Jump to content

Jack Ryan

All Eight Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses members are now individually named on two New York Child Victims Act case documents

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Jack Ryan -
4Jah2me -
656
14188

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Kirk discovered aliens that looked pretty much like me and you, though they were more polite than you. At most they had green skin. But there were some knockout babes among them, let me tell you, and Kirk made out with every one of them.

The boneheads took a few more thousand years of evolution to appear and were not to be found until Picard’s time. Later there appeared the Borg, who very much resemble those who oppose the Work today.

This guy really does think he's funny and astute!

Share this post


Link to post

16 hours ago, AlanF said:

Where do you get all this nonsense? Do you just make it all up?

Not much of a thinker are you? Your dismissive attitude proves my point..... You have never thought of these issues in your life before? Just dismissal? ..... 

In  the Seinfeld show the female character used to comment about someone being " spunge-worthy".  By your dismissive attitude of important questions surrounding evolution and atheism..... you are proving yourself  "unworthy " of my time and attention.

The most important atheist debaters of our era have taken the time to consider these questions. You are obviously too smart for your own good .......you do not even consider them and give replies like the above......

As I have said before - what is a person like you doing on this forum if not  with the single purpose  to irritate...  The subject originally was about child molestation and people going to court for perceived negligence. 

Atheists inherited their morals from the Christian-judeo traditions.  Before the Jewish law given to Moses, most nations burnt their children in fires and slept with whatever and whomever they wished.  Male and female fertility rites on the mountains.......

As I demonstrated before - if one believes purely that  there is no God and we come from a soup by chance ..... no amount of logic will give you any morals.

20 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

them too. And i was excited when was able to get "Aid to Bible understanding" in 1984 in Vienna Betel one evening in September.  

I had such a large collection of books but my moving from country to country  has made me get rid of most of them now. I had bibles with Jehovahs name in, in several African languages, too.

The" Insight" online has this advantage which I like very much..... one can look up any supporting scripture on the spot... and it usually gives one something you have not thought of before.  They also update it regularly -i think-  because the history updates include the newest discoveries.  I like to revisit old subjects and get the newest info. 

15 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

in seeing in all life on Earth the directed hand of God.

At least you acknowledge the design component ...... 

What is your thoughts on the second law of thermodynamics?  

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, Witness said:

I’m sorry, but you are blind to the true motives behind your leadership. As I have said, telling the

Why are most of the anointed happy in their congregations, giving spiritual assistance locally, using their wisdom where it is needed, and  in unity of mind and spirit they help to get the preaching work done - which is after all the main commission given to all Christian's?

Why is it only a few who say they need to be "feeding " others but by their attitudes want to actually "lord" it over the teaching of the congregation?  These ones do not even submit to the local congregations workings, not assisting the sheep, not carrying the sheep like a shepherd, not feeding the sheep in their congregation, not preaching to the lost sheep in their community - but actively going out of their way (at the smallest opportunity) to defame all JWs, their congregations, the preaching work they do and those who are leading the way to provide appropriate food for our time....... the nourishing food we need now is to build unity of purpose, faith, endurance,  and genuine self-sacrificing love - only this will get us ready to pass through Armageddon.

 

15 hours ago, AlanF said:

Hitchens almost always came out on top. He mopped the floor with his opponents.

This is cult-like. When an articulate celebrity goes on stage and his followers are so enamoured of him that they do not even see the flaws in the arguments.  

I watched several of his debates - even the one against his brother - he is impressively  articulate but that is all. 

Yes- I guess I'm a moron ...... so I wonder what that makes you?   Since you have not answered any of the most important points I have raised against your religion,  except raising insults.

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

GB can gather together then so can other Anointed

It is their job to meet together to coordinate activities where they are serving. 

 A meeting of only anointed at congregation level makes it exclusive - excluding the other sheep.  My experience tells me it is practical as well as scriptural decision. Anointed are just as prone to sin as any of us..... and may soon develop a superiority and start drawing sheep after themselves......... as happened jn the first century congregation.  We see many instances where people were drawing a following after themselves. They became wolves.

This is why I constantly say:  there us some hidden motive behind these persons which want this,  which they are not prepared to acknowledge.  They accuse the GB of hidden motives but this is an example of projecting their own sin on others. Pride has crept in somewhere -  to the extent that they are prepared to go against Jehovahs people as a nation at every opportunity.  They have no wish to feed the sheep but somehow to "influence" the sheep to your own benefit....No sacrificing love in any of it.

15 hours ago, Tom Foolery said:

Hitchens

Yea, I typed it wrong late at night.  The guy is dead for more than two years .... not relevant as a person any more..... BUT the questions about "future " expectations,  morality, consciousness, language (which only humans have)  remain.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, Arauna said:

 A meeting of only anointed at congregation level makes it exclusive - excluding the other sheep.

