JW looking clarity followup

[robvalue]

Nic: I would agree that if anyone is in control of the world, it is an evil being. No argument there. What I don't get is the belief that there is a much more powerful good being, who sits by and allows the evil one to do this. More "realistically", god is actually evil and has created a little inept minor deity to pretend to be the good one, without the power to stop him, so he'd have an excuse.

But really, what's so bad about Satan? He stood up to god for being a psycopathic monster. Good for him! I know which side of that I'd be on.

[Aractus]

No, I don't speak greek but I can read the Kingdom Interlinear and compare the greek words in those scriptures. As far as those scriptures, I do believe that you can find scriptures to make an argument for the trinity. But, when I read scriptures like when Jesus was called good teacher and he said, "no one is good but the father" or when God from heaven said, "this is my son, the approved..." I just can't but assume they're two separate beings. I can use a puzzle piece to try and figure out what the puzzle is going to look like and I could be right. But it would take all the pieces to truly know what the picture will be

Well then, if you can't read Greek then you can't tell me what what is and isn't a Greek "figure of speech", at least not without evidence. Again, all the parables in the Bible - all of them - take place in a real physical location. So Jesus must have believed Hell to be a literal place otherwise why would he use it as a setting for his parable?

You didn't answer my question - who is the "First and the Last"? If it is Jehovah then what business is it of Jesus to call himself by Jehovah's title?

It puzzles me that you ignore the book of Revelation that makes it abundantly clear that the first-century author sees Jesus as deity and equates him with Jehovah. That comes right out of your Bible. Jesus saying people go to hell after death also comes straight out of your Bible. Nevermind the fact that no other denomination will touch the NWT for being translated by biased translators.

You also ignored my earlier questions, so I'll repeat them.

1. Why would this almighty god be subjected to what a human demands as proof?

Because he DOES prove himself several times according to the Old Testament, and according to the New Testament when Jesus appears before doubting Thomas. The problem is that what constituted as proof in the first century no longer constitutes as proof; after all the first century Jews and Christians believed that diseases were caused by daemons and other demonic forces. They didn't know about psychology, they didn't know that some illnesses affect cogitative processes and manifest themselves as mental diseases.

2. Does gods creation not make him apparent?

No it doesn't because: a. Why are there diseases that target children? b. Why did he create Onchocerca volvulus and other parasitic worms? Why did he tell Adam and Eve they could "eat from any tree" (except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) when in fact many tress produce fruit that is deadly to humans? And furthermore why did he create fruits, vegetables, other plants, fungus's, and other life forms that are deadly to humans?

[Tonus]

But your point was that the people had no issues and didn't want to speak out and they got shunned anyway. If they're dissenting voices then they can't try to play coy when confronted with their words and actions.

My point was in response to something you had said:

Discussing beliefs with people in a calm respectful way is upbuilding to humanity

I was pointing out that the Watchtower organization only agrees with this when it benefits them.  If you decide to discuss ideas or beliefs that the leadership does not agree with, it doesn't matter how respectful or calm you are: they expect you to stop, or face removal.  And they consider this to be a serious enough offense that they instructed congregations to consider it sufficient for a person to hold such views, whether or not they were discussing them at all.

I went through that same phase as you seem to be going through when I realized I was an atheist; it's a challenge to recognize that JWs aren't any different than any other religious group when it comes to the validity of their beliefs.  It's based on the same thing: human interpretation (often self-serving) of a book formed by mashing together a lot of ancient stories.  The fact that their policies and interpretations change so often should be a red flag: why wouldn't god help them get it right the first time?

Their stance on blood transfusions is a very good example.  Considering that they base this belief on a couple of short and simple Biblical texts, it's amazing that they have had to revise it time and again, sometimes undoing prior revisions entirely.  That might set them apart from other denominations, but not in a good way, IMO.

[KevinM1]

Door-knocking isn't trespassing, I don't even know why you idiots are bickering about that.

I've read contradictory things about trespassing laws in NH.  In some resources, it's written that any unwanted/approved presence on private property is trespassing.  In other resources, that it's trespassing only if the offending party doesn't leave when asked.  Regardless, the Supreme Court ruling nic referenced only says that JWs don't need a special permit to go door-to-door.

