last century )so as to my question why hasn`t the god of the universe revealed himself to all humans of every race on all continents instead of just a small select group, if he truly was interested in the human race.

MarcusScriptus

Warmasaunned,

It isn’t as easy as looking for proof in the Scriptures. And it might be that we are still looking for things the way we were taught when Witnesses. God is both more complex and much more simple than what we were lead to believe if we were once JWs.

Take your time in coming to a conclusion. Don’t expect it all to make sense. Remember if there is a God, it’s not a matter of academia but of the heart. Love doesn’t make much sense all the time.

Also don’t worry if your views change tomorrow from what they are today. And don’t worry if you’re thinking that a God who is there that you just can’t see or believe in (though you are trying or have tried) is going to judge you adversely because you can’t do that right now. That’s neither here nor there with God.

Be the best you can as a father to those children. Show them what some people don’t think atheists or agnostics or those without a religion can be and offer to others. Prove to your children and family and friends that using your mind, your heart, and not jumping to conclusions one way or the other is not a dead end street.

If there is a God, and you want to know him, you will in time. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but if you want to you will. After all, the theists often refer to God as the Hound of Heaven who is sometimes chasing us down to play when all we see is a dangerous dog who might hurt us. Often we don’t recognize God until he catches up with us because we don’t realize we are running away from we imagine is a threat.

And if you don’t ever believe in God in the end, that doesn’t make you some horrible person either.

And now, for some of you others…

Why is there an insistence on insulting the convictions of others on this board? Why should people result to calling other people “mad”? We haven’t moved so far from our Witness connections if that is where we still are.

We prove the Witness right when we do that. Insulting the humanity of others because of their convictions, whether they choose to believe in a deity or not, is never acceptable. Never!

If I hold to some conviction, be it atheism or not, and it doesn’t make me any better of a person toward others than the judgmental Jehovah’s Witnesses, then I belie any claim of value to my convictions. Who wants to be an atheist, agnostic or whatever I am if it leaves them in the squalor of Watchtower opinions that likewise devalues others whose convictions differ?

If we are insulting people, regardless of our convictions, then we are not faithful to our convictions or they are not what we claim or think there are at all. We are the worse of hypocrites for our stand against the Watchtower because we just “switched brands” and are still doing the same thing.

It makes it seem like it’s not the teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses that is wrong, but the type of people that religion attracts. Perhaps it only appeals to the person who cannot see that they are nothing more than a triumphalist, to someone who cannot make any doctrine or philosophy peacefully work—and not because the belief is incapable of creating such but maybe because it is in the wrong hands.

If we eat at ourselves and our humanity and the beauty of exercising the freedom of conscience each deserves to express in the way they see fit, why did we leave those Kingdom Halls in the first place? The elders and the Governing Body did all that for us without us having to bother. Why do we keep acting as if we are crying out: "Let us not be outside here where those we hate cannot be insulted and reduced to labels, but let us return to the captivity of Egypt where we can be slaves again to the Russian Roulette ways of never knowing when we might be the next victim to the whims of a society that might officially cut us off because they don’t like the way we think!"?

Now it is great to offer our opinions, to share what we all learned, and to help people reason their way out of the trap of the Jehovah’s Witness religion. But when we start picking on people and the choices they make once they leave the Watchtower, then it wasn’t the religion that was bad, it was those of us who have to keep acting this way toward others whether we are in a Kingdom Hall or not.

And if that is the case, then we are all wrong, and someone needs to apologize to the Watchtower for all this. Oy vey, goyim, can't you learn from us Jews and not complain once you cross the Red Sea?

Whatever I believe in now is the truth. Whatever I believed in then was the truth. And whatever I believe in tomorrow will be the truth, even if each day has me believing something different. Behold, am I the Governing Body or just an ex-Jehovah’s Witness? Taste my fruit, thou shall never know the difference! [Insert triumphalist laughter here.]

117

If God truly loved humans...why not reveal himself ? So that they could make an informed decision ?

by smiddy in

we learn from the bible that god spoke to adam ,then certain faithful ones,then after moses only the preisthood that was established,and individuals, raised as prophets,and this by the way is only a a small select group on the planet.never mind about other groups of humans.

fastforward to the era of christ ,again, god is only dealing with a small select group to advise and admonish.during the time from moses to christ he was only dealing with what became one small nation.the rest of humankind were left to their own devices.fastforward down to this 21st century we have no guidance/instruction/prophets to instruct or guide us.