In addition, anointed Christians do not view themselves as being part of an elite club. They do not seek out others who claim to have the same calling, hoping to bond with them or endeavoring to form private groups for Bible study. (

    Hello guest!
) Such efforts would cause divisions within the congregation and work against the holy spirit, which promotes peace and unity.   wt 1/2016, "We Want to Go With You"

1) "elite club", 2) "private groups for Bible study", 3) "cause division", 4) "against holy spirit"

I am interested to know on what evidences, GB made conclusion about this 4 points?? and how other rank and file members came to same conclusion as GB, how anointed want to separate themselves in such a way and a measure to be considered as promoter of this 4 points?. This doesn't mean how some of them (anointed) are not in such state of mind to think about self as more spiritual than somebody else. But is this general problem that includes ALL anointed? All other "groups" inside WT Society and JW organization can do the same, to act according to 4 points. 

I think how GB need to offer proper, trustful evidences for conclusion and advice, for warning they made. Our comments about this, mostly are based on few premises.

For example: Can we trust GB research and objectivity on this. Did they made any research, and how they collected information's how some anointed made private study. What is problem if they gathered? People doing that all the time outside of congregation. Solely gathering can't be reason for ban they want to implement (not only to anointed, but to all JW members).      

Who gave power to GB to make decision how you or other members have to behave on such issue. To make warning that you are not entitled to have private Bible researches? What is PRIVATE in GB minds? 

I will not going to more words. Just like to make thinking question: What if this "private groups of Bible studies" and gatherings (spiritual hiding) in "caves" aka homes are in fact what this verse speaking about?

Nevertheless, I have reserved seven thousand in Israel— all whose knees have not bowed to Baal and whose mouths have not kissed him.” - 1. kings 19

 

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

"food at the proper time" might actually mean "cartoo

I wish there were cartoons when my children were small.  Food for the young ones at the proper time- something they can relate to -  is also important. They should not be overlooked.

Share this post


Link to post

When my children were young, preschool, at the Kingdom Hall I required them to be quiet and respectful, but did not require them to pay attention.  I let them scribble, and do coloring books, and play silently with very small toys in their seats.

Today my oldest is an elder, and all three are strong and active in the truth of the Truth (to the best of my knowledge), have very good jobs and married well ... VERY well. 

It was more important to me for them to have HAPPY childhoods.

Meantime, I know many elders whose children all left.

.... but then again ... I am a Barbarian and a loose cannon.

...  silly me.

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, AlanF said:

fact is that a number of fossils over more than 10 million years show the two-joint arrangement,

Evading the real question.  The cambrian explosion refers to an explosion of so many different kinds of animals in  a short period of time without any hint of " precursors"  found in earlier layers of the earth........... and you turn it into an argument of the jawbone during this time - totally missing the point.   

Explain the sudden appearance of wings, explain the explosion of all the different kinds of mammals without any hint of it in previous layers of the earth.   The jawbone is a side issue..

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Punctuated Creation's hard evidence

The question is not:  how stable is the structure AFTER  it has formed because we know from obserbation in nature that species can adapt to its environment.  Changes,  such as Darwin's finches, whose beaks changed when the food source changed and then changed back again when the food source changed again.... but never changed Io a different species of bird.....STABILITY OF SPECIES is confirmed.

But the Cambrian explosion was too short  and sudden  to produce / originate such a variety of complex animals..... which  brings us back to the " origin" of all species"   

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, AlanF said:

is just old-time creationism in a tuxedo, as one critic said.

And this is just a punch line.  The proof  is the eating of the pudding...... so solid proof is needed.  

 

16 hours ago, AlanF said:

Animals killing animals for food goes back 550 million years. Is that "good"?

I have a problem with their dates...... but this will open up another subject.  So I leave at that.

 

17 hours ago, AlanF said:

Her reliance on creationist sources

Wrong again!   I look at both sides. You assume that all JWs only drink at mommies JWs  breast..... how silly of you. Some of us grow up and mature.  On the other hand you only drink from the extremely  deceptive bottle of evolution.. and have scorn for anything that points to anything other than that....... now that is NOT smart.........just another religion masquerading as a science. 

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, AlanF said:

This guy really does think he's funny and astute!

I admit that there is limited value to bringing in Kirk and Picard. But I have sort of been on a kick with them lately elsewhere. Not long ago I flew back from Florida, where I had attended a wedding, and I found myself in the Shatner seat overlooking the wing, but there were no incidents.

I confess that I am having a hard time adapting to Alan. I need some punctuated equilibrium in the worst way. I simply can’t enter that anal world of his and debate him over every syllable, which is plainly his purpose in life. I see what happens to those that do. They hold their own very well, and make powerful points, but it does them absolutely no good. I know he is not a bot (I think I floated that possibility long ago) but he behaves so much like one—impervious to any thought not his own, his replies regularly and machine-like laced with insults and taunts—that I think I could even be forgiven were I to say it again.

10 hours ago, Arauna said:

As I have said before - what is a person like you [Alan] doing on this forum if not  with the single purpose  to irritate

Yes, it would appear that is his purpose. And so he threatens to destroy it will his ill-manners no less than AllanSmith did. Enter a discussion with Alan, and discover that he simply becomes like a hurricane over warm water, yielding nothing, spewing insults, crowing over his intellectual superiority, dismissively uttering the most pompous and overconfident nonsense—that he has “disproved God,” even baiting and laying traps: “Tom, you’re killing me!!!” hoping that I will hurl back something inadvisable about “killing.” He is so transparent as he carries on as though so clever.

