xero

I think it's interesting that opposers never call to mind how David felt about taking action against King Saul, never mind his disposition, his character or his disobedience. He waited for Jehovah to deal w/Saul. Sure, he removed himself from the persecution directed at him by Saul for a time and perhaps some who have withdrawn mentally or physically (or both) because or real or imagined persecution have done the same, yet can any of these say that any elder tried to pin them to a wall with a spear or hunt them down to try to kill them?

Interesting podcast... https://simplyputpodcast.com/adiaphora/

You don't need that. You just need to obey. Jesus is the head of the congregation. He is the one who will remove the lampstand of any congregation not submissive to him. Until then you have to find an organization, claim this one as the one God is using and directing by Christ Jesus and then submit to the theocratic order required.

4Jah - You're clearly confusing your emotions w/a functioning conscience. Don't burn incense to your inner light. You don't know if the light that in you is darkness or light unless you subject it to the true light of scripture. The true light of scripture makes it clear (unless you reject Hebrews among other books) that God has and uses organization, that he delegates authority to humans in these organizations and that one must be submissive and obedient to those taking the lead. It doesn't say you'll like it. In fact the scriptures suggest the opposite. Discipline isn't fun, but it's useful. Your job is to determine which organization you are going to be submissive to. You can't go it alone. Not scripturally.

Musing more. The more I consider Hebrews and the counsel given, it's hard to imagine that anyone could be considered a faithful Christian or a faithful organization if these failed to either submit to organizational authority (implying an argument that in extrabiblical matters the individual has a responsibility to be obedient insofar as the commands/counsel are not in opposition to clear scriptural dictates) or failed to apply discipline to individual members. As much as I look about, this is certainly an earmark of what I'd expect of a true religion - that the religion would expect and enforce biblical standards and principles.

Well, like I said. I'm reading this paper. https://rts.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/Libery-of-Conscience.pdf

I've been musing on the educational sanitation of late such that we are even more unified than before w/regard to teaching. Part of me is annoyed as I loved conducting the book study in my own home (for over ten years) so I could go off topic w/questions and have a lot of fun. But I can see how that was generating a cult of personality and division of sorts as people would talk about how things seemed to be done differently and people would comment among themselves as if they were trading baseball cards as to who had the best book study. Plus the so-not-camera-ready-and-not-slick GB goofiness seems to just emphasize how Jehovah simply HAS to be behind this if THESE are the geniuses behind it all. The organization necessarily has to have a certain homogeneity about it if it's not to become a farm raising "superfine apostles". People now and in the first century were looking to follow men and lets face it, some of the brothers we've met have been quite brilliant and clever and it's hard to NOT want to follow along w/their cleverness. BUT that's not helpful w/regard to unity and peace in the congregations. I'm reminded of Paul saying to the Corinthians "I decided not to know anything among you except Jesus and him impaled". (I only wish I could keep all this in mind).

Musing more.... One of the things I noticed as an outside observer prior to becoming one of Jehovah's Witnesses was the business of disfellowshipping and reinstatement. I saw both of these things as an atheist observing. It struck me at the time as highly unusual. I'd read of excommunication as a Catholic, however I've never knew anyone who was ever disciplined in this way, though it's supposedly on the books. It struck me that perhaps this was the reason I felt comfortable around these people as a group and in general. There were actual consequences for misbehavior. One could hardly imagine any consequences as a Catholic. No one even made you go to confession, never mind you never had to do anything except repeat "Hail Mary's" and "Our Fathers" to get forgiven (which had never at all been convincing to me). No, even now it strikes me as a very important thing, this business of discipline. I have to admit that I have a hard time w/the business of creating loyalty oaths and pledges and if someone won't burn a pinch of incense to an organization then they are persona non gratis...also engaging in thought-policing - that's also wrong. Now chronically arguing and pushing ideas and engaging in stirring up contentions in the congregation would certainly merit some attention. Maybe not DF'ing, but certainly addressing these things, but always w/a view to reclaiming people, not forcing people to knuckle under. Ultimately, people who don't want to deal w/the discipline and mental regulating of the Bible will leave. Same reason some people who are obese don't want to hang out at the gym.

More musing.... Conscience is like an internal scale too but it's one that weighs things in accordance with its own experiences. I remember one class I took by Dr. Albrecht, a neurology professor whose specialization was in the eye. It was a basic class, but one thing that stood out that I remember from the class was the rods vs cones of the human visual system. He said our eyes have scales which can weigh elephants and bees wings. The cones weigh elephants and the rods weigh bees wings. It's a simple illustration. There are people like my grandfather who were color blind, lacking any cones whatsoever. It turns out this aided him as a quality control engineer as his eyes were very sensitive to shades, more so than a normal person. A person's conscience might be like these scales in some way. Some people missing nuance and seeing little difference between one thing and another. "All religions are the same" they might say (and believe). Another person's conscience might see a myriad of differences and perhaps so many differences (that like a character in a Jorge Louis Borges story https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funes_the_Memorious I remember who couldn't recognize a dog as the same dog because the angle of attack/reflection of light off the dog and its movement made it perpetually different) he simply can't even recognize a religion. Why? Because everything seems different. When examining a dog, when does what we call a "dog" stop being a dog? We have a fingerprint of experiences in our minds which make for "dog". We do this for all things. So when something troubles our conscience we can do a few things. We can re-check and remeasure. "Did I remember to turn the stove off?" Maybe the stove is off. Maybe it was on. But we're glad we checked. Suppose we go back and the stove is off, but we're still unsettled. Something about the stove is off we think. So perhaps we hire a technician to examine the stove. Is it leaking gas? Is it not heating properly? Does something seem awry? Does anyone else think something might be wrong? Maybe we go look at someone else's stove. They seem satisfied with their stove, but not you. You sense something awry with their stove as well. Maybe you argue with them about the stove. Maybe they say "I'm happy w/my stove and I'm sticking with it!". You say "Fine. But don't say I didn't warn you." They respond "Warn me about what? I know my stove isn't the best in the world, but it works for me. It cooks my food and that's all I expect out of it. What do you think a stove is supposed to do?" You move on. Perhaps you start studying "Stoves of the World" and "The History of Stoves" and "The Chronology of Stoves in Ancient Babylon" You start to think of yourself as an expert in the history of stoves, their genesis and usage throughout time. But you yourself have decided that no stove is good enough for you. You're going to eat that turkey raw, because no stove is perfect. ...then you die of food poisoning.... *THE END* (Again....me musing aloud)

