Jump to content
The World News Media

Conscience individual and collective


xero

Recommended Posts

  • Member

Musing more on conscience.

To listen to some, you'd imagine they'd suggest that to promote adherence to the Bible or any particular denomination one would have to first find one which currently had zero debatable anomalies in official statements from any imaginable scriptural, historical, archaeological or scientific "truths" perspective w/regard to belief otherwise to these, you're committing some kind or moral crime unless you in detail provide an exhaustive analysis of defects along w/the appendices of apologias on each side of the arguments.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 15.7k
  • Replies 459
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In the 1970's it was common for Bethelites to order Bible commentaries like Matthew Henry's and Barnes' Notes on the NT and various Bible translations. Later, they also allowed orders for Jay Green's

I liked your KH building experience. We've all had that experience when we would have made different decisions if we were in charge, and then we are glad we weren't. But I can't seem to fit your

Bingo. It’s the pure nastiness of one, not to mention the pure dodo-headedness of another. These annoy far more than the posts themselves, though sometimes the two are hard to unravel. After

Posted Images

  • Member
12 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

I believe, your continued denial of insulting others in a subtle way has once again been exposed.

I don't deny that this was a subtle (and to some, not-so-subtle) way of insulting others. I have only denied specific false claims about ways in which persons claimed I had insulted them.

I don't mind calling out trolling behavior. I have specifically pointed it out with JB/4J2 and I don't mind that you have said that this can be insulting to others. There's an admitted element of trolling in what I just did, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

More musing...

Conscience seems very "gustatory" in the mouths of many. Taste and see. But when you don't like what you've tasted, maybe you tasted the wrong thing. Maybe you didn't cook it right. Maybe eating healthy is an acquired taste.

Even looking at organizations requires a certain artistic viewing distance.

A lot of complaints about chronology and other expectations. I get it.

On the other hand, I suspect w/o the expectations related to the imminence of the kingdom's arrival, this organization known as JW's wouldn't exist.

Who's to say Jehovah isn't behind allowing a little "operation of error" go to his servants so they do what they need to do?

If you were living in the 1st century, and Jesus said. "Come follow me. Of course you'll end up getting persecuted and you'll die before the end comes, but you'll eventually be happy you did and BTW that's thousands of years off from now." Just how enthusiastic would you really be?

People don't have the stamina to be on the bleeding edge of enthusiasm in perpetuity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, xero said:

or any particular denomination one would have to first find one which currently had zero debatable anomalies in official statements from any imaginable scriptural, historical, archaeological or scientific "truths" perspective w/regard to belief

This might actually be simpler than it sounds. If you look at the style of many standard commentaries, for example, you can see that some weather the ages better than others, such that certain commentaries from 300 years ago,  have much greater, lasting value than many that have been made in the last 30 years. Of course, there will be obsolete sections in almost all works of men.

Take for example, a denomination that sets itself up as a teaching ministry, such as ours which says this about the meaning of the name Jehovah:

*** nwt p. 1735 A4 The Divine Name in the Hebrew Scriptures ***
What is the meaning of the name Jehovah? In Hebrew, the name Jehovah comes from a verb that means “to become,” and a number of scholars feel that it reflects the causative form of that Hebrew verb. Thus, the understanding of the New World Bible Translation Committee is that God’s name means “He Causes to Become.” Scholars hold varying views, so we cannot be dogmatic about this meaning. However, this definition well fits Jehovah’s role as the Creator of all things and the Fulfiller of his purpose. He not only caused the physical universe and intelligent beings to exist, but as events unfold, he continues to cause his will and purpose to be realized.

I don't think any Christian-oriented religious mind would find anything really debatable in that sentence, and it even includes the non-presumptuous statement that we cannot be dogmatic, and that this is our current understanding. So we are prepared for the idea that it is subject to change when and if more is learned.

This is similar to how many commentaries handle almost any Bible reference or teaching that might not be obvious. And there are Christian-oriented people who learn their Bible through and through with this kind of non-presumptuous, non-dogmatic teaching style. Changing a doctrine under this paradigm need not result in any debatable anomalies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
13 hours ago, xero said:

To listen to some, you'd imagine they'd suggest that to promote adherence to the Bible or any particular denomination one would have to first find one

Does anyone see the problem with Xero's comment above ?

Well, he deliberately confuses the issue by putting the BIBLE and denomination in the same 'pot'.  

Adherence to the BIBLE is NOT the same as adherence to any particular denomination. But xero trys to pretend it is all the same. Xero, you are wrong.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
12 hours ago, xero said:

On the other hand, I suspect w/o the expectations related to the imminence of the kingdom's arrival, this organization known as JW's wouldn't exist.