And, IMO, door-to-door anything should be considered trespassing.  We live in the 21st century, with more knowledge of our fingertips than ever before.  If your mythology can't entice people in that environment, coming to their houses and interrupting their day won't do it.

[Won2blv]

Well, surprise surprise, but we believe that the other religions just have it wrong.

That's part of the point.

It is interesting to me that in my recent agnosticism, hearing a lot of criticism of religion that I feel JW's aren't worthy of.

Like what?

And even some of the ones that they are can be argued. Like blood transfusions. I have had a hard time with this but I find it interesting to read articles about the benefits of not accepting blood transfusions. Or the fact that there are hundreds of bloodless surgery wings at hospitals.

Please post those articles.  I'm letting you off the hook for the 30/30 rule; links are fine when adding to a discussion.

I don't think they developed those just for the few witnesses in America. Jw's simply believe that Satan is in control of the world and humankind in general. Not like they are his robots and minions but more in a manipulating manner. So it only makes sense to us that most humans would spread false beliefs.

Who's spreading false beliefs?  People don't tend to spread beliefs unless they actually hold them.  If a Baptist thinks his or her belief is real, that's what they spread.  There are exceptions of course- most megachurch preachers, for example, but your wording makes it sound like people actively lie to each other about their beliefs.  

Look at holidays, they have ZERO christian background. But people seem to get more amped for christmas than church. But hey, presents! So, this is almost a glib explanation but god or no god i Think JW's believe in more true things than most religions

You can't see the fallacies here?

I want it to be clear that I am not saying that the medical professionals actively say that blood transfusions do more harm than good but here are some links

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/...rch.health
http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/medi...e_patients
http://www.pennmedicine.org/bloodless/ab...tages.html

BTW, what is the 30/30 rule?

Jehovah's witnesses don't meddle in politics. We don't try to force our beliefs into the school system like many other religions. We're pro life but we stay out of peoples business when it doesn't affect us. Same with gay marriage. We don't tell people that they're dead mom, son, daughter, etc is an angel now. We're trained to be honest, kind, respectful. We're immune from a lot of the hypocritical accusations that a lot of secularist use, like celebrating holidays. We own our beliefs, which is not easy today. And I know you'll probably down play anything I've claimed. I'm not saying that only JW's are good people. Atheists, muslims, christians, etc can be good people. It is up to an individual to choose how they want to act in life, however, I do believe JW's are extra prodded towards acting in respectful ways to all humans. I know that there will be disagreement there. People do get super annoyed with our door to door work, but if that is our worse offense that we do to others... I can live with that.

The false beliefs that I mentioned would be the ones that Satan spread, if he exists... People don't usually purposely spread false beliefs. I get that, sorry for the broad statement

And as far as the fallacies. I want to clarify another time, I am NOT making arguments or statements in favor of believing in god. I am expressing in my words what makes me hold on to my beliefs for the time being. 

[Bad Wolf]

Surprise surprise! None of those links are peer reviewed articles posted in a scientific journal!

[Won2blv]

No, I don't speak greek but I can read the Kingdom Interlinear and compare the greek words in those scriptures. As far as those scriptures, I do believe that you can find scriptures to make an argument for the trinity. But, when I read scriptures like when Jesus was called good teacher and he said, "no one is good but the father" or when God from heaven said, "this is my son, the approved..." I just can't but assume they're two separate beings. I can use a puzzle piece to try and figure out what the puzzle is going to look like and I could be right. But it would take all the pieces to truly know what the picture will be

Well then, if you can't read Greek then you can't tell me what what is and isn't a Greek "figure of speech", at least not without evidence. Again, all the parables in the Bible - all of them - take place in a real physical location. So Jesus must have believed Hell to be a literal place otherwise why would he use it as a setting for his parable?

You didn't answer my question - who is the "First and the Last"? If it is Jehovah then what business is it of Jesus to call himself by Jehovah's title?

It puzzles me that you ignore the book of Revelation that makes it abundantly clear that the first-century author sees Jesus as deity and equates him with Jehovah. That comes right out of your Bible. Jesus saying people go to hell after death also comes straight out of your Bible. Nevermind the fact that no other denomination will touch the NWT for being translated by biased translators.