( i know this is where jw`s would say but we have been preaching & teaching you god`s truths since 1879 ) all i can say their, is take your head out of the sand and look at all the changes ,corrections adjustments,re-adjustments,reversals,and failed expectations of prophecy you have published over this last century )so as to my question why hasn`t the god of the universe revealed himself to all humans of every race on all continents instead of just a small select group, if he truly was interested in the human race.

MarcusScriptus

Terry,

I don’t question the wisdom and the value of the convictions of an atheist nor their intelligence or innate value as a human being.

But when ad hominem is used in an argument against any position, I then tend to side with the belief that the person has really not changed from the time they were a Jehovah’s Witness. They have just substituted Jehovah for no-Jehovah, and they still enjoy the feeling triumphalism supplies, of being “right” while others are “wrong.” They feel the same need to have some "gospel" to offer and to "bring down the established" whatever. They've just changed brands but kept the ego.

Ad hominem, or attacking the person who has a conviction instead of the convictions themselves—i.e., the Watchtower habit of saying things like: “Anyone who is truly honest with themselves…” or “Only a person in their right mind…” or “Only those who really love truth…”, etc.—is a Watchtower-learned habit (suggesting that those who don't hold their view are not truly honest, are not in their right mind, or don't really love truth).

I don’t believe a person can be instantaneous labeled as “intellectually dishonest and cognitively dissonant” because they believe in God. The convictions might be called “dishonest”, but are the people themselves truly and logically “cognitively dissonant”?

Apologetics uses reason to defend one’s stand. One of the rules of apologetics is that the use of ad hominem instantly makes for fallacy of logic. What one is doing is offering fallacious rhetoric in place of facts.

The Witnesses commonly use this technique. Make the person into someone stupid or intellectually dishonest for believing something and this makes the subject distasteful as well. This doesn’t prove anything, however, except that the person offering the argument is not using logic.

Regardless of whether one believe in God or not, it does not automatically take away from their intrinsic value and mental capacity as a human being.

For more information on the use of common fallacies in argument that the Watchtower and others use, see the popular “Baloney Detection Kit”: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html

117

If God truly loved humans...why not reveal himself ? So that they could make an informed decision ?

by smiddy in

we learn from the bible that god spoke to adam ,then certain faithful ones,then after moses only the preisthood that was established,and individuals, raised as prophets,and this by the way is only a a small select group on the planet.never mind about other groups of humans.

fastforward to the era of christ ,again, god is only dealing with a small select group to advise and admonish.during the time from moses to christ he was only dealing with what became one small nation.the rest of humankind were left to their own devices.fastforward down to this 21st century we have no guidance/instruction/prophets to instruct or guide us.

( i know this is where jw`s would say but we have been preaching & teaching you god`s truths since 1879 ) all i can say their, is take your head out of the sand and look at all the changes ,corrections adjustments,re-adjustments,reversals,and failed expectations of prophecy you have published over this last century )so as to my question why hasn`t the god of the universe revealed himself to all humans of every race on all continents instead of just a small select group, if he truly was interested in the human race.

MarcusScriptus

My argument is but limited to how the Watchtower standards sometimes remain with ex-Witnesses and limit our ability to make informed decisions in matters of personal conviction. I am not speaking of concepts outside the Watchtower, especially not ones that do not limit a person to make an honest search and thus come to an informed and sound conclusion.

The theology of Jehovah's Witnesses limits our ability to make such informed decisions on the basis that their theology itself is limited. While to a larger extent other views may be subject to the points I've raised, they are not at issue. Neither at issue is the conclusion one comes to in the end as long as it is truly an informed one, and not limited by Watchtower concepts.

117

If God truly loved humans...why not reveal himself ? So that they could make an informed decision ?

by smiddy in

we learn from the bible that god spoke to adam ,then certain faithful ones,then after moses only the preisthood that was established,and individuals, raised as prophets,and this by the way is only a a small select group on the planet.never mind about other groups of humans.

fastforward to the era of christ ,again, god is only dealing with a small select group to advise and admonish.during the time from moses to christ he was only dealing with what became one small nation.the rest of humankind were left to their own devices.fastforward down to this 21st century we have no guidance/instruction/prophets to instruct or guide us.