I mean, I should ignore the idiot. I know I should. But I come on the forum that I have come to regard as mine and I see his ugly puss doing all the above ugly things and I overshoot. It is good to view life as discipline—whether it is intended that way or not is immaterial—but by viewing it that way you can benefit from the curve balls that it throws at you. So it is with Alan. I will learn to adapt. Or else the Librarian (that old hen) will once more tell me to knock it off and then I will see if I am capable of that or not, or maybe I will hand the torch to Robert Cumulus. He’s plenty smart, let me tell you, and he is waiting in the wings right now.

Man, what an odious character!

Share this post


Link to post

The following narrative was recently posted to the website of a JW critic. It shows that, in addition to the Governing Body's continued inadequate policies regarding Child Sexual Abuse, it continues to practice Adult Emotional Abuse.

 

<<
I was brought into the “truth” in 1969. When married & wanted children I was advised by the else’s & others that now (1973) that because we were so near to the end of this system that it was a really bad idea. I was told how hard it would be to care for a child on the lead up & also through Armageddon.  I was brow beaten, & bullied by many of the brothers & sisters, all bar one, an elderly sister who had also been told back in the 50’s exactly the same thing. Her son & daughter would never have been born if she’d listened to the elders back then, so her advice was this, if you really want children, you must have the faith that Jehovah will see you through.

I went on to have 4 children, who have all left the truth because they were bitterly disappointed in the organisation as a whole. I was a sister for 34 years. I was abused by my husband, witnessed many kinds of terrible things that were covered up, including incest, slander,adultary many forms of dishonesty & thieving . The hypocrisy was rife. One day, sitting in a meeting I looked around me. There was more than 60 witnesses attending. I looked at each in turn & thought of what they were truly like & out of all of them, I knew in my heart that only 4 were truly decent, genuine, honest & loving people. I was just so disgusted that I got up & walked out. I didn’t return for years, then one Sunday, I decided to go to a meeting just to see if anything had changed. After the meeting several sisters gathered around me, telling me how much I’d been missed & how pleased they were to see me because they cared so much. I lived only a few minutes walk from the Kingdom Hall. My street must have been worked many times during those years & yet, not a single member of that congregation, none of those “loving caring sisters” none of the elders, no not a one had ever picked up the phone to talk to me, knocked on my door when they were in the street, NOT A ONE bothered to ask me why I’d left. Bear in mind here that I’d committed no sin, id not been disassociated,, or disfellowshipped.
 
So, total hypocrites  forever.

This religion is nothing but a brainwashing, hierarchical, cult, for people who get off on having a holier than thou attitude. Their teachings can be pulled apart with ease by anyone with a questioning mind. The trouble is that those within the organisation are not ALLOWED to question, or to have an open mind.

MY ADVICE........ STAY WAY, WAY AWAY . I wasted 34 years of life & was treated badly the whole time. I now have bitter regrets that I was ever involved.
>>

 

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, AlanF said:

There was more than 60 witnesses attending. I looked at each in turn & thought of what they were truly like & out of all of them, I knew in my heart that only 4 were truly decent, genuine, honest & loving people. I was just so disgusted that I got up & walked out. I didn’t return for years

This is true in my congregation, too. None of them are any good—not even four. They are all villains. They are so hypocritical that they smile at me and say Hello but their scheme doesn’t work. I know they are all backstabbers. It used to stymie me but I have learned to whirl around like Chuck Norris and take them out with a kick to the head when they are doing this, which is always.

 

45 minutes ago, AlanF said:

I was told how hard it would be to care for a child on the lead up & also through Armageddon. 

Today I read that the US population is not having enough babies to reproduce itself, so those pushy Witness elders you speak of must have influenced a lot of people!

    Hello guest!

Every time I meet someone who says, “I would never bring a child into this crazy world,” I curse those Witnesses—making so many people think (through “mind-control!”) that this world is a hotbed of problems when everyone should know that there are none to speak of.

 

45 minutes ago, AlanF said:

I was a sister for 34 years. I was abused by my husband, witnessed many kinds of terrible things that were covered up, including incest, slander,adultary many forms of dishonesty & thieving . The hypocrisy was rife

This is why cop shows are so prolific on television for the last 40 years. Viewers cheer at cops chasing down all those wicked Witnesses who are doing evil things.

(Notice how the above reproduces as: “AlanF said: ‘I was a sister for 34 years.’” Notice how I refrained from saying, “So THAT is your problem! Notice the commendable self-control.)

Share this post


Link to post

.... as usual ... today's DILBERT Cartoon exactly highlights anything anybody is talking about, today.

... a seemingly endless supply of "cartoons at the proper time".

... eat your ink filled hearts out, Caleb and Sophia!

dt191128.gif

6 hours ago, Arauna said:

But the Cambrian explosion was too short  and sudden  to produce / originate such a variety of complex animals..... which  brings us back to the " origin" of all species"   

It's turtles .... all the way down.

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I admit that there is limited value to bringing in Kirk and Picard. But I have sort of been on a kick with them lately elsewhere. Not long ago I flew back from Florida, where I had attended a wedding, and I found myself in the Shatner seat overlooking the wing, but there were no incidents.