You also ignored my earlier questions, so I'll repeat them.

1. Why would this almighty god be subjected to what a human demands as proof?

Because he DOES prove himself several times according to the Old Testament, and according to the New Testament when Jesus appears before doubting Thomas. The problem is that what constituted as proof in the first century no longer constitutes as proof; after all the first century Jews and Christians believed that diseases were caused by daemons and other demonic forces. They didn't know about psychology, they didn't know that some illnesses affect cogitative processes and manifest themselves as mental diseases.

2. Does gods creation not make him apparent?

No it doesn't because: a. Why are there diseases that target children? b. Why did he create Onchocerca volvulus and other parasitic worms? Why did he tell Adam and Eve they could "eat from any tree" (except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) when in fact many tress produce fruit that is deadly to humans? And furthermore why did he create fruits, vegetables, other plants, fungus's, and other life forms that are deadly to humans?

Ok sure, I can't read greek. But I have done research and found other non jw sources that come to the same conclusion. Again, because it was part of the parable as a place doesn't confirm he meant it to be a literal place. I go back to the fact that he didn't think a camel could actually walk through the eye of a needle or that you could have a rafter sticking out of your own eye.

As far as the first and last. I do find this interesting and I'm doing more research. Right of the bat, it is possible to me that such an appellation does not need to be uniquely for one being. As an example, the term "greatest of all time." You could say Muhammed Ali was the greatest of all time in boxing and Jack Nicklaus was the greatest of all time in golf. Exact same appellation and they could both be true. But that doesn't equate the two as being one. So, is this answer to this? I don't know... Is a better example, Muhammed Ali is the greatest of all time and Casious Clay (I think I spelled that wrong) is the greatest off all time. Same person, just different names from different eras. So I ask you, if god said, "this is my son..." or Jesus said, "i am not good, no one is good but the father in heaven" doesn't this seem to imply two separate beings? And wouldn't it make sense that there could be an alternate meaning to both being referred to as the first and last?

Your questions...


1. God making himself apparent in the past still doesn't demand that he owes it to humans today. I think you could further into this but that basically as simple as it gets. 

2. I was actually not saying this as an argument for the existence of god. It is a circular argument. It is just something that I observe that makes me wonder. I know there is a natural explanation of how things could have come about but thats why I'm on this forum. I want clarity. I want to feel confident in whatever I believe. 

---

Surprise surprise! None of those links are peer reviewed articles posted in a scientific journal!

You're right, but they are from respectable sources. I didn't pull them from bloodisbad.org or some kind of biased site. It is established that overall, its better if blood does not need to be transfused.

---

Door-knocking isn't trespassing, I don't even know why you idiots are bickering about that.

I've read contradictory things about trespassing laws in NH.  In some resources, it's written that any unwanted/approved presence on private property is trespassing.  In other resources, that it's trespassing only if the offending party doesn't leave when asked.  Regardless, the Supreme Court ruling nic referenced only says that JWs don't need a special permit to go door-to-door.

And, IMO, door-to-door anything should be considered trespassing.  We live in the 21st century, with more knowledge of our fingertips than ever before.  If your mythology can't entice people in that environment, coming to their houses and interrupting their day won't do it.

I think you're right. I know where I live, the private property definitions are different than NH. Basically, you can go to someones front door but if you walk anywhere else on their property you're trespassing. But still, generally you need a "no trespassing" or a sign that clearly states your will for anyone to enter your premises. My friend lived in NH for a while and he said that it was the hardest place to go door to door. So I am sure that a lot of people in your area sympathize with you. I know that this has fell flat on the board but here goes one more time, JW's are not charlatans. They truly believe that they can help people have happier more fulfilling lives. That is why they still go door to door. They might be wrong, but if you have a little bit of humanist in you, you might be able to be less irritated with them. 

[Won2blv]

Nic: I would agree that if anyone is in control of the world, it is an evil being. No argument there. What I don't get is the belief that there is a much more powerful good being, who sits by and allows the evil one to do this. More "realistically", god is actually evil and has created a little inept minor deity to pretend to be the good one, without the power to stop him, so he'd have an excuse.

