Jump to content

James Thomas Rook Jr.

WHAT DID YOU LEARN THAT WAS NEW AT THE 2019 "LOVE NEVER FAILS" REGIONAL CONVENTION ?

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

JOHN BUTLER -
207
3475

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

But this brings me back to the point of whether that talk is given exactly  the same at every convention. 

However I do agree that humans are much more important than animals, and God and Christ are much more important than humans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Melinda Mills said:

Man was made in God's image and has the ability to love, appreciate wisdom, reasoning, music and poetry and worship. Animals can't do that.

Speaker missing to tell some things. Animals has not ability to do things as humans, but if God created them, He incorporated some qualities similar to humans. Or same as to humans but on different level. Searching for food, or even growing and collect food, creating family and offspring, care of them, fight for survive, showing affection to same and other species, etc. Cows give more milk after listening classical music :))) Speaker didn't done enough research on subject.

1 hour ago, Melinda Mills said:

Don't elevate animals to status of man.

Don't elevate humans to status of gods :))))   

Message has same principle, but speaker, i guess, missed to highlight and used The Same Principle and to made Parallel Lesson about same trap in spiritual interaction inside congregations and WT Society. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning "Animals being given undo importance" ....

We are very fragile, big ugly bags of mostly water and require a LOT of things :of the world to stay alive, and healthy, and emotionally stable.

I have 16 pet chickens ( two died of heat exhaustion, from being run around the yard by my dogs, after flying out of their temporary enclosure, and I buried them this morning in the yard with little plastic pipe "tombstones" which I melted into the side with a soldering iron their names and date of death, which was yesterday).

And yet ... when I die, I do not care if I am just left where I fall, or someone puts my remains in a dumpster.

And yet ... today at Golden Corral, my wife and I ate fried chicken, and I pondered "Am I a hypocrite, for loving both live chickens ... and those crispy fried??"

I looked at myself in the mirror, and noticed my eyes are in front (predator), and the chickens' eyes are on the side of their heads (prey), and decided that  that is the natural order of things, and I should just get used to it, without recriminations.

Besides .... "Love Never Fails" .... and when I die, I will probably be too tough to eat, and with the fried  chicken .... it's no one we know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Or same as to humans but on different level. Searching for food, or even growing and collect food, creating family and offspring, care of them, fight for survive, showing affection to same and other species, etc. Cows give more milk after listening classical music :))) Speaker didn't done enough research on subject.

I am sure the speaker wouldn't argue with you on that. But the main point remains: animals were not created in God's image, whereas humans were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Witness said:

If animals have the ability to be fearful, joyful, loyal, even hateful, they certainly have the ability to show love - deep affection for another animal or human.

I had a cat that would settled down in front of the stereo speaker to listen to classical music as soon as it began.  There must have been some sort of appreciation there, in the form of contentment or pleasure. 

I had a 5 year or so old Box Turtle ( tortoise, actually) that I rescued from a highway, and as I watched "him", ( and yes, you can tell...) it often occurred to me how ignorant we really are of what they think and feel ... and the colossal arrogance on people's part to assume they think less of their lives than we think of ours.

As I watched "Mr. Henry II", the thought occurred to me that beneath those plated decks might dwell the mind and heart of a great lover, and a consummate mathematician ... all day quietly working on equations for orbital mechanics, or parallel dimensions.

The things I have seen with my own eyes belies the arrogance and cluelessness of  Clergy who worship themselves.

When they pontificate about such things, they declare aloud their incompetence, and lack of credibility.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

As I watched "Mr. Henry II", the thought occurred to me that beneath those plated decks might dwell the mind and heart of a great lover, and a consummate mathematician ... all day quietly working on equations for orbital mechanics, or parallel dimensions.

You are getting close......awfully close. In fact, close enough. I will solve this baby for you.

Put your ear down to the turtle very very close and say just the right words, and he will explain the overlapping generations to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things we have to learn about the animals:

Adam was in the garden several years before Eve was created.  He saw animals dying and knew about death. Therefore he understood what would happen if he disobeyed.  Why did Jehovah not give or promise everlasting life to animals although they did not sin?

Why did not Jesus die for animals? 