I love it when I recognize an obtuse, arcane reference ... like visiting the Twilight Zone, on an expense account.

dt960320dhc0.gif

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I love it when I recognize an obtuse, arcane reference ... like visiting the Twilight Zone, on an expense account.

Okay. Genuine smile at that one, thank you. I remember that episode. And there is a brother in the hall who recalls how terrified he was at the beautiful woman waking up to see the goons that had done the plastic surgery reconstructing her face. 

You might know that Rod Serling was from Binghamton NY, not too far away from me. I follow his daughter on Twitter. Recently we visited the town, and wrote up all the Twilight Zone memorabilia there:

    Hello guest!

Share this post


Link to post

I love tacos.....

 

I'm about to give up on this entire site.

Or....

Maybe there should only be one thread... called Jehovah's Witnesses .... and we have ONLY one singe topic for everybody?

Let's try that....

I'll ask the @admin if we can start a club like that and freeze this one.

Oh... and @TrueTomHarley aka... a million other usernames....

Could I have the address to your blog again? I seem to have misplaced it.... in EVERY SINGLE THREAD ON THIS SITE!

 

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, The Librarian said:

Could I have the address to your blog again? I seem to have misplaced it.... in EVERY SINGLE THREAD ON THIS SITE!

Look closer. It’s in there.

(sorry)

Still, many posts on controversial things I have also posted here, word for word. (Not this one about the Twilight Zone, but you must admit it does perfectly fit in with JTR’s comment.) I have no problem retrieving them from your site, and not mine, but I can not find them so easily on yours. The “Content I Started” tab includes all comments on those threads, even AlanF telling me that I suck. If I readily find a list of my headings, I would link from their. Sorry, ma’am, I really am trying to comply

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Sounds good to me .... I had hoped that "The Archive" would really be an archive, but it has changed formats so many times I have no idea how to access postings from five or six years ago. 

Yes... between WT, Google, Tumblr..... This has been the most stable platform yet that I have been able to land on in the last decade.

Sadly though... the "archive" is in Google's hand now....

And the threads don't offer an easy way to find stuff without going through the search feature...

I feel your pain.

I'm open to ideas guys...

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, The Librarian said:

Maybe there should only be one thread... called Jehovah's Witnesses .... and we have ONLY one singe topic for everybody?

Let's try that....

I'll ask the @admin if we can start a club like that and freeze this one.

This is just your librarian sense of order kicking in. Far more preferable is the current system, where the topic is adhered to for a time, and even revisited, than a giant-magamall site where nobody will be able to keep up.

Share this post


Link to post

It's painfully clear that Arauna, despite her blustering overconfidence, is an especially unclear thinker. This appears in her posts in many ways, such as responding to things that were never said, all manner of sidestepping and ignoring of arguments, bringing in non sequiturs of various sorts, and even outright lying.

Arauna has also complained that I've not answered her challenges, but anyone who reads my careful and detailed responses knows that's not true. True, I've not responded to some posts, but I've usually commented that those are simply too ridiculous to bother with.

This post will be a case in point. Arauna will ignore almost all of it.

And of course, I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't, with hypocrites like TrueTomHarley complaining that my detailed debunkings are too long, and hypocrites like Arauna complaining that I don't respond at all, with both of them hypocritically failing to respond to most of the content of my posts.

One of the clearest proofs of unclear thinking is Arauna's propensity for cutting out important parts of what she responds to, and only commenting on the misrepresentations that are left. Below we'll see several examples.

Arauna had said, among other nonsense:

Quote

    . . . The argument that atheism can provide morals is false. . .

I responded, in part:

Quote

    As usual you're so far off the beam that you're not even wrong.
    
    Where do you get all this nonsense? Do you just make it all up?

    
Rather than giving an actual answer, Arauna immediately descends into the ad hominem:

Quote

Not much of a thinker are you? Your dismissive attitude proves my point..... You have never thought of these issues in your life before? Just dismissal? .....

But I've given much thought to issues like these. And as I've pointed out before, Arauna really has no idea what atheism entails. She has a grossly skewed view of it, borrowed from her reading of non-JW Christian apologists. To clear that up, note what I told James Thomas Rook on page 50 of this thread:

<<  And while I'm at it, I'll state for the record that almost no religious apologists seem to understand what "atheism" means. While it can mean "belief that no gods exist", most of the time self-described atheists like me mean that "I do not believe in any gods". Do you understand the difference? It's a big difference, because it's not logically possible to know that no "gods" exist in the entire universe, but it's quite reasonable not to believe in any gods, just as it's reasonable not to believe in the Tooth Fairy without being able to prove that it doesn't exist. Remember that most religious people are atheists with respect to all gods but their own. Real atheists just go one god further.

For more on that, read Dawkins' The God Delusion, where he proposes a scale of belief from 1 to 7. Total belief in God rates a 1, total disbelief a 7. He and I claim to be about 6.5. >>

Of course, if Arauna reads that, her eyes will glaze over and she'll pretend she didn't read it, in line with her usual Orwellian crimestop.

