I'm so mad I'm going to ring head office and ask to speak to him in the spirit of Mat 5:23,24 & Matt 18:15 - wonder if they'll put me through? Somehow I don't like my chances of being able to apply those verses.... theoretically it should not be a problem as "all pigs are equal" (as Orwell would say) in this organisation, yet somehow i think it will be a case of "some pigs are more equal than others" and don't have to take phone calls, or be held accountable for what they say if they don't want to.
doubtfull1799
JoinedPosts by doubtfull1799
-
36
William Malenfant's appalling hate speech - latest morning worship video
by doubtfull1799 inso he tries to prove that we are living in the last days without any evidence, but instead a series of unsubstantiated assertions ("never has there been a time with so much lack love and affection").
and uses things that are not even part of the so-called "sign" (abortions, pollution).
then proceeds to ridicule the "ridiculers," stereotype them, and declare they are only fit for destruction!.
-
-
-
36
William Malenfant's appalling hate speech - latest morning worship video
by doubtfull1799 inso he tries to prove that we are living in the last days without any evidence, but instead a series of unsubstantiated assertions ("never has there been a time with so much lack love and affection").
and uses things that are not even part of the so-called "sign" (abortions, pollution).
then proceeds to ridicule the "ridiculers," stereotype them, and declare they are only fit for destruction!.
-
-
doubtfull1799
I they really cared about the people who are struggling to accept their assertions that we are living in the last days, wouldn't it have been kind and loving to patiently and thoroughly outline some good, solid, convincing statistical evidence and research showing how wars, earthquakes, famines ect have been significantly increasing in the 20th century and that 2 Tim 2:1-5 is more than a horoscope.
With regard to 2 Tim 3:1-5 the question that is always put to the HH is: "can you see those qualities in people today?" But the more important question that is NEVER asked is this: "has their ever been a period of time in history when people didn't behave like that?" If not, then what possible use is this description as a "sign" to identify a particular time period? Why didn't Paul predict the things William actually mentioned like nuclear bombs, or one billion abortions?
-
36
William Malenfant's appalling hate speech - latest morning worship video
by doubtfull1799 inso he tries to prove that we are living in the last days without any evidence, but instead a series of unsubstantiated assertions ("never has there been a time with so much lack love and affection").
and uses things that are not even part of the so-called "sign" (abortions, pollution).
then proceeds to ridicule the "ridiculers," stereotype them, and declare they are only fit for destruction!.
-
-
doubtfull1799
So he tries to prove that we are living in the last days without any evidence, but instead a series of unsubstantiated assertions ("never has there been a time with so much lack love and affection"). And uses things that are not even part of the so-called "sign" (abortions, pollution). Then proceeds to ridicule the "ridiculers," stereotype them, and declare they are only fit for destruction!
Instead of addressing the most glaringly obvious reason people don't believe we're living in the last days, i.e, the complete lack of any solid evidence, he goes on to give his own reasons:
1. They are blinded by Satan. (If that is so is it really their fault? Why should they be deserving of destruction? If they've been misled by a more powerful being that does not make them wicked... it puts responsibility on God, if he truly wishes for all to be saved, to "unblind" them).
2. They are victims of "gradualism." Pulling out that old frog illustration like its the first time anyone's heard of it. Implying that people have not made a proper investigation of the facts or history, when the opposite is more likely to be the case. Most people have come to the conclusion that we are not living in the last days because they have made a more thorough investigation of the historical evidence instead of just accepting Watchtower assertions or misleading twisting of statistics.
3. They are haughty, depraved, wicked. His final brilliant argument is to imply that if people have allowed themselves to fall prey to his first two points they must be morally corrupt - the are deserving of destruction and good riddance to them! Or "so be it" in his words.
So in summary, what I got from the video was this: if people are too blind or stupid to see that we are living in the last days, and they have allowed Satan to blind them to the (non-existent) evidence then Psa 92:7 applies to them: They are wicked ones sprouting like weeds and their only reason for existence or worth as humans is to be annihilated.
Nice demonising and hate speech that towards those who don't accept your opinions. The JW leadership are not extremists at all, such tolerant, peace-loving people!
-
5
Russian award story in the St. Lucia Times. Almost 80 comments at the end! Pretty heated stuff.
by Sugar Shane insome of the pro-jws are comparing the award reception to that of shadrach, messach, and abendego.
therefore excusing it as perfectly acceptable in the eyes of god.
that just seems a bit of a stretch to me, given that the jws talk about political neutrality, ect.
-
-
doubtfull1799
I hear you Smiddy... the level indoctrinated people will go to to justify something is unbelievable. And it used to be us!
-
29
The bizarreness of Genesis 6:2
by doubtfull1799 in"the sons of the true god began to notice that the daughters of men were beautiful.
so they began taking as wives all whom they chose.".
it may be feasible to some to accept the bible's assertion that the first humans were tempted to pursue independence from god, especially since they were created in his image and he is independent from any authority.
-
-
doubtfull1799
"The sons of the true God began to notice that the daughters of men were beautiful. So they began taking as wives all whom they chose."
It may be feasible to some to accept the Bible's assertion that the first humans were tempted to pursue independence from God, especially since they were created in His image and He is independent from any authority.
However it is far more difficult to understand how so-called perfect and superior beings could have been tempted to do something that would have been totally unnatural to them.
1. Are not angels, being spirit beings, genderless? Why were they only attracted to the females then? Why did not half the angels materialise as women and take men? Of course if you take it as patriarchal mythology that makes perfect sense.