 

------

(Exodus 21:28-32) 28 “If a bull gores a man or a woman and that one dies, the bull must be stoned to death and its meat is not to be eaten; but the owner of the bull is free from punishment. 29 But if a bull was in the habit of goring and its owner had been warned but he would not keep it under guard and it killed a man or a woman, the bull is to be stoned and its owner is also to be put to death. 30 If a ransom is imposed on him, he must give as the redemption price for his life all that may be imposed on him. 31 Whether it gored a son or a daughter, it is to be done to the bull’s owner according to this judicial decision. 32 If the bull gored a slave man or a slave girl, he will give the price of 30 shekels to that one’s master, and the bull will be stoned to death.

(Accounting with animals? but judgement had to be executed by man. Bull will not stone itself to death.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Melinda Mills said:

Why did not Jesus die for animals? 

I am not going to answer it for you.

1.)  Since the beginning of life on Earth there have been two kinds of animals .... those that eat plants, and those that eat each other.  This is the natural order of things, and as sentimental as I am about animals, I cannot ignore this scary fact.

That is obviously how life on Earth was designed, cartoon theology notwithstanding.

If the Lion, and the Lamb lay down together, it will be because the lamb is inside the lion.

To answer your question ... it was never God's intent to give animals everlasting life, and that includes pre- creation humans that evolved. Only the New Creation ... "Homo Theocraticus", was ever intended to have the opportunity for everlasting life.  Neanderthals and such just lived whatever they could manage and died. End of story.

2.) That is a good idea, not to provide an answer, because the very, very BEST answer would only be a best guess ... including no. 1, above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

But each of those interpretations was treated as knowledge when it was taught. Even though they turned out to be false, and required updating. Just because we like to avoid the word false, and call it "refinements" or "increasing light" changes nothing about the falsehood of the previously called knowledge.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck.

IT'S A DUCK!

A duck by any other name is still a duck!

 

....except of course, when there is a fear that if it is admitted to being a duck, the donations will stop.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

He saw animals dying and knew about death.

Possibility exist, but no Bible verse speaking about this idea, known to me, in that way. No Bible report exist about what Adam knew about death or about some other things.

5 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

Therefore he understood what would happen if he disobeyed. 

This is also just in sphere of our interpretations. :)) and on our conclusions about what they ,supposedly, see, know, understand etc, .... based on our own experiences and/or based on conclusions made by people lived before us. 

5 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

Why did Jehovah not give or promise everlasting life to animals although they did not sin?

Where and when JHVH promised Adam such thing, everlasting life ? He promised him/them dead if eating fruit. We don't know what JHVH "promised" to animal :)) .... at loud or in His own Thoughts.

5 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

Why did not Jesus die for animals? 

Because they not sinned :)) They not sinned because some other laws ran their living. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** it-1 p. 596 Death ***
Cause of Death in Humans. The first reference to death in the Scriptures occurs at Genesis 2:16, 17 in God’s command to the first man concerning the eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and bad, violation of which command would result in death. (See NW ftn.) However, death among animals as a natural process was evidently already in effect, since they are passed over completely in the Biblical presentation of the introduction of death into the human family. (Compare 2Pe 2:12.) The gravity of God’s warning about the death penalty for disobedience would therefore be understandable to his human son, Adam. Adam’s disobedience to his Creator brought death to him. (Ge 3:19; Jas 1:14, 15) Thereafter, Adam’s sin and its consequence, death, spread to all men.—Ro 5:12; 6:23.
 

(2 Peter 2:12) But these men, like unreasoning animals that act on instinct and are born to be caught and destroyed, speak abusively about things of which they are ignorant. They will suffer destruction brought on by their own destructive course,
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

2Pe 2:12.

But these people blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like unreasoning animals, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like animals they too will perish. 

I agree how people (me) do not understand many things and can blaspheme because that fact. Peter wrote those words some 4000 years after Adam and Eve stuff. So, he was also under reasoning that  prevailed in human society until then. Animals, he said, are "unreasoning", run by instinct... so animals, Peter conclude, are BORN to be caught and destroyed (slaughtered and eaten). That is in opposition to reports in Genesis where we can't see any verse who would said that God create animals to be born for for final purpose - to be destroyed. No verse, in this 3 chapters of Genesis, content some claim or possibility that animals are born to be hunted and eaten by other animals or by human.  But Bible say this:

    Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so. 