Since the most common form of atheism -- non-belief in any gods -- has no precepts about morals or anything else, any more than non-belief in the Tooth Fairy does, statements like "the argument that atheism can provide morals is false" are completely off the beam. It is a complete non sequitur and a straw man, because no atheist claims that his atheism can provide morals. That false claim comes from various Christian apologists who also fail to understand atheism, usually deliberately. It's obviously deliberate because the loudest of them, like William Lane Craig, have all been repeatedly corrected by atheist clear thinkers. But these apologists, like Arauna, are not interested in dealing with facts, but in bashing the critics of Christianity.

Arauna has clumsily confused atheism with humanism (

    Hello guest!
) and other philosophies (
    Hello guest!
) but these are quite different things.

The fact is that most atheists are a good deal more 'moral' in most rational senses than are most Christians. Atheists do not go to war against one another over differences of opinion about atheism, nor do they kill one another. Indeed, some of the most violent wars and acts of aggression in history have been committed by certain Christian groups warring against other Christian groups. And we all know about the Catholic Inquisition against 'heretics'.

By the way, don't bother trying to claim that Stalin, Hitler, Mao and others committed their atrocities in the name of atheism; this has been debunked hundreds of times.

It's also clear that Jehovah's Witnesses as a group don't morally oppose war and killing. Rather, they oppose taking part in war by anyone besides JWs. The Watchtower Society even argues that JWs are not pacifists, but are neutral in secular affairs. Plenty of JWs would happily take up arms against anyone the Governing Body set them against.

Quote

In  the Seinfeld show the female character used to comment about someone being " spunge-worthy".  By your dismissive attitude of important questions surrounding evolution and atheism..... you are proving yourself  "unworthy " of my time and attention.

I've not dismissed any such "important questions". Rather, I've given detailed explanations on all manner of your false and misrepresentative claims. This is easy to prove:

List four examples where I've dismissed "important questions surrounding evolution and atheism".

You'll never do this, and you'll have proved my charge: you're a hypocritical liar.

On the other hand, I can list dozens of examples where you've ignored or summarily dismissed what I've posted regarding evolution and atheism.

Quote

The most important atheist debaters of our era have taken the time to consider these questions. You are obviously too smart for your own good .......you do not even consider them and give replies like the above......

LOL! Look at the blatant hypocrisy and lying!

Quote

As I have said before - what is a person like you doing on this forum if not  with the single purpose  to irritate...

Not to irritate, but to goad nearly braindead religionists into thinking for the first time in years. JWs have their own echo chamber and rarely go outside it.

Quote

The subject originally was about child molestation and people going to court for perceived negligence.

So? Conversations evolve, and most of this evolution was started by JW apologists like you bringing in other topics in attempts to bash critics.

Quote

Atheists inherited their morals from the Christian-judeo traditions.

In most Western lands, of course.

Wow! A true statement!

Quote

As I demonstrated before - if one believes purely that  there is no God and we come from a soup by chance ..... no amount of logic will give you any morals.

False. See above.
You're confusing morals in general with Judeo-Christian morals, morals that include genocide against unbelievers. Do you really believe that God-dictated genocide is moral?
     

Quote

 

    23 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

    in seeing in all life on Earth the directed hand of God.

At least you acknowledge the design component ......

What is your thoughts on the second law of thermodynamics?   

 

Ah, another reference to the arguments of young-earth and IDish creationism. Rather than detail the reasons why creationist claims about thermodynamics and evolution are completely wrong, I'll refer you to the article "Creationist Misunderstanding, Misrepresentation, and Misuse of the Second Law of Thermodynamics" here:

    Hello guest!

 

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, Arauna said:

Why are most of the anointed happy in their congregations, giving spiritual assistance locally, using their wisdom where it is needed, and  in unity of mind and spirit they help to get the preaching work done - which is after all the main commission given to all Christian's?

 

Simply because of the term you have used…”mommy Watchtower”, and what it has to offer.

Someone commented on a video made of the construction of Warwick, that if the name “Jehovah” were to be replaced by “Watchtower” in the comments made, the JW god is revealed.   

Examples:

“THE fine progress being made at the construction site of the new world headquarters in Warwick, New York, is certainly evidence of Jehovah’s backing and support.”

THE fine progress being made at the construction site of the new world headquarters in Warwick, New York, is certainly evidence of Watchtower’s backing and support. yb16 pp. 18-19

Back to 1983:

 “Nevertheless, 10,468 gathered at the nearby Warwick Farm racetrack to hear a program that gave encouragement to press on with the expansion of Jehovah’s work during these “last days.”

Nevertheless, 10,468 gathered at the nearby Warwick Farm racetrack to hear a program that gave encouragement to press on with the expansion of Watchtower’s work during these “last days.” w83 8/1 pp. 28-31

This entirely explains why the organization is now building a mega media center when it is also taught that Armageddon is imminent at the same moment in time. Would the true God offer us such a confusing message, or would it be Satan, the master of confusion and deceit? (Rev 16:13,14) This should cause every JW concern for what they are slaving for. (Matt 6:24; Rom 1:25; 6:16) Watchtower’s work must push on in the earthly realm of Satan.  If Armageddon was so imminent, the anointed would not be slaving for the work of man’s hands. (2 Cor 6:16) They would be preparing their hearts for the Kingdom to come and serving only one Master.  (Rev 2:20; 3:1-3, 15-18) Their focus would not be on investing their money and time into earthly pie-in-the-sky developments.  