But really, what's so bad about Satan? He stood up to god for being a psycopathic monster. Good for him! I know which side of that I'd be on.

Thats all interesting. Think about it this way, what was God's original purpose for the earth? From my reading, it was that he wanted mankind to live in peaceful paradise conditions. He asked one thing, don't eat from this one tree. Its like if someone gave you a home to live in for free and said, "please just leave the one closet alone. Its my closet" Satan came down and convinced Eve that god was lying to her and hiding a big secret. After that god could have just zapped them and started over. But obviously since he didn't, he must have a greater goal in mind. He asked them to trust him implicitly and they couldn't. So it seems to me like god gave them the opportunity to prove if they could really govern themselves. He was voted out of office in a sense. Instead of acting as a bully he decided to devise his own plan that would lead to his eventual original purpose for the earth. 

Is god really a psychopathic monster? I think you would have the burden of proving such. God is responsible for the deaths of many men women and children. Is it impossible that it could have been for the greater good of human kind in general? I am not even saying that I am right and you are wrong. I am just saying that it is possible that god's certain seemingly indiscretions could have been justified for a greater good.

Lastly, I do think that if there was a good god up there that he would do what he could now. If god exists that means that he would have existed since the beginning of the universe. (of course this god would be a timeless being prior to creation) But on the scale of time that we can somewhat comprehend, 6000 plus years is nothing for a being that has existed 13 billion plus. And you could say that his word the bible is his attempt to help people now protect themselves from the evil one. Because it all still comes down to humans personal responsibility. Satan cannot control people like robots, but he can trick them and manipulate them. If he exists!

Not trying to preach, I just have a lot that goes through my head. 

[rexbeccarox]

---

That's part of the point.




Like what?





Please post those articles.  I'm letting you off the hook for the 30/30 rule; links are fine when adding to a discussion.




Who's spreading false beliefs?  People don't tend to spread beliefs unless they actually hold them.  If a Baptist thinks his or her belief is real, that's what they spread.  There are exceptions of course- most megachurch preachers, for example, but your wording makes it sound like people actively lie to each other about their beliefs.  



You can't see the fallacies here?

---

I want it to be clear that I am not saying that the medical professionals actively say that blood transfusions do more harm than good but here are some links

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/...rch.health
http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/medi...e_patients
http://www.pennmedicine.org/bloodless/ab...tages.html

What does any of this have to do with what I asked?

BTW, what is the 30/30 rule?

You should know this; when you registered for the forum, you agreed to abide by our rules, which aren't hard to find, even after you register.

Jehovah's witnesses don't meddle in politics. We don't try to force our beliefs into the school system like many other religions. We're pro life but we stay out of peoples business when it doesn't affect us. Same with gay marriage. We don't tell people that they're dead mom, son, daughter, etc is an angel now. We're trained to be honest, kind, respectful. We're immune from a lot of the hypocritical accusations that a lot of secularist use, like celebrating holidays. We own our beliefs, which is not easy today. And I know you'll probably down play anything I've claimed. I'm not saying that only JW's are good people. Atheists, muslims, christians, etc can be good people. It is up to an individual to choose how they want to act in life, however, I do believe JW's are extra prodded towards acting in respectful ways to all humans. I know that there will be disagreement there. People do get super annoyed with our door to door work, but if that is our worse offense that we do to others... I can live with that.

Again: no idea what this has to to do with what I asked you.

The false beliefs that I mentioned would be the ones that Satan spread, if he exists... People don't usually purposely spread false beliefs. I get that, sorry for the broad statement

So, how do you know Satan's not spreading false beliefs to you?

And as far as the fallacies. I want to clarify another time, I am NOT making arguments or statements in favor of believing in god. I am expressing in my words what makes me hold on to my beliefs for the time being. 

Ok...

[Won2blv]

But your point was that the people had no issues and didn't want to speak out and they got shunned anyway. If they're dissenting voices then they can't try to play coy when confronted with their words and actions.

