Posts by undercover

17

Photosynthesis and the problem with the creation story

by purrpurr in

i just noticed in the bible that on day three, god created the plants and trees on the earth.... day four, god created the sun, moon and stars!

so that means that the vegetation that is by its very nature dependant upon light to grow and photosynthesise was created a day before the sun that it needs to live!???.

this gets even more strange when you factor in the jw exhuse that a day to god is like a thousand years.

undercover

JWs resolve this issue by saying that what happened on day 4 isn't the literal creation of the sun moon and stars but only their being made discernible as distinct objects in the sky. Prior to that sunlight was already reaching the earth's surface from day one when God said let light come to be. Only, the sunlight was diffuse, shining through a haze and one could not make out the sun or any other heavenly body as distinct objects in the sky. They basically teach that what happened on day 4 is the clearing of the atmospheric clouds to allow heavenly objects to be distinctly discernible for the first time.

I've seen that explanation. Unfortunately for them, it's BS. The scriptures don't say anything about haze lifting, or indiscernible objects. It says, Then God said: “Let there be luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night, and they will serve as signs for seasons and for days and years. They will serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth.” And it was so. And God went on to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the day and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars. Thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth and to dominate by day and by night and to make a division between the light and the darkness. Then God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.

The NWT translation (the only translation endorsed by Jehovah, ya know) itself says, God 'went on to MAKE the ...luminaries, and 'put them in the expanse of the heavens...to make a division between the light and the darkness'. Using the WT explanation, there was already a division between light and dark, you just couldn't 'see' the luminary bodies. That's in direct conflict with what the verse said. The scripture is pretty plain - god made em and hung em on the 4th day. (And even that doesn't make sense since it's the 4th 'day' already. What divided the day and night the first three days?)

17

Photosynthesis and the problem with the creation story

by purrpurr in

i just noticed in the bible that on day three, god created the plants and trees on the earth.... day four, god created the sun, moon and stars!

so that means that the vegetation that is by its very nature dependant upon light to grow and photosynthesise was created a day before the sun that it needs to live!???.

this gets even more strange when you factor in the jw exhuse that a day to god is like a thousand years.

undercover

This was dealt with by JW's in the 1969 book "Is the Bible really the word of God?" book. In chapter 2 it states that the Genesis account does not include the creation of the sun and planets.

New publications say this as well. In trying to come to terms that the universe is billions of years old, they like to claim that the sun, stars, and even the planet earth rock were created well before the creative process on earth. This, they claims, means the Bible and science are compatible. However, they always conveniently forget this scripture:

Exodus 20:11 - For in six days Jehovah made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and he began to rest on the seventh day

112

Geoffrey Jackson's Golden Apple watch INVESTIGATED

by C0ntr013r in

i went through the original footage to get a good look at the watch.. from these pictures we can probably say that it is a apple watch and that it has a golden color.

the color on the pin is black, and the band is white, grey, silvery or beige.. .

the pin is in the exact place for it to be a apple watch.. only apple watch edition have the gold color.

undercover

Seriously... y'all are worried about what kind of watch the man wears? Even if it is a solid gold Apple Star Trek communicator tricorder...

Of all the things this organization can be criticized over, and held to task for, y'all focus on a GB member's watch.

Nope, ex-JWs aren't bitter... they just have too much time on their hands since they don't have to go door-to-door anymore

25

This too Shall Pass (RC Commission vs WTS)

by undercover in

jw
friends

while i'm glad that the practices of the wts are under review and the australian commission is taking them to task, i'm not really expecting huge changes in the long run.

oh, they may have to agree to some changes in how they report crimes brought to elders' attention, but this excitement over the supposed expose of wt practices shall pass, and jws will soon be canvassing neighborhoods and rolling their carts, looking for converts.

conventions will go on.

undercover

Actually there is a big difference. Francis Ford Coppola invented the character 'Michael Corleone'. All the other characters in the 'The Godfather' were make-believe as was the story line.
There is nothing make-believe about Watchtower, the Royal Commission, Geoffrey Jackson and JW's lies,
So there is a very high likelihood that Geoffrey Jackson, Watchtower and Jehovah's Witnesses as a whole will 'eat crow' before this is past!