2. Are not angels, being spiritual beings, sexless? What does it actually mean to "materialise?" Does it mean to become visible in the physical realm? Have the appearance of physicality? Why were the angels attracted sexually to humans when they were higher life forms? Does that not indicate some sort of fault in the way they were created? That would be like a human being sexually attracted to a so-called lower or less intelligent life form like a dog or cat. Furthermore how did they actually copulate? Does materialising mean actually morphing into a fully functional human body with reproductive system and gene pool etc?
3. If this was so disgusting and amoral that the human offspring were not allowed to live out their natural lives but were condemned to death in the flood, why were the angels involved not also punished by immediate destruction? Why were they allowed to live on for centuries to wreak more havoc on the human race and promote their perverted ideas etc...
4. If they were sent to some "abyss" (tartarus) where is this abyss? Heaven or earth or somewhere in between? Was it created at the same time as the rest of the universe? If it pre-existed earth God must have known he would have need of it
The more you think about this story the less it makes sense unless you accept it is nothing more than a parallel to other ancient Mesopotamian/Egyptian/Greek mythology, not an explanation for those mythologies.
-
3
Today's Text: Proof that God does not abide by His own principles...
by doubtfull1799 in"do not withhold good from those to whom you should give it if it is within your power.
- prov 3:27".
by the common christian definition of god, everything is within his power.
-
-
doubtfull1799
Indeed @stuckinarut2. Unlike Elders, who would have a mandatory reassessment of their qualificatons if even one of their children rebelled, God is not accountable or subject to scrutiny.
-
3
Today's Text: Proof that God does not abide by His own principles...
by doubtfull1799 in"do not withhold good from those to whom you should give it if it is within your power.
- prov 3:27".
by the common christian definition of god, everything is within his power.
-
-
doubtfull1799
"Do not withhold good from those to whom you should give it if it is within your power. - Prov 3:27"
By the common Christian definition of God, EVERYTHING is within His power.
Every explanation of God's permission of evil (including the JW one) without intervention, seems to ignore this basic scriptural tenant?
Remember the illustration used that God's permission of evil was similar to allowing a child to have a painful operation to fix a broke bone? So, OK, you might have to have the operation for the long term benefit of the child, but do you cease to do good and make it as painless as possible? Would you withhold from the child anaesthetic? Would you deny them painkillers. etc?
Even if JW doctrine on the universal issue was correct, is there really any reason why God couldn't help out and do good in the meantime, give us a cure for cancer for instance? If it is in His power to do that, would it make any difference in settling the issue as to whether man can rule himself? The test (according to the doctrine) is about sovereignty, not medical knowledge! So if providing the knowledge doesn't violate the issue, and God is withholding this good from us in this way, he is acting immortally by His own standard as stated in the daily text...
-
16
Using violence to end violence?
by stuckinarut2 init really is mind blowing when we think about it : witnesses have no problem with a deity who will use violence in order to end violence?!?!.
armageddon will be gods war to kill billions of people...because it shows his love?.
thoughts?.
-
-
doubtfull1799
You'll Be Back lyrics - From the Musical "Hamilton"
(This is King George singing to the American Colonies)
You say the price of my love is price you're not willing to pay
You cry in the tea which you hurled in the sea as you see me go by
Why so sad?
Remember we made an arrangement when you went away
Now you're making me mad.
Remember despite our estrangement, I'm your man
You'll be back
Soon you'll see
You'll remember you belong to me
You'll be back
Time will tell
You'll remember that I served you well
Oceans rise, empire fall
We have seen each other through it all
And when push comes to shove
I will send a fully armed battalion to remind you of my loveYou'll be back
Like before
I'll fight the fight and win the war
For your love
For your grace
And I'll love you til my dying days
When you're gone, I'll go mad
So don't throw away this thing we had
Cause when push comes to shove
I will kill your friends and family to remind you of my love -
5
I took a Watchtower Rag !
by Phizzy ini accepted a wt mag/rag from a bro i have known for decades just to be polite.
i asked him if he would like my comments on it sometime, he said he would listen, (yea maybe he will hear, but not really listen and absorb what i have to say.).
the interesting thing is, they are getting better, the borg,there was only one "half quote" where they select what they want from a source, and ignore the rest of what the source says.. and only one blatant lie.. it was the mag about the 4 horsemen, and a supplementary article makes the false claim that " archaeology repeatedly supports the bible's historical accuracy".. this is typical jw borg propaganda speak.
-
-
doubtfull1799
Good pick-up on that blatant lie about archaeology @Phizzy
How brilliant to just completely ignore the mountains of archaeological evidence that died not support the Bible!
I also love the quote about how there are 50 people mentioned in the Bible that have been confirmed to exist by archaeology - shame it is none of the main important characters like Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, Solomon, Jesus etc etc
-
15
This really does not end well for God.
by pleaseresearch into say this whole creation thing has been or will be a success at the end is absurd.
not only did one third of the angels jump ship to satans side.
but adam and eve screwed up so quickly.
-
-
doubtfull1799
Good post @pleaseresearch
You have no idea of what lay behind the war in heaven, as it's called. You also have little understanding of the fall of man and if Adam and Eve "screwed up" as you say. How do you know they screwed up?
How do you know He did not intend for man to fall?
Did God fully intend for man to remain in an ignorant state forever?Respectfully @Cold Steel, you really don't know the answers to these questions anymore than the OP does! Your comments are just as speculative since God in His wisdom did not see fit to enlighten any of us by means of the Bible as to what his thinking was. It is mere human apologetics. May I suggest the following book for anyone interested in a thorough, well-informed, academic discussion of apologetics:
https://www.amazon.com/How-Defend-Christian-Faith-Atheist/dp/163431056X