Solomon was blessed with wisdom and material riches. Yet he said,

I increased my achievements. I built houses and planted vineyards for myself. I made gardens and parks for myself and planted every kind of fruit tree in them. I constructed reservoirs of water for myself from which to irrigate a grove of flourishing trees. I acquired male and female servants and had slaves who were born in my house. I also owned many herds of cattle and flocks, more than all who were before me in Jerusalem. I also amassed silver and gold for myself, and the treasure of kings and provinces. I gathered male and female singers for myself, and many concubines, the delights of men. So I became great and surpassed all who were before me in Jerusalem; my wisdom also remained with me. 10 All that my eyes desired, I did not deny them. I did not refuse myself any pleasure, for I took pleasure in all my struggles. This was my reward for all my struggles. 11 When I considered all that I had accomplished and what I had labored to achieve, I found everything to be futile and a pursuit of the wind. There was nothing to be gained under the sun.

Then I turned to consider wisdom, madness, and folly, for what will the man be like who comes after the king? He will do what has already been done. 13 And I realized that there is an advantage to wisdom over folly, like the advantage of light over darkness.

14 The wise man has eyes in his head,
but the fool walks in darkness.”  Eccl 2:4-14

Just like the majority of JWs, the anointed in the organization are also swept up by what their “god” offers – peace and security, even prominence in the organization, while convinced they are doing God's will.  (1 Thess 5:3)  When Israel went into exile in Babylon for their idolatry (2 Chron 36:14-16) many didn’t care to leave after the 70 years had passed. They treasured the life they had built for themselves.  Leaving it all behind didn’t sound like a good proposition.  That would mean leaving their cultivated land, friends and possibly family members.    After all, Babylon was a beautiful place to live in and very progressive for its time. 

However, there were those who mourned over their captivity and the destruction of God’s Temple.  They perceived their own wickedness.  Most likely they were among those who left when God gave the order to restore Jerusalem through Cyrus.  (Ps 137; Ezra 1:2; 2 Chron 36:22,23)

Despite what man achieves in the world, Satan has authority over the world. (John 12:31)  It brings with it, the promise of death. (Isa 28:18; Luke 4:5-8)  WT’s focus is what can be accomplished through  whatever the world of Satan has to offer.  

Christ is simply, light and life; and he offers the promise of life if and only if, we choose that simple route God has provided us through His son’s sacrifice.  (2 Cor 11:1-4)  

Today’s “Babylon” is a spiritual captivity that again takes God’s people captive – God’s “Israel”.  They are surrounded by “foreigners” in a delusion of “peace and security” that is in reality ,the promise of darkness and death. They have been overcome by a “Gentile” power that rules over them – the elders who can judge them as “dead” for rejecting the idol, and their subtle accusations (from the "accuser") by words stated in the magazines listed previously.  But JWs take it with a grain of salt, fully accepting the words of men over the words of God.  (Num 3:10; Ezek 44:6-9; Rev 11:1,2; 13:5-9, 15)  We are warned not to become captive to empty philosophy, to false prophets who deceive God’s chosen people “Israel”; false “messiah’s” who say, “I am He”. (Col 2:8; Matt 7:15; Mark 13:22; 2 Tim 4:3,4; 2 Pet 2)  But the delusion is so powerful, so inviting, that “Israel” and thousands with them, fall for its offer of salvation. (Luke 21:24; Rev 13:10; 2 Thess 2:9,10)

Each one of us who were/are JWs, have/had made the choice for an organization to lead us to salvation, a practice of idolatry. If we proclaim that we didn't dedicate ourselves to "Jehovah's organization", yet we’re still a member of it, then we deceive ourselves in believing that it must be the only path to salvation.    We are being judged on that choice. (Luke 22:31; Matt 13:30) This is Satan’s extraordinary scheme to “surround the saints” with his ‘diabolical’ plan to wipe out the “remaining ones of the woman’s seed”, using falsehoods and empty philosophy to do so.  (Ezek 38:8-12; Rev 20:7-9; 12:13)

Devil - διάβολος diábolos, dee-ab'-ol-os; from 

    Hello guest!
; a traducer; specially, Satan (compare 
    Hello guest!
):—false accuser, devil, slanderer.

The Watchtower no longer recognizes the anointed as God’s Temple. (Eph 2:20-22; 1 Cor 3:16,17)  Gradually, they have removed themselves from this truth and now teach all JWs as the Temple of God and Body of Christ.   (Rev 16:13,14)  You also hold the belief that every JW is “Israel”. Forty-five years in the organization, I believe you said.  Is this what they taught you about the anointed when you first entered the organization?   Their teachings now, support the representation of God’s priesthood as the elders.  Because of this gradual change, most anointed go along with it, too apathetic to stand up for the true Temple of God, and are content letting false prophets lead them. (Rev 13:11-13) By doing so, they are rejecting their rightful place in God’s Temple/priesthood. (Rev 11:1-3) Satan is accomplishing just what he wants, before the end, to drown the “woman” covenant promise, with his lies. (Gal 4:26; Rev 8:10,11;12:1-4,15 )  Those anointed who leave “Babylon” where God’s people are held captive to falsehoods, and listen to Christ's warnings, are part of the “restoration work” and completion of God’s Temple/Body of Christ.(Zech 4:7)

And as they were coming down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them saying, “Tell no one the vision until the Son of Man is raised from the dead.” 10 And the disciples asked him, saying, “Then why do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” 11 And he answered and said, “Elijah indeed is coming, and will restore all things.”