( i know this is where jw`s would say but we have been preaching & teaching you god`s truths since 1879 ) all i can say their, is take your head out of the sand and look at all the changes ,corrections adjustments,re-adjustments,reversals,and failed expectations of prophecy you have published over this last century )so as to my question why hasn`t the god of the universe revealed himself to all humans of every race on all continents instead of just a small select group, if he truly was interested in the human race.

MarcusScriptus

Interesting comments, ProdigalSon.

But are those points enough to make an informed decision either way?

For example, what if someone doesn't have the Bible? It may not be available in their language still. How can they examine the Bible "close enough" to find the truth of God?

Also, does coming to believe in revelation as the Hindus believe the same as revelation as viewed in Catholicism? I know it isn't the same for Islam. What you offered would not apply in that instance or for other theistic systems.

And just because atoms exist doesn't equate philosophically or scientifically that the Judeo/God concept is the Origin and the Keeper of the Atom. The atoms in my Chef Boyardee can stay put because of the can with the label of that chef on it, but I ain't worshipping Chef Boyardee. And it's got his actual name on it, unlike the atom!

These points might reinforce the faith of a believer, but they can be very ineffective with someone who does not have the luxury of your vantage point. What happens then?

11

What degree of accuracy and consistency do you feel it's fair to hold today's religions to?

by The_Present_Truth in

as most of us know, if you look at most any religion today you might see bit of good and bits of bad, bits of truth and bits of falsehood, some christian teachings, some pagan practices & origins.

doesn't seem to matter where you look - the jw's included.

so i find myself asking myself, "to what degree of accuracy and consistency is it fair to hold today's religions to?".

MarcusScriptus

The reason you don't recall saying that is because you didn't.

I was speaking about the rule you were using.

My point was that Watchtower reasoning can stick with us and make deeper inroads than we realize. If we are not diligent we might not see where we are using techniques we've unknowingly taken from the Watchtower to make examination of things on the outside. The comments aren't about you personally, their directed at the Governing Body that is not well-versed on any subject they take up, whether its theism or atheism or anything else. They are wrong about it all. And sometimes they do so much damage to our reasoning abilities that it's hard to shake off.

Examples, Examples

You admit that you use the Bible as a historical record. Christianity doesn't do that. It is considered a religious interpretation of history, not history in the strictest sense. It cannot be made to fit precisely with historical secular records because it was never intended to. That is an Adventist belief that the Watchtower adopted.

What's the harm in using such a view? It ignores the fact that various ancient genres were used to record religious lessons like fable, poetry, myth, and legend to carry sacred truths away from actual events. What's in the Scriptural record in not always meant to be historical the same way Christ's parables aren't meant to be considered actual events.

If Jesus could make up characters to teach truths, can't God inspire writers to do the same at other times? If it's the same God, why not?

Making it all historical truly makes the Bible sound silly. You mean there was a literal conversation between a rich man burning in Hades with a man being hugged by Abraham in the afterlife?

Incidental Worship--Who Taught You That? Sound Like the Watchtower to Me

Halloween, for example, did originate with the Christians. It is the Eve or Vigil of All Hallows or All Saints Day. It is meant to be seen as a demonstration of how the dead are victorious and how demons and the like are so powerless they are like playthings to us.

As it was done for centuries in Ireland, at the vigil or eve Mass for All Hallows it is still a custom for the children to parade behind the priest at Mass dressed as sainted martyrs. Some of these getups can be, well, strange if you are not familiar with your saints. For example the St. Lucy costume is that of a young girl whose eyes were pulled out by Romans which she now carries on a platter. Other sainted martyrs are represented likewise, with some carrying their heads, others burnt to a crisp, etc. Of course, not all the children are dressed so graphically as in a horror movie of today--in fact it is never exactly gruesome--but when this was carried out, particularly in Ireland, the children went out afterwards going door-to-door requesting treats from their neighbors, still in costume of the dead. By then it was already night on All Hallows Eve.

Eventually the custom also included dressing up as the things that heathens were afraid of, such as demons, ghosts, and witches, because Roman Catholics believe they cannot be harmed by such things and they have no fear of them. This not only frightened many of the heathens to some respect who were quite superstitious of making demons and spirits objects of folly, it was often seen as a "trick" to get the householder to offer goodies like the Christians. The custom of using heathen religious lanterns as literal lanterns to see where they were going (named "jack o'lantern" after the vernacular title for will o'the wisp that occurs in marshes) was another insult to heathens.

