xero

I've been feeling weird of late w/regard to prayers. I'm praying, like Jesus told me, to the Father. I ask him and talk to him on the basis of Jesus and his office as high priest and king, however if prayer is respectful speech to God, then what is respectful speech to Jesus? Am I not supposed to talk to him? All authority is given him in heaven and on earth by Jehovah, so recently I've been feeling that I'm treating Jesus like a simple messenger and go-between, which he certainly IS as a mediator, but not at all simple. But am I not allowed to talk to him? Is he not my Lord and Savior? I talk to the brothers. I listen to them. They give advice (mostly biblical) but it seems I never talk to Jesus, but always past him or through him. Of course Christendom flips this around and never talks to Jehovah, or confuses Jesus w/Jehovah or the trinity. Anyway...I'm just thinking aloud. https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/wp20150101/should-we-pray-to-jesus/ It just feels wrong to not talk to your Lord and Savior.

It's not like JW's are the only ones. SDA (Seventh Day Adventists) are equally punctillious, but about 1844 and they use Daniel and some other interesting ways of parsing scripture. I don't fault people for keeping alert. I am trying to process all of this over again because some interpretations don't seem so solid. Of course the people in the 1st century likewise had a lot of speculations and the like, but that didn't invalidate their basic claims. So the deal for me is: 1. It has to be an organization 2. It can't support the trinity, hellfire, eternal torment or the like 3. It can't blow off biblical morality Problems w/SDA's is that they used to be antitrinitarian, but they caved. Of course they have other problems, like the sabbath (but the point is that they make a point of taking a stand on something). I remember asking someone (as an atheist) who was religious if he thought his religion was the truth and he said no. I had to laugh at the idiocy.

Reminds me of the brothers who studied w/me. This one brother would bonk me on the head w/his bible when I went on a rant. At other times he say the angels were running around in front of my mouth trying to throw some salt on the words coming out of my mouth. Not surprising that it happened occasionally that when a HH brought up something designedly antagonistic, I've said a few times "Are you asking because you really want to know, or are just trying to start something?"

All true. It is hard waiting in expectation. I've found it better if I keep looking at the Bible from as many different viewpoints as I can find. This makes the truth stand out by way of comparison. Even false expectations by other groups can be oddly encouraging. I was watching this four part movie "Noah" on Amazon and the first part was pretty good. It dealt w/all the various evidences for the flood. The next part made it clear that the guy who was producing the film was a seventh day adventist, and quite sincere and though I found fault with a number of things, I didn't find fault with the desire to get right with God and try to understand prophesy in a more than cursory manner. Fortunately the WT index had a 1997 article on SDA's and their interpretations. Still a lot of what was said in the movie I found myself resonating to. Much like when I read how certain Jewish holidays aren't required, but in and of themselves aren't sinful - any more than trying to follow the law (as an exercise, though not a requirement) could be an interesting and useful exercise. Even people like Mike Heiser say things and write things I've found of interest (though obviously I'm not a devotee). Or say the Portland, Oregon group that puts together the animated youtube series. "The Bible Project". I've found these interesting as well. I know others aren't interested in these things to the same degree and even would find it odd (or dangerous), I still read all of it - even when it's like nails on a chalkboard to listen to some of the arguments. I just want to know where people are coming from in their faith (or lack thereof).

In fact never. I suppose everyone is a "witness" to something. Perhaps some would like to be, but they (like a few I've studied with) could never get their behavior enough in control to make it to baptism. In point of fact it seems it was a kindness of sorts to not allow them to get baptized as they would have soon run afoul and ended up in a judicial situation. Which is sortof odd in a way. You DO want people to get baptized, but this is a symbol, and is ostensibly representing a person who has rejected his former way of life and accepted the office, authority and disciplining of Jehovah, his Son and the holy spirit in its operation. (Of course I know I'm no paragon of virtue in the aforementioned either). Of course this is neither here nor there as it goes. There are times when it doesn't matter who a person represents him or herself as - you see what they say and what they do and you respond accordingly. (Or as in a cool feature of the site - you make them disappear)

Blocking you forever.