True. The Godfather example is a fictional tale, but one that borrows from actual crime syndicates and how they operate. True Detective is fictional as well. But in these tales of corruption and crime, it is art imitating life. And in life, corruption and organized crime may suffer some defeats, but they continue without letup, and without being stamped out, and with absolutely no remorse.

The WTS will suffer some PR nightmares, but they will never eat crow in public, I guarandamntee you that. They will feel absolutely no remorse. They may change some rules, in order to placate government agencies, but they'll spin it as direction from Jehovah himself, and the vast majority of JWs will lap it up like a kitten to milk.

But as long as it slows em down, that's good. The more stuff on the Internet that can be used to show doubting JWs and people considering joining that this is not a benign religion, the better.

53

What is their official explanation for not allowing beards?

by keyser soze in

jw
friends

i ask because my gf, who knows all about my jw upbringing, convinced me to grow a goatee, just to see how it looks.

we both decided it looked good so i decided to keep it.

i tried to explain to her that as a jw, i wasn't allowed to grow one, but then drew a blank when she asked me why.

undercover

Law handed down orally. Enforced by elders and peer pressure.

Circuit overseer told the story in one of those 'OBEY or else' talks about an elder from a foreign country who came to the US. He had a beard, the local elders thought it looked fine, no action taken. Along comes the CO who chided the elders for allowing it. Made them tell the bearded elder to lose it or be removed. Why? As the CO said in the talk, 'It's just not done. What is more important? Following rules or demanding personal rights?' The CO was happy to report that the bearded elder shaved his beard and fell in line with rest of the sheep.

I asked an elder about it one time. He gave me the 'don't want to give the org a bad rep' excuse. He then went on to explain how large corporations have grooming rules for employees. They don't want exposed tattoos, body piercings, facial hair, etc etc. All about the reputation of the corporation. That was the day I finally realized that I wasn't a member of the one true religion, but an unpaid employee for a publishing company.

25

This too Shall Pass (RC Commission vs WTS)

by undercover in

jw
friends

while i'm glad that the practices of the wts are under review and the australian commission is taking them to task, i'm not really expecting huge changes in the long run.

oh, they may have to agree to some changes in how they report crimes brought to elders' attention, but this excitement over the supposed expose of wt practices shall pass, and jws will soon be canvassing neighborhoods and rolling their carts, looking for converts.

conventions will go on.

undercover

While I'm glad that the practices of the WTS are under review and the Australian commission is taking them to task, I'm not really expecting huge changes in the long run. Oh, they may have to agree to some changes in how they report crimes brought to elders' attention, but this excitement over the supposed expose of WT practices shall pass, and JWs will soon be canvassing neighborhoods and rolling their carts, looking for converts. Conventions will go on. Money will be begged. Property bought, property sold. Lies told. Old JWs dying with no sight of a Paradise Earth.

As in organized crime, you can only impede their growth, not stop them. Same way with organized religion (which is pretty much the same thing). You can disrupt them in small degrees, embarrass them, but you'll never break them up, or get them off the streets.

Jackson speaking before the RC is not much different than Michael Corleone testifying before the senate sub-committee on organized crime activity. Everyone knew he was Mafia, yet he walked away. We know all about the WTS, and the commission either knows or suspects, but Jackson will lie and maybe some low level capos will take the fall, but the leadership? Never.

The odds of the WTS being brought down by a government investigation, or even an expose from inside is slim to none. It's about the same odds as Frank and Ray exposing government corruption in the final episode of this season's True Detective. You might burn down a casino, and kill some mid level Russian mobsters, but the whole corrupt syndicate continues grinding along.