When famine struck Ireland and many of them came to America to settle in the 1800s, they brought these customs with them (by the way, Halloween is really celebrated only in the USA; it isn't an official custom of any religion). The customs have been assimilated into secular culture where people who are not Catholic also join in and add some other things that normally are frightening to them.

Today all people, of all beliefs, religious or not, for just one night a year laugh at what scares them. Death and evil and superstition are turned into folly for all. And according to Catholic view, Christ has made these things subject to even human beings--if not now at least in eternity when Christians rule with Christ. Dressing like the dead shows a belief in the resurrection, and making heathen objects of terror into playthings shows they are really nothing to Christ. They have no power over Christians.

I do happen to be Jewish, by the way. But my family many centuries ago became Catholic, and while most remain Catholic today, some of us are not. There are also a good number of atheists too. I was the only one who became a JW in my teens and early 20s.

However, I do know my religious history extremely well because after leaving the Watchtower I formally studied in religious academia under scholars in order to prepare me and get qualified for a job in the religious world--which I am not going into for the moment.

What I have learned is that even the manner you are using is still Watchtower based. Sure, we don't mix light and darkness even in Judaism. But when God conquers something we often make fun of what that thing was before--like David did when he slew the giant. Heads of slaughtered enemies were paraded on sticks and made fun of.

Irish Christians did the same thing with false heathen symbols associated with those who believed Samhain was a real god. The Irish Christians did things with these symbols that were supposed to bring that false god's wrath upon them for doing so. Did it? No. And today we all know that Samhain isn't real. When was the last time you heard of people geting stuck down by Samhain for making folly with his symbols as mere Halloween party favors? That was the point the Irish Catholics were making with their customs.

Even the story of Noah and Flood is actually teasing the Babylonians about their account in the Epic of Gilgamesh. Who wants to worship the kind of gods that would bring a flood upon mankind that they describe? While Noah was real, and there likely was a big flood in ancient Mesopotamia, the Babylonian account of a world flood from an uncaring god is foolish--and it is interpolated into the Noachin tale to show how silly these heathens were. It is the same with Roman Catholics and Halloween--take what the heathens believe in and trample it underfoot to show how silly it all is.

Only when the Puritans came to the US did superstition cause these Christians to avoid anything that "smacked" of heathenism. This fear eventually climaxed into the Salem Witch Hunts and trials which themselves ended that religion. But its superstitions were revived in the US with the restorationist movements like Adventism and Mormonism.

Don't Be a Duck if You're No Longer In the Flock

While it is difficult for someone who may not have been exposed to the amount of history and religious teaching I have been--and most people don't have the opportunity to actually be employed in the religious world among its leaders and great halls of study and learning as I have--what I say can sound like nonsense.

Let that be. And really, you don’t need all that education to make good use of your mind. But the point should come across that you won't heal properly if you use anything--anything at all as learned by the Watchtower. Even if they are right about something, it is always an incomplete understanding at best.

Just as you misunderstood my comment at the beginning, so you might not see how you are still grasping onto Watchtower-invented lines of reasoning to develop your views.

Don’t be so quick to make judgments on religion, gods, atheists, agnostics, anyone at all—especially if you were once a Jehovah’s Witness. It takes a lot before we can make sense of ourselves once we leave. Besides, you have to love people for who they are, not in spite of something about their convictions you don’t appreciate or disapprove of. If you do that, then you don’t really love who they are in the first place, do you?

But if it walks like a duck, and acts like a duck, and reasons with a Bible like a duck, I don't care if it claims to no longer be a duck...

117

If God truly loved humans...why not reveal himself ? So that they could make an informed decision ?

by smiddy in

we learn from the bible that god spoke to adam ,then certain faithful ones,then after moses only the preisthood that was established,and individuals, raised as prophets,and this by the way is only a a small select group on the planet.never mind about other groups of humans.

fastforward to the era of christ ,again, god is only dealing with a small select group to advise and admonish.during the time from moses to christ he was only dealing with what became one small nation.the rest of humankind were left to their own devices.fastforward down to this 21st century we have no guidance/instruction/prophets to instruct or guide us.