Nehemiah was in charge of restoring the Temple once God’s people left Babylon.   God has chosen His servants today to “restore” His remaining temple “stones” with the truth of Christ.  Only in this way will they become "sealed".  These are the “two witnesses” who announce His people’s sins, and reveal the “man of lawlessness” standing/sitting in the Temple, treading down His priesthood. (Matt 24:15,16) The call is to leave “Babylon”, even at the cost of your “life”.  (Jer 3:14,15; Luke 17:34-37; John 16:2; Matt 24:28; Rev 11:7,8; 13:15; 6:9; 18:4-8)

This restoration work isn’t happening with the advent of the WT, since God’s anointed Temple stones are “trampled”, while its counterfeit/organization continues to visibly build its tower. (Gen 11:4)  Proof?  Christendom may have its lies, but so does the Watchtower – a 100-year record of them.  “Zion” is built solely on Truth. (Zech 8:3; Rev 21:27)

Many choose to remain just where they are, too comfortable or too afraid to lose their “land”/belief, family and friends that they have built in “Babylon”.  They refuse to nourish an undivided faith in God and Christ.   (Exod 20:3,4; Matt 22:37-40)

 

And those who heard it said, “Who then can be saved?”

27 But He said, “The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.”

28 Then Peter said, “See, we have left all and followed You.”

29 So He said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or parents or brothers or wife or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, 30 who shall not receive many times more in this present time, and in the age to come eternal life.”  Luke 18:26-30

 

For consideration, "The Last Harlot and Her Beast", 4womaninthewilderness blogspot, Pearl Doxsey

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, AlanF said:

It's painfully clear that Arauna, despite her blustering overconfidence, is an especially unclear thinker. This appears in her posts in many ways, such as responding to things that were never said, all manner of sidestepping and ignoring of arguments, bringing in non sequiturs of various sorts, and even outright lying.

Just say that you disagree with her. Why can you not do that? Everyone else does. When she responds in muted kind, it is only after you have goaded her with ten insults.

1 hour ago, AlanF said:

with hypocrites like TrueTomHarley complaining that my detailed debunkings are too long, and hypocrites like Arauna complaining that I don't respond at all, with both of them hypocritically failing to respond to most of the content of my posts.

Just say that you disagree with them. Why can’t you do that? Not everyone who doesn’t see your point of view is a hypocrite.

1 hour ago, AlanF said:

Arauna has also complained that I've not answered her challenges, but anyone who reads my careful and detailed responses knows that's not true. 

There are other things to do in life, you know.

Look, it is not the length. JWI has been just as long. It is not the content. JWI also carries on about some things that I would not carry on about. It is not the myriad quotes that you wish to “debunk.” JWI has also....well, no, he hasn’t done that, at least to that extent. But that is your personal preference. God knows that I indulge enough of mine here.

It is the unrelenting hostility and contempt toward those taking another view that raises the red flag. If you would drop that, I would leave your posts unmolested. I know how to live and let live.

The Librarian (that old hen) apparently banned AllenSmith in all his permutations—far more than mine (and I got the idea from him). Several have decried that banning. I don’t. That is not to say that I would do it myself, but he DID get ugly on many occasions. I don’t blame @The Librariana bit—even though he ostensibly was on my side. Or was he? Speculation was floated by many that he actually was an opposer seeking to make JWs look as nasty and intolerant as possible.

Same with you. Conduct yourself with some decorum. We may never interact, because I don’t like you. But I will not feel any reason to send Vic Vomidog after you. There are many others here of your persuasion. They are not stupid or at a loss for words, and I do not send Vomidog to take a bite out of them. They know how to behave.

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, Witness said:

Simply because of the term you have used…”mommy Watchtower”, and what it has to offer.

Is there such a thing? or are you just making things up?

54 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

The Librarian (that old hen) apparently banned AllenSmith in all his permutations—far more than mine (and I got the idea from him). Several have decried that banning. I don’t. That is not to say that I would do it myself, but he DID get ugly on many occasions. I don’t blame @The Librariana bit—even though he ostensibly was on my side. Or was he? Speculation was floated by many that he actually was an opposer seeking to make JWs look as nasty and intolerant as possible.

Same with you. Conduct yourself with some decorum. We may never interact, because I don’t like you. But I will not feel any reason to send Vic Vomidog after you. There are many others here of your persuasion. They are not stupid or at a loss for words, and I do not send Vomidog to take a bite out of them. They know how to behave.

Could it be he was the only true witness here trying to expose apostates that claim to be part of an organization when they aren’t? Let’s not look at how bad he was, but how bad other people were toward that person. I have been viewing this site for a long time. Some of you got nasty with Allen Smith, more than just rude. However, you're still here.