How so? You are the one who is placing yourself in the judgment seat? You are the one who presumes to know the infallible will of Jehovah. And if you don't, you ought to stuff a sock in it.

I'm actually feeling kindly towards you for suggesting I might be like Tom. We need more brothers like Tom. Irregardless of what "some" may think.

Right. It's all been wheat and weeds until the angels start reaping. Of course YOU as an individual absolutely are judged if you don't try your best to follow and admit to following your God given conscience. Lets take a Catholic who is sincere. He could sincerely be wrong (or right), but if wrong the scriptures say he will be beaten with fewer strokes. "48 But the one who did not understand and yet did things deserving of strokes will be beaten with few. " - Luke 12:48. So take me. I absolutely know that God exists. I absolutely know that the Bible is the word of God. I absolutely know God is NOT a trinity, that there is no immortal soul, that hell is NOT a place of eternal torment. I know that fornication is wrong, along with homosexuality, murder and a number of other things. If I go to some church or synagogue or mosque or whatever and these people are teaching these lies and even doing a lot of these immoral things, then I'm willfully placing myself is a bad situation and I deserve whatever beatings come my way, even annihilation. (never mind that the only thing that's lawful for me is for me to be dead as I'm a sinner and have absolutely no right to life). Of course I don't say ANY are good. Jesus himself said no one was good but God. So by that none are "good". But I know that's not what you're after here. But you do correctly get that there are in fact nominal Christians and some call themselves Jehovah's Witnesses and they aren't "good" or even "right". However I suspect that these are quite few and inconsistent if these are bad as it's pretty darn hard to keep evil under wraps for long. The truth is that anyone who is obviously evil can't keep that to himself for long. Looking at JW's and asking if there is or are incentives to doing wrong, or promulgating falsehoods, you'd be hard pressed as it's easier to do this as an independent baptist, or non-denominational sort of person. Have JW's gotten things wrong? Yes. What things are wrong now? You decide. How would you go about "weeding" even though it's not your job to do that? Show me scriptures which show that true Christians are going to get it right and get it right all the time. You can't because those scriptures don't exist. We have a lot of people who get hung up on this or that piddly minnow of a fault which to them is like sand in their eye, and sure! A grain of sand in your eye can hurt. Until you get it out. Sometimes you realize that YOU put that sand grain in your own darn eye and blamed the organization that it didn't make it impossible for grains of sand to exist. When you do, you realize that maybe if you'd done something differently you wouldn't have gone down the path you went down, and now you have to figure out how to get back. Question is - are you humble enough to do it? So yeah. Wheat and Weeds. Doesn't mean that no organization isn't better than or used more by Jehovah than another, because I think JW's do a pretty good job even though they do have grains of sand flying here and there and the more you know about the scriptures head-wise the more you know that people have a lot of ideas in their heads that just aint so scripturally. But the question is, "Did Jehovah pick you or me to straighten everyone out?" - probably not. Sometimes it's right to be wrong or even let yourself be wronged to keep the peace. (as annoying as that might be). I think conscience is a thing people feel they need to share with everyone, like a bumper sticker. It isn't. Your conscience is your own. The organization doesn't ask that you abandon your conscience even though some might say that if they can't blurt out every idea they have at the Watchtower Study w/o self-censoring then they aren't "free" and the organization is censoring and crushing their conscience. Is it? Do you insist that everyone must share your thoughts? Didn't the scriptures say that if you keep asking and knocking it will be opened "TO YOU"? So why do you insist that others MUST look at and see everything that you in your own peculiar way have decided is an improvement on scriptural understanding? This is a defect of opposers, though they don't see it that way. They don't get that IF Jehovah has shared some awesome little secret w/them then maybe they should keep it to themselves. Maybe it isn't an awesome little secret and maybe it's not Jehovah who has shared this delicacy w/them. Maybe it's just them being weird. Always good to "not think more of yourself than is necessary to think".