Yes, the Watchtower / JW org relies on MONEY to keep them running. The money comes from dragging in more innocent people that believe the lies about 'Only baptised JWs will survive Armageddon'. So those Orgs have to keep pushing the lies that Armageddon is coming in five minutes, so you'd better get baptised in this Org. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
5 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

This might actually be simpler than it sounds. If you look at the style of many standard commentaries, for example, you can see that some weather the ages better than others, such that certain commentaries from 300 years ago,  have much greater, lasting value than many that have been made in the last 30 years. Of course, there will be obsolete sections in almost all works of men.

Take for example, a denomination that sets itself up as a teaching ministry, such as ours which says this about the meaning of the name Jehovah:

*** nwt p. 1735 A4 The Divine Name in the Hebrew Scriptures ***
What is the meaning of the name Jehovah? In Hebrew, the name Jehovah comes from a verb that means “to become,” and a number of scholars feel that it reflects the causative form of that Hebrew verb. Thus, the understanding of the New World Bible Translation Committee is that God’s name means “He Causes to Become.” Scholars hold varying views, so we cannot be dogmatic about this meaning. However, this definition well fits Jehovah’s role as the Creator of all things and the Fulfiller of his purpose. He not only caused the physical universe and intelligent beings to exist, but as events unfold, he continues to cause his will and purpose to be realized.

I don't think any Christian-oriented religious mind would find anything really debatable in that sentence, and it even includes the non-presumptuous statement that we cannot be dogmatic, and that this is our current understanding. So we are prepared for the idea that it is subject to change when and if more is learned.

This is similar to how many commentaries handle almost any Bible reference or teaching that might not be obvious. And there are Christian-oriented people who learn their Bible through and through with this kind of non-presumptuous, non-dogmatic teaching style. Changing a doctrine under this paradigm need not result in any debatable anomalies.

This isn't an example of what I'm getting at. Opposers would insist that if you have no complete answer for every issue, you simply should shut your mouth and not go door to door.

Now as a former atheist, I thought certainly the public ministry was incredibly important as an exercise for anyone who imagined he had the truth. The ministry would at some point disabuse him of any truly glaring deficiencies as the "wisdom of crowds" would flatten any truly deficient belief he might hold at present to be true.

Opposers would argue that it's YOUR job to argue as in insider on behalf of the HH who might not even have the intellectual capacity to understand the question to begin with. THAT is an unreasonable position to take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
12 hours ago, JW Insider said:

This is similar to how many commentaries handle almost any Bible reference or teaching that might not be obvious. And there are Christian-oriented people who learn their Bible through and through with this kind of non-presumptuous, non-dogmatic teaching style. Changing a doctrine under this paradigm need not result in any debatable anomalies.

Basically leaving yourself wriggle movement. But the True Anointed won't need to do that because their information will be through Holy Spirit. JWs will be shocked when it happens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
18 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

Does anyone see the problem with Xero's comment above ?

Well, he deliberately confuses the issue by putting the BIBLE and denomination in the same 'pot'.  

Adherence to the BIBLE is NOT the same as adherence to any particular denomination. But xero trys to pretend it is all the same. Xero, you are wrong.

 

I shouldn't reply. But hey. Buddy... Unless you are part of a denomination you aren't going to go door to door pushing living by the Bible. If you do w/o being part of a group, then you'll come off like the dangerous kook you likely are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
12 hours ago, xero said:

Opposers would insist that

 

12 hours ago, xero said:

Opposers would argue that

This is so funny........ :)  It's @TrueTomHarley  all over again.  Tom is xero your AKA ? 

Firstly he lumps all so called 'Opposers' together.

Secondly he thinks he knows exactly what those Opposers would think or do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
8 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

 

This is so funny........ :)  It's @TrueTomHarley  all over again.  Tom is xero your AKA ? 

Firstly he lumps all so called 'Opposers' together.

Secondly he thinks he knows exactly what those Opposers would think or do. 

I know one thing you're not doing. Preaching the good news of God's Kingdom. Opposers are like fat leftist introverts who stare at their shoes and play dungeons and dragons and go to cosplay conventions because they loathe life and the demands it makes on them. Therefore anything excellent, they seek to tear down. They don't create, because to create is to be subject to criticism. Nope. They just like to sit in their fat, unaccomplished obesity in their mother's basement.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • SuzA

      SuzA 25

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • JW Insider

      JW Insider 9,623

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Abegail Sheldon

      Abegail Sheldon 24

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,367

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.6k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,648
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.