Vic has been seen in JW.net is opposition to the Org in a very ugly way. What does that say about the owner of that account?

Don’t use hypocrisy as an excuse not to like someone when vile people continue to post and you don’t seem to have a problem with them being insulting, rude, nasty, and extremely offensive.

Have you complained to the librarian about AlanF just like others apparently have about Allen smith?

You offend me sir by trying to defend the indefensible. So, don’t tell AlanF what he can or cannot say if the Librarian will not ban that person like he does with people he has grown to hate. I just hope, that person doesn’t tell others he/she is a witness to.

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, John Paul said:

Is there such a thing? or are you just making things up?

"Mommy Watchtower" is Arauna's phrase, Allen.   You know it's not uncommon to hear JWs call the organization, "Mother", using Gal 4:26 as their excuse.  Instead, a "mother" or "woman" in the scriptures  can represent covenants....promises.....  

For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, 24 which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar— 25 for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children— 26 but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all.   Gal 4:22-26 (Gal 3:18)

That promise of life will be fulfilled when the Bride of Christ is complete and united with Christ. She will brings forth "her" children in the Kingdom of God. Isa 54:1-17;Rev 21:2; 22:17

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Forgive me if I belabor this point, Ms. @The Librarian

It is important to me not to be seen as an ingrate. I’m not. I am very grateful to you and this site. It is important to me not to be thought of as if trying to draw readers away or trying to sabotage this site. I’m not.

Come, now. I write several hours per day, producing material persuasive on controversial topic that few Witnesses tackle, and then intermix it with generous amounts of hogwash to come up with reasonings that I have never seen before—and ought I just give it to you?

Actually, I do give it to you. Controversial posts I put here at the same time that I put them on my own blog. So you must not begrudge me if I link back to posts there. If they are also here, and I can find them, I would link to them here.

I don’t have to write here as much as I do. I have made some very long comments lately, and I’m sure I will put them somewhere else someday. They don’t have to be here in the first place. I like the instant feedback that I get and I like the thought of pulling my weight on your site, but it does not have to be. Let me know publicly or privately if you would like to see a change. I do not want to thwart you.

41 minutes ago, Witness said:

“Mommy Watchtower" is Arauna's phrase, Allen. 

This is AlanF’s taunt, Witness. He has said it innumerable times and now Arauna has adopted it once or twice in her replies.

There is no way that you could not have known this.

1 hour ago, John Paul said:

Vic has been seen in JW.net is opposition to the Org in a very ugly way. What does that say about the owner of that account?

The “owner” knows nothing about it, and Vic has breathed life into himself if that is the case. He is a 100% concoction of mine who first appears in the brilliant ebook Tom Irregardless and Me, which I would link to except the Librarian will get mad.

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

This is AlanF’s taunt, Witness. He has said it innumerable times and now Arauna has adopted it once or twice in her replies.

There is no way that you could not have known this.

Okay, it originated with AlanF and Arauna repeated it.  I do not keep up on AlanF and Arauna's involved conversations.   It was Arauna's mention of it, that I remember seeing.  Nonetheless, many, especially elders, have referred to the organization as "mother".  AlanF is not far off base in using it, at all.  

Share this post


Link to post
44 minutes ago, Witness said:

"Mommy Watchtower" is Arauna's phrase, Allen.   You know it's not uncommon to hear JWs call the organization, "Mother", using Gal 4:26 as their excuse.  Instead, a "mother" or "woman" in the scriptures  can represent covenants....promises..... 

That’s a big assumption since Galatians is referring to the heavenly Jerusalem, not a physical organization. So, if witnesses use that term, I suspect they are referring to the spiritual Jerusalem, not the watchtower. Do you believe there are more than 8 million witnesses that don't understand the Bible?

Why not bring the post back to its original topic, instead of gathering inconclusive opinions about the Bible, earth and the heavens.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

This is true in my congregation, too. None of them are any good—not even four. They are all villains. They are so hypocritical that they smile at me and say Hello but their scheme doesn’t work. I know they are all backstabbers. It used to stymie me but I have learned to whirl around like Chuck Norris and take them out with a kick to the head when they are doing this, which is always.

 

Today I read that the US population is not having enough babies to reproduce itself, so those pushy Witness elders you speak of must have influenced a lot of people!

    Hello guest!

Every time I meet someone who says, “I would never bring a child into this crazy world,” I curse those Witnesses—making so many people think (through “mind-control!”) that this world is a hotbed of problems when everyone should know that there are none to speak of.

 

This is why cop shows are so prolific on television for the last 40 years. Viewers cheer at cops chasing down all those wicked Witnesses who are doing evil things.

(Notice how the above reproduces as: “AlanF said: ‘I was a sister for 34 years.’” Notice how I refrained from saying, “So THAT is your problem! Notice the commendable self-control.)

You're so dumb that you don't realize that I didn't say those things -- you've been hit by this board's buggy software.

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

The “owner” knows nothing about it, and Vic has breathed life into himself if that is the case. He is a 100% concoction of mine who first appears in the brilliant ebook Tom Irregardless and Me, which I would link to except the Librarian will get mad.

I think the point is, why complain to the owner and librarian about certain people if you're