( i know this is where jw`s would say but we have been preaching & teaching you god`s truths since 1879 ) all i can say their, is take your head out of the sand and look at all the changes ,corrections adjustments,re-adjustments,reversals,and failed expectations of prophecy you have published over this last century )so as to my question why hasn`t the god of the universe revealed himself to all humans of every race on all continents instead of just a small select group, if he truly was interested in the human race.

MarcusScriptus

Very points from both sides.

I think however that when dealing with ex-JWs, one needs to consider the possibility that even when some of us choose a different belief or philosophy, the way we chose it might itself need some revision. Did we follow Watchtower ways to reach our new conclusions? I know that for the first decade after leaving the Witnesses that I was constantly doing that.

I am a supporter of all free uses of one's consicence. Though I am a theist, I have strong ties and great love for friends and family who are atheist. I hate how they are constantly demonized and reduced to cookie-stamp charicatures and marginalized. But I do notice a striking difference between them and many ex-JWs who become atheists.

Regardless of where we land after we leave the Watchtower, make sure we land using our feet and no other support we were taught to use while in the grips of the Governing Body thought machine.

Questions to consider along this line:

1. Many claim there is no “God” in the Judeo/Christian sense. Does this mean that no other type of deity can, has, or will ever exist? What does science officially have to say on the matter?

2. Have we ever been chased down by someone we did not know but had been trying to get our attention for some time? Does the fact we did not know about this person or what they were doing prove their non-existence or did it just prove we didn’t know the person existed?

3. Name that which does not exist that humans debate about and take as seriously as the “God-issue.” How many of these things exist? How many of them have changed history? Is this unique or just one other superstition among many?

4. Do we have emotion invested in our non-belief about God? How much emotion do we have invested in other things that don’t exist? List them.

5. Is the scientific method intended to be a means to answer all questions? Offer your hypothesis, and then use it to prove to a loved one who questions your fidelity and love and see how far you get. Explain in detail what occurred when you did this, and then allow your results to be tested by others willing to try the same during their own lovers' spat. Sit back and see what happens.

6. Is our rejection of God based on what the Watchtower taught us was God or is it based on a complete relearning of the great religions? If it based on this relearning process, could our knowledge be sufficient to allow us to pass an exam on religion and philosophy offered on the college level? Did we apply methods we learned from the Watchtower to do our studying or did we first retrain ourselves to study and learn with time-proven academically sound ways? Did our conclusion leave us with a similar “dislike-all-who-don’t-agree-with-my-convictions” attitude that the Watchtower have or did it humble us and change our attitude for the way we view others who apply their conscience in other ways than we do?

Just food for thought.

11

What degree of accuracy and consistency do you feel it's fair to hold today's religions to?

by The_Present_Truth in

as most of us know, if you look at most any religion today you might see bit of good and bits of bad, bits of truth and bits of falsehood, some christian teachings, some pagan practices & origins.

doesn't seem to matter where you look - the jw's included.

so i find myself asking myself, "to what degree of accuracy and consistency is it fair to hold today's religions to?".

MarcusScriptus

Degree of accuracy based on what I was exposed to by the Watchtower? Can someone hold my head while I vomit? Thanks...

Actually I’ve come to learn that there's nothing about other religions or philosophies from the Jehovah’s Witnesses that is fully correct, reliably accurate, or even smart to keep holding onto anymore. NADA.

Enlightened by the Watchtower? Or Just Listening to the Un-Educated?

For example, take Christmas—which is “right around the corner” (like Armageddon always is, supposedly). It’s not a celebration of Jesus’ birthday. It’s an eight-day commemoration of Christ’s nativity—and there’s a big difference. On a birthday one celebrates not only the anniversary of one’s birth but that a person has become one year older. The solemnity of the Nativity is the way Christians start their new year on their liturgical (religious calendar) which draws on the natural seasons of the northern hemisphere as a form of yearly catechesis. There's none of the connections with a birthday celebration associated with it.

What about the “paganism” mixed in? Well first, it should be “heathenism,” not Paganism. To refer to some of these practices as Paganism insults modern-day Pagans (some of my friends are practicing Pagans) because a lot of these customs do not originate with them but with other religions.