According to this direct JHVH words, it seems how Peter wrote information that is not quite full about relationship between human and animals and animals to animals from the begining!. He forget to mentioned how JHVH determined in advance what the food would be to humans and animals (fruit, plant and seed). Of course, reason for his mentioning animals in this chapter was another issue. I just want to put some other perspective about animals and their purpose and position before God and human. 

Peter based, i guess, his description about animals on other elements, as God's words to Noah, People Nature and People's mastering over nature and animal.

Yes, God created land animals and after he finished with those species, He said, Hey why not to create something different. I made several type of monkeys and this construction can be base for a little advanced Creature and I will give him much more than i gave to all other Dusts. I will put him to be Manager of all this.

At the end of Day 7, He not gave to Human more praise than to other animals. He "just" conclude how All created is Good.   :)))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't go to the convention, but I can summarize what it may have been about and not what I learned but what I already know. 

Love your neighbor as yourself, unless your neighbor professes to be a Christian. 

You must love the governing body just as much as you love Jehovah, because they are Jehovah in a sense.

No one else on earth has as much love as jehovahs witnesses.

Kicking a 15 year old out of your house because they got baptized at 6 years old and started to question the governing body is the most loving thing you can do for your child.

Jehovahs love for you is conditional on you loving the governing body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Matthew9969 said:

Kicking a 15 year old out of your house because they got baptized at 6 years old and started to question the governing body is the most loving thing you can do for your child.

This does not happen.

I would not say that it never ever happens. It may. It is a big world with many people and you never know what individuals might do. But no way would it ever be sanctioned by the organization. Nor is 6 an age that I have ever heard of for someone being baptized. Again, it may have happened, but I know of no examples. One of my kids wanted to get baptized at 10, and was advised to wait. (and was bummed about it) However, another was baptized a 9–something which was most unusual, but not unheard of. I think the tendency is to recommend more years of age today—mid teens is what I typically see.

More likely the case presented is the 15 year old running away due to an atmosphere he/she thought too “restrictive” and then retroactively spinning it as being “kicked out” of the home. Kids locking horns with parents and running away from home is a theme almost as old as time. In this case her parents following the lead of the organization is presented as the trigger—and may actually be the trigger—but it is always something. It is not new.

Malcontents complain at great length over the video shown at a convention of a teenaged girl “kicked out” of her house for immorality. Were they to be more honest, they would acknowledge that 

1) she ran away from home,

2) her parents did not want her to go,

3) (admittedly speculative) she thereafter represented the situation as being “kicked out” due to the repressive rule of the Governing Body. (Actually, the girl of the video probably did not, because she did return, but many girls of reality do just that.)

It was so with a star witness at the Russian trial that resulted in a countrywide ban. She complained of the oppressive tactics of the organization. When asked to give an example, she offered up her being ejected for her “not officially sanctioned” relationship with a man. Here she is “shacking up,” an action once universally condemned by most of society, and virtually ALL of religious society, and she spins it as a philosophical disagreement with the Witness organization!

Adhering to Bible moral standards on matters of sexuality was once commonplace, and what the video portrays would have once been spun as “tough love.” 

I have been going through a Great Courses series on CD lately. The narrator (Prof Patrick Allitt) observes that in 1960 a child out of wedlock was an absolute shocker to general society. Fifteen years later it was commonplace. Those condemning the video are essentially those condemning a traditional generation for not more quickly falling into line with the “new morality”—spinning it as a conflict with the Witness organization, when in actually it is a conflict with the morality of the Bible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

3) (admittedly speculative) she thereafter represented the situation as being “kicked out” due to the repressive rule of the Governing Body. (Actually, the girl of the video probably did not, because she did return, but many girls of reality do just that.)

I found it curious how you phrased "".... but many girls of reality ... ", as if Witness girls are somehow divorced from reality..

... merely a curious semantic slip ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the "next town over"  Congregation one Elder had two daughters, who got multiple Tattoos, (shoulder and base of spine), and Dad threw them out ( I do not know the age, but one of my sons dated the older  Sister, while he was in High School.....),  The younger sister was "lost" to the world, the older one came back and married an Elder about 40 years older than she was.. (raised eyebrows and astonishment all the way around...).

When speaking about people ... there is truly INFINITE variety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites





×
×
  • 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.