This phrase "Your ignorance perceives you" makes no sense unless you are personifying a quality, namely "ignorance" and suggesting that this personified quality has knowledge of the self that the self is unaware of. If it's an intentional usage, it's Yogi-Berra-like in a clever way, but this cleverness is a bit self-masturbatory if it's genuine because the one to whom it's directed would fail to understand it. The latter statement is true, but if we're using "stupid" in the manner of the bible, we'd say that these things are capable of being known by the stupid, but the presumptuousness of the "stupid one" prevents him from acting in wisdom.

This is like one of those games where you try to guess the missing words in the phrase. I suppose this is what happens when you block people who post manifestos as replies.

2 Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are,+ if you judge; for when you judge another, you condemn yourself, because you who judge practice the same things. - Ro. 2:2

That's what all the crazy people say. "You're just jealous that the voices don't talk to you!"

I don't believe publications, I read them and make up my own mind. The publications themselves along with the publishers don't claim to be prophets. It's opposers who get hung up on punctuation because they don't get that it's all wheat and weeds until the harvest. Opposers think it should all be wheat. But then again they reject the bible too. This is the same style of argument you see in politics. Like say you might say that you're a democrat, and I say "So you're the party of slavery!" and then you say "I don't believe that!" and I say "Yeah, well all the slave holders were democrats. Republicans were the ones who opposed slavery." Thus someone quotes C. T. Russell or some other older pub.

Most of the people I've seen who professed to be were on the "needs his meds" side of things.

There's no shortage of mentally ill people among JW's that's for sure. Shows what a tolerant and welcoming lot they are.

You've judged that they have, and then argue as if you've made your point which you haven't. One wonders why you continue to persist in your failure to accept that this is what you're doing?

I don't think you know what the word "mercenary" means. It has nothing to do w/aggression.

I just think of the scripture that says "the taking of offense rests in the bosom of the stupid ones"

As an aside, people who are offended or disgusted by the behavior of other people are often putting themselves in the judgment seat. There is a natural disgust reflex, but the opposer especially the moral opposer who places themselves in the judgment seat often has an unnatural and self induced disgust based on his or her own presumptuous standards. In truth, they have no right to be offended or disgusted by anything but themselves as they fall short of Jehovah's standards. Of course rather than focusing on their own offensive, disgusting behavior from Jehovah's standards, they presume to be clean. In this presumption they are the filthiest of them all and the most disgusting.

Which is why I suspect the bar to pass through to the 1000 year reign to be lower depending on the individual, but arguing about not doing this or that thing because some individual has an opinion is to miss the point. Exactly. Not to mention the fact that even now not doing what's right is bad for you as an individual.

Not necessarily. The WTBTS understands the former point correctly, however they're not dogmatic about whom might be in each group. "...I could be arguing in my spare time"

If you could study Hemingway's style and try to copy that, maybe someone might listen. You jabber on and on. It's like nails on a chalkboard going through anything you've posted. I say this with all due respect and when I say "nails on a chalkboard" I mean that in a good way.

4 Was the baptism of John from heaven or from men?”* 5 Then they drew conclusions among themselves, saying: “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ he will say, ‘Why did you not believe him?’ 6 But if we say, ‘From men,’ the people one and all will stone us, for they are convinced that John was a prophet.”+ 7 So they replied that they did not know its source. 8 Jesus said to them: “Neither am I telling you by what authority I do these things.” (let the reader use discernment) That's all you're getting for now because this exchange is less appealing than watching paint dry.

Wrong answer. It means you don't know your bible. 21 He [JEHOVAH] changes times and seasons,+Removes kings and sets up kings,+Gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to those with discernment.+ - Daniel 2:21 17 This is by the decree of watchers,+ and the request is by the word of the holy ones, so that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind+ and that he gives it to whomever he wants, and he sets up over it even the lowliest of men.” - Daniel 4:17 10 So Pilate said to him: “Are you refusing to speak to me? Do you not know that I have authority to release you and I have authority to execute you?”* 11 Jesus answered him: “You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been granted to you from above. This is why the man who handed me over to you has greater sin.” - John 19:10-11