In the 1980s several significant studies that the Watchtower ignored but the rest of Christendom and academia has heavily impressed upon since is that the historical record of the origin of many Roman Catholic and Orthodox practices has been adulterated by North American anti-Catholicism. While there is likely some connection with some non-religious customs in the celebration of Christmas in some lands, the extent had been overly distorted. To illustrate, the date of December 25 th was actually chosen because of its connection to the Spring equinox and the Easter date. The Christian liturgists deliberately chose a date that would assist in the education of catechumens as well as mark the darkest and coldest of days to contrast with the marked differences in sunlight and temperature that could be witnessed on Easter (another eight-day celebration). While some have theorized that it was the Saturnalia the Roman Church was attempting to replace, that has only been a religious theory modern critics have been using to try to fill in gaps in history.

Secular Customs Not the Same as Religious Customs

Also missing from the Watchtower’s constant attacks on “customs” associated with Christmas is that no country celebrates the Nativity with the same customs that the Witnesses generally criticize as connected to “paganism.” The use of holly, a Yule log, a Christmas tree, and similar items are generally North American or European. They don’t represent other areas of the world where, for example, it is the Nativity scene that is generally set up, not a Christmas tree. In some places holly, Yule logs, etc. are never used since they don’t exist. Fireworks are more commonly used in the southern hemisphere to mark the days of Christmas. And, interestingly, none of these customs are connected to the religious celebration itself. They are locally observed, and have more to do with secular history than anything else.

Not a Birthday but the Celebration of a Birth—And Not Even a “Day”

In fact, Christmas is the name of the celebration in North America and the UK, but in the rest of the world it is called the Nativity of the Lord (which is in fact the way it is titled on all liturgical calendars). The name “Christmas” has to do with the first celebration of Mass (Christ’s Mass or Christian Mass) to mark the Nativity which can be held as early as after sundown on December 24, what most secular people call Christmas Eve, but known as the Vigil of the Nativity to religious observers. (In Christianity, especially in Catholicism, holy days are considered Sabbaths, regardless of the day they land on, and are thus observed from sundown to sundown.)

Because the next festival, known as Epiphany, where the Magi come and visit Christ (likely at the time he was 2 years old—and yes the churches know this), occurs four days later, the festivities associated with the Nativity are carried on for 12 days—thus the Twelve Days of Christmas.

Things the Witnesses don’t know or don’t get right because they aren’t educated in religion:

1. Christmas is not a birthday. It’s not even a “day.” It’s a twelve-day observance marking the coming of Christ to earth and the new liturgical year/countdown to Easter—the most festival on the liturgical calendar. (Candidates for baptism generally begin their catechesis this time of year, also. They end it on Easter, getting baptized at its vigil celebration.)

2. The secular customs associated with Christmas differ from country to country and are not “official” in a religious sense with Christian customs. Most of the official customs, such as Advent candles, the Christ candle, the naming of the coming year after either Matthew, Mark, or Luke (not John—totally different subject), are generally unknown to the secular or non-religious public. Interestingly very little to nothing is every mentioned about these by the Witnesses.

3. The main decoration and image associated with Christmas celebration worldwide is the Nativity scene, not the Christmas tree. It is the center for family gatherings and kept up from Christmas Eve until a day popularly known as Candlemas, which occurs in February. The Nativity scene was introduced by St. Francis of Assisi.

4. The date of the first day of Christmas has a specific connection to catechesis of the catechumens and the Easter Vigil date, not to specifically replace a heathen festival. It was chosen on the basis of its number of days and weeks until Easter baptism was held and to contrast (in the north) with the season of Spring. While there is some evidence to suggest the Christians wanted to overtake Saturnalia (change the date from the birth day of the sun to the day the “Son” was born in the flesh), this has never been objectively established even in ancient church records. Often the Roman Catholics proudly recorded when they switched something “pagan” and sanctified it to Christian use, but this is very unclear in this instance which is considered by academics, especially since the mid 1980s, to make the Saturnalia connection suspect.

Now this is just Christmas. I've said nothing about the countless other things the Witness belie their claim of "understanding" with.

24

Nobody wants to live in paradise

by eric356 in

i've got some probably-not-so-original musings about why nobody would actually want to "live forever on a paradise earth.

" these are the sorts of things that probably make every jw kid (or adult) have some doubts, because the problems are so obvious.

the standard jw answer of "it doesn't say in the bible what will happen, we'll see when we get there" or "wait for the new scrolls to be opened" are totally inadequate because the problems involve the very concept of eternal life in paradise.