58

Will his holiness Jehovha Jackson appear before the ARC?

by punkofnice in

yes or no.......what say you?.

i'll start - no!.

.

undercover

If required to show, he'll show. And he'll try to wag the dog. Even if the Commission folks zero in on inconsistencies, he'll lie his way through it.

No biggie for him.. He's used to lying in front of thousands of people on a daily and weekly basis. And if he actually believes that he has God's spirit, he'll even be cocky about it.

11

'Parents' magazine cover with JW.org cartoon kids

by undercover in

jw
friends

making the rounds on facebook among jws is a photo of a 'parents' magazine cover that shows the cgi jw.org kids on the cover, and an article headline about how wonderful the teaching tools on jw.org are.

(i don't have the time or the desire to hunt the photo and post it - sorry).

i immediately suspected some bored and naive jw doing some photoshopping.

undercover

Making the rounds on Facebook among JWs is a photo of a 'Parents' magazine cover that shows the CGI JW.org kids on the cover, and an article headline about how wonderful the teaching tools on JW.org are. (I don't have the time or the desire to hunt the photo and post it - sorry)

I immediately suspected some bored and naive JW doing some photoshopping. My quick 5 minute search revealed no concrete evidence either way. And that's about all the time of my life I wish to invest on the search. I'm sure it's not real, but I was wondering if anyone else has seen this photo show up among JWs on your Facebook/Twitter/Instagram lists.

24

ROYAL COMMISSION: ARE JWS TAUGHT TO REFRAIN FROM SWEARING ON THE BIBLE OR NOT? JW.ORG PLEASE EXPLAIN!

by steve2 in

during yesterday's rc proceedings (wednesday 5th august 2015), one of the victim's lawyers questioned mr vincent toole, the jw organization's legal counsel for the australian branch office.

she asked him why at least two of the jw elders who gave evidence last week refused to swear on the bible.

mr toole appear puzzled by her question and said he did not know.

undercover

Another orally handed down 'law', made enforceable by peer pressure.

I remember that it was 'looked down on' to swear on the Bible. JWs, being a very black and white crowd, were told that 'christians' didn't need to swear on a Bible, and most took it to heart, all the way to refusing to swear on a Bible in court proceedings. Even when the WTS clearly called it a 'conscience matter', JWs were still afraid to go too far.

That's where these court proceedings can be tricky. If an attorney starts harping on these minor little things, and then a WT lawyer trots out printed material that leaves it up to the follower, then it can make the accusing lawyer look at best silly, at worst misinformed.

We know that real WT law is an oral tradition, and that words in a Watchtower are just a CYA for later, should someone accuse the WTS of something. Problem is that you can't easily prove this indoctrination method straight up. You have to experience it. You can't really prove it, unless you lived it.

12

Why is a mass shooting in a church worse than other mass shootings?

by undercover in

jw
friends

i'll preface this by saying that i was horrified by the news of the shooting in charleston, a town that i visit quite frequently, and i know where the church is.

i don't mean to make light of the situation, but my question is serious, after having watched news pundits, politicians, neighbors, friends, express shock, horror and outrage over the events.. they, like me, were shocked by the school shootings, and the theater shootings, and other mass shootings.

but i sense a different shock, a different reaction, to this event.

undercover

I'm a little familiar with the history of the church, and Charleston's history with slavery up to, and during the war (and subsequent aftermath). Thanks for the Slate article, sir82. When speaking in specifics, it does add to the equation.

But the reactions from people I was originally referring to weren't in the know of the church, or even the city. The reactions I witnessed were coming from people who had no clue as to the significance of the building, the city, the history. They were just appalled that it could happen in a church, as opposed to say, the mall.

I really think some people believe that God, or his spirit, or whatever, is present in these buildings and there is true sanctuary in these buildings. So, when their sensibilities are upset with this kind of event, they are more shaken than when it happened in a movie theater. Truth is, location doesn't matter. There is no sanctuary if someone wants you dead enough bad enough.