My point was in response to something you had said:

Discussing beliefs with people in a calm respectful way is upbuilding to humanity

I was pointing out that the Watchtower organization only agrees with this when it benefits them.  If you decide to discuss ideas or beliefs that the leadership does not agree with, it doesn't matter how respectful or calm you are: they expect you to stop, or face removal.  And they consider this to be a serious enough offense that they instructed congregations to consider it sufficient for a person to hold such views, whether or not they were discussing them at all.

I went through that same phase as you seem to be going through when I realized I was an atheist; it's a challenge to recognize that JWs aren't any different than any other religious group when it comes to the validity of their beliefs.  It's based on the same thing: human interpretation (often self-serving) of a book formed by mashing together a lot of ancient stories.  The fact that their policies and interpretations change so often should be a red flag: why wouldn't god help them get it right the first time?

Their stance on blood transfusions is a very good example.  Considering that they base this belief on a couple of short and simple Biblical texts, it's amazing that they have had to revise it time and again, sometimes undoing prior revisions entirely.  That might set them apart from other denominations, but not in a good way, IMO.

It just doesn't make sense to me that someone could be df'd for only holding a view without discussing it. If your view is out in the open, it can only come from discussing it. And I know that it is not a lightly taken accusation. Even the bible gives a burden of 2 or 3 witnesses, it usually takes dozens of witnesses to deem someone as spreading apostate beliefs. 

We're you a witness then? If so, as an atheist this point is moot but, if jw's serve Jehovah then they can trust in him to set matters straight. IMO, the bible does not teach the trinity, hellfire, holidays, our spirit going on after we die, etc. Not many religions agree with those stances. So, if someone believes truly that major doctrines are not covered correctly in the kingdom halls then that is their prerogative. But those are beliefs that witnesses have held for decades and I assume will never change. And for me, I don't care if Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BCE. Or what the generation means, or to what degree one can accept blood products. I want to know if I believe in god or not. I have two people close to me that are apostates. This does not speak for all, just the two i know, but they are both miserable. And I feel like you can go back to a point and say, "you know, if they just applied this one bible principle they could have saved a lot of heartache." Is this because of the divinity of scriptures? The broken clock fallacy? Just bullshit from me? I don't know. But its my experience and its what makes it hard to break free from what I assume is true, that there is no god. 

---

I want it to be clear that I am not saying that the medical professionals actively say that blood transfusions do more harm than good but here are some links

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2008/...rch.health
http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/medi...e_patients
http://www.pennmedicine.org/bloodless/ab...tages.html

What does any of this have to do with what I asked?

BTW, what is the 30/30 rule?

You should know this; when you registered for the forum, you agreed to abide by our rules, which aren't hard to find, even after you register.

Jehovah's witnesses don't meddle in politics. We don't try to force our beliefs into the school system like many other religions. We're pro life but we stay out of peoples business when it doesn't affect us. Same with gay marriage. We don't tell people that they're dead mom, son, daughter, etc is an angel now. We're trained to be honest, kind, respectful. We're immune from a lot of the hypocritical accusations that a lot of secularist use, like celebrating holidays. We own our beliefs, which is not easy today. And I know you'll probably down play anything I've claimed. I'm not saying that only JW's are good people. Atheists, muslims, christians, etc can be good people. It is up to an individual to choose how they want to act in life, however, I do believe JW's are extra prodded towards acting in respectful ways to all humans. I know that there will be disagreement there. People do get super annoyed with our door to door work, but if that is our worse offense that we do to others... I can live with that.

Again: no idea what this has to to do with what I asked you.

The false beliefs that I mentioned would be the ones that Satan spread, if he exists... People don't usually purposely spread false beliefs. I get that, sorry for the broad statement

So, how do you know Satan's not spreading false beliefs to you?

And as far as the fallacies. I want to clarify another time, I am NOT making arguments or statements in favor of believing in god. I am expressing in my words what makes me hold on to my beliefs for the time being. 

Ok...

Did you not ask for links to articles? And the other paragraph was mentioning some things that excuse witnesses from certain criticisms IMO...

And yes, Satan could be spreading his false beliefs through JW's. But I do believe that as far as religions that base their beliefs on the bible and the god therein, Witnesses can back up their beliefs with scripture more soundly than any other. So its easier for me to believe that I would not be a tool of his