MarcusScriptus

The Watchtower concept of “paradise” is actually not of their own invention. It is, however, a perfect demonstration of what happens when you have only half the information at your fingertips and even that is being taught by those uneducated in religious things.

As I state in a lot of my answers, what I’m about to say shouldn’t be construed as reflecting my current personal convictions, but it is factual. The paradise on earth hope IS NOT unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is one of the foundational beliefs of Christianity that precedes the Bible, and is found in both the Apostle and Nicene Creed—both rejected by the Governing Body and those that adhere to their teachings.

Differences notwithstanding, Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants (including most Evangelistic Fundamentalists) believe that God will make the earth a paradise and that humankind will enjoy life upon it for age upon age into eternity. The only difference between what the Witnesses teach and this piece of eschatology is that in Christianity it is a sort of “heaven on earth” situation, and it is enjoyed by all Christians including God himself. —Revelation 21:3.

What Christendom Has Taught Since the Beginning

The basics are that there will be an end to time itself. It, as a dimension, will come to a halt, and history as we understand it, will be interrupted. At this point all who are dead and in heaven or hell will be raised in supernatural (or, as the NWT puts it “spiritual”) bodies. This is what Christians call the “resurrection of the just and unjust” or “righteous and unrighteous.” In Christianity’s copy of the dictionary, resurrection refers to the raising of the corporeal body to life. Souls that enter heaven and hell after the death of a person have yet to be resurrected (the non-corporeal spirit like angels cannot be “resurrected,” for example) unlike in the Watchtower’s “version” of trusty ole Webster’s.

Now in a body like Christ, the final judgment occurs. Afterward in this new and powerfully incorruptible physical form, history begins anew. The “new heavens and new earth” begin with God coming to “dwell WITH mankind,” and not the other way around. More than this, however, Christianity has little to add for nothing more exists in either Apostolic Tradition or Scripture.

True, many find the paradise that the Witnesses draw up as unsatisfactory for who doesn’t want to see their Maker face-to-face, or live as something more wonderful than in a mere perfectly healthy human body?

‘Don't Engage in Higher Education Lest Ye Learn Something From It!’

I’m not going into detail about Hell or Purgatory or limbo or anything like that—those are related and have answers, but that’s not the point of this comment.

Because there is no one educated in religious history connected with the Watchtower (or because there is a definite prejudice to reject anything that might make the Witnesses less “different” and thus eat away at their feelings of triumphalism and solidarity) this never gets taught to the Witnesses.

Few of us knew our religions (or previous convictions if they weren't religious ones) very well before we became JWs. We might think we did, even have been brainwashed by the Witnesses to believe that our lack of understanding of our formal ways of life was an above-average understanding (it is, after all, a religious system that strokes heavily the ego), but as many of us who have been out can firmly attest, if we had known more and been on guard more we might never have been sucked in by the constant scarecrow-reasoning “magic act” that the Governing Body has been putting on for over 100 years—the hat is old and worn and the rabbit is so dead it is stiffer than rock.

That is not a very settling thing to live with. I didn’t believe it at first. Then 10 years later I realized it, and now almost 20 years later I have come to grips of the truth that I practically knew nothing at all—so of course I was perfect prey for them! They don’t really make much headway with theologians and scholars, with scientists and philosophers, historians and linguists, do they? But if they really knew these subjects as they claimed they did, wouldn’t they have these types just busting over the tops of the Kingdom Halls?

So if we missed this teaching the first time around, don't be too upset. It plays to their advantage that some don't know these things even now. Why else would they forbid higher education (at least look down on it) if they weren't afraid of what people might really come to learn?

It’s not a unique teaching of theirs as they claim. The resurrection of the body is one of the last things recorded in both the creeds I mentioned (which are usually recited by most Christians each Sunday in various denomination settings). My father, who was Pentecostal, had Pentecostal books and artistic works that described the resurrection and paradise earth. My mother’s copy of the Catholic catechism has a whole section about it. I remember even telling the one I studied with before entering the “Watchtower compound” this, much to no avail (telling Witnesses things like this gets that ‘smiling-dismissal’ result like we don’t know what we are talking about because it can’t be true because nothing that goes against Watchtower teaching is true).