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/collective-conscience-educational-context-society-saumya-sharma-sam-/ Collective conscious or collective conscience (French: conscience collective) is the set of shared beliefs, ideas and moral attitudes which operate as a unifying force within society. The term was introduced by the French Émile Durkheim in his Division of Labour in Society in 1893.

You ought to google once in a while. https://www.thoughtco.com/collective-consciousness-definition-3026118

Life is so much better when you don't let curiosity overtake you by unblocking bad smells you previously blocked.

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.

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.

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.

I'm waiting for the link you were going to provide w/the analysis of the stone which will make the case for your conclusion. I've googled, but I haven't found anything yet. I'm assuming you have it, otherwise you wouldn't have said it was poured concrete.

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.

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.

I know they don't exist any more, but they did. PS. You want I should show you my green bible and list of "Back Calls"? Shibboleths are shibboleths.

"However, firstly the scriptures are for the Anointed ones, secondly the scriptures do not apply to false religions. Otherwise that scripture would take away a person's own conscience. " Prove this by scripture. Otherwise you should really stop while you're ahead, you keep digging that hole you're in you'll never get out.

Sure they do. For that matter so do CO's and DO's. BTW The same is true for the prophets. "27 About noon E·liʹjah began to mock them and say: “Call out at the top of your voice! After all, he is a god!+ Perhaps he is deep in thought or he has gone to relieve himself.* Or maybe he is asleep and someone needs to wake him up!” - 1 Ki. 18:27 (paraphrasing the trash talking prophet ..."Baal IS a god after all. Maybe he had to go take a dump. Since he is a god that's got to be a massive dump.")

Thinking more on this. The attached pdf has this passage: The pastor steps up to the pulpit of his evangelical church to instruct the people on practical Christian living, especially in terms of how to function under God’s delegated authorities. The pastor begins by declaring that children are to obey their parents in the Lord, for this is right (Eph. 6:1). In response, the congregation bellows an enthusiastic “Amen!” The pastor proceeds to exhort everyone to submit themselves to the governing authorities of the state (Rom. 13:1). In response, the people shout a hearty “Amen!” The pastor moves on to charge wives to submit to their husbands as to the Lord (Eph. 5:22). In response, the church gives a more subdued and uncomfortable “Amen.” Finally, the pastor admonishes the church members to obey the church leaders and submit to their authority (Hebrews 13:17). In response, the congregation glowers at the pastor with suspicious eyes and murmur to themselves, “Whatever happened to liberty of conscience?” One can see the same response today in various KH's. Just how do opposers imagine they're obedient to Hebrews 13:17 as separate from any organization? (If they still imagine themselves to be Christian)

"4Jah Creates more spiritual food" I think you too make presumptions w/regard to the minds and motivations of "Ex-JW's". You probably barely know your own mind. "He that is trusting in his heart is stupid" - Proverbs 28:26

Two things. (on the blood issue) 1. No one can speak to all JW's and what they might or might not do in any given situation. As a group, you CAN crunch the numbers. 2. The doctrine is biblical in the sense that it is derived from the bible, as are pretty much every attempt at concretizing a biblical principle by any individual. The question is nuanced w/regard to the application of the underlying principle. Some have little to no capacity for nuance. (some may suggest that "nuance=loophole")

I appreciate the feedback, and I suppose anything not obvious has an element of controversy about it. What I see is (and now I'm addressing my personal fascinations w/various brain-body states and ways of interacting w/the world and why the differences and how to find common ground w/o giving important ground and how to help if possible anyone else who may be wrestling w/the same issues)...I've run into many people w/Aspergers or variously high-functioning Autistic people. The latter, one I know quite well - has a phenomenal memory, always knows the time w/o looking at a watch, always knows the amount in their bank account, always is on time, never misses an appointment. This one has issues with nuance in people and differences in conscience. She'll say "If they didn't mean what they wrote, then why did they write what they wrote?". Quite bleedingly literal. It seems that w/people like this, the black and white is stark. When the organization says something these autistic types have like Rain-Man a memory on everything they've said "exactly what they said", but of course w/o the biosphere of emotional content, social circumstances, allowances for error and the like they get critical and have really difficult times dealing w/changes. Of course this is the one type of person leaning out more towards individual conscience that I have more sympathy for because they almost seem pathologically limited in dealing w/change. https://www.integrityinc.org/signs-symptoms-of-high-functioning-autism/ (On the other hand I must be betraying myself in my own OCD fascinations. Reminds me of before I became a JW. I had a roommate who's GF was bipolar. I'd been studying the process of active listening and so when she was on a rather manic verbal episode I decided to engage w/her on her thoughts using active listening. About 8 hours later I was still going and the thought occurred to me "Who's manic now?")