2,000 years old—oft repeated—sometimes not remembered, but nonetheless official, the doctrine of life on a renewed earth of paradise is a great way to show how uneducated the Witness leadership is. Crack not open the catechisms of the great faiths for you just might learn something.

But who wants to learn when you got all the truth you need anyway. There’s no room in the belly for food even when it’s full of junk.

5

Things Ive Un-Learned Since Leaving the Watchtower, Part One

by MarcusScriptus in

while it is not possible for me to claim that the following are axioms in the objective sense, they are a glimpse into demonstrating how far from reality the governing body keeps its adherents.

once a member of jehovahs witnesses, we suddenly develop a sense of authority since we have the truth.

we become experts in the bible, on religion, upon anything we study about.

MarcusScriptus

While it is not possible for me to claim that the following are axioms in the objective sense, they are a glimpse into demonstrating how far from reality the Governing Body keeps its adherents. Once a member of Jehovah’s Witnesses, we suddenly develop a sense of authority since we have “the truth.” We become experts in the Bible, on religion, upon anything “we study about.” We might convince ourselves that we are like the Christian apologists of old. We staunchly believe that true religion is defined by the Bible. And we often hate people who are not believers, even demonizing them. Some of these approaches or views may stick with us for years after leaving the religion of the Watchtower. A few of the most startling for me that took years to finally realize after leaving were:

1. Adopting or subscribing to a religion or a philosophical conviction neither makes me an authority on that which I’ve embraced regardless of how “true” I believe my convictions are. Generally speaking, an authority on a subject is one who is recognized in academic circles as formally studying it, and they are usually an observer, not one who holds the conviction or a member from “within.”

2. Apologetics is not the same as debate. Debate seeks to convince by literal argument, apologetics seeks to defend one’s stand as a reasonable act. Debates do not succumb to any definitive rule of satisfactory proof; they are won by those we perceive as being the best at arguing, not best at proving their point (as in the popular Lincoln-Douglas format). Apologetics does not seek to do anymore but to convince a listener that despite of what another might feel about a belief or belief system, the apologist’s subscription to it does not defy reason. Apologetics uses the scientific method upon which to present its defense.

3. Except for religions which literally make claim to it (i.e., Mormonism), the current religious systems are not based on books or religious texts. It is the other way around. Each religious community—all which already had a functioning religious paradigm by the time writing began—developed their religious texts to reflect or explain their current religious system and views.

Christianity is one of these religious systems. Since it holds that its congregation is the mystical embodiment of its Leader, its belief system is not based on how close its religious community follows the writings it produced but on how close one remains within the religious community which developed them. It is not so much the writings that define what their religious community does. On the contrary, it is the community which defines what these texts mean and how it applies as the ages pass. It is not a religion which is based on the rules of a book but upon its mystical connection to its God.

4. Atheism itself was not the force behind the mass murder of religious people under the rise of the Communist Bloc. Neither is atheism itself the force behind those criminal acts against human freedom in lands where it is forced upon all of the population. Murderous rulers and authorities use any type of “cloak of convenience” to empower them to reign in terror. If the popular cloak of the time happens to be religion, then they perform their acts in the name of God. If the cloak of today is atheism, then they perform their acts in the name of human enlightenment. But neither atheism nor religion is responsible for their criminal acts. These people are abusive opportunists, and they should never be allowed to use the name of atheism or religion to cover their true nature. Those who commit acts of genocide, who strip people of their dignity, and forbid the free exercise of one’s conscience in matters of personal conviction have lost all claims to human enlightenment, have lost their religion. Regardless of what flag they fly, they are neither atheists nor religious. They are merely criminals.

Feel free to comment on these or add to the list. What we “un-learn” is often an important stepping stone to healing and/or regaining our balance as a member of society.

38

KM Jan 2011 Family Worship

by dozy in

there is a big insert in the jan kingdom ministry about the family worship night (which has evolved new capital letters - like governing body.).

some helpful suggestions include the head of the household putting an agenda on the fridge door a few days ahead for the family to "build excitement and anticipation" (i kid you not.

) the provision is compared to the sabbath arrangement as a gift from god.

MarcusScriptus

Thank goodness I'm no longer part of that world. I could almost taste it now...yeech--

Zombies Needed 102 by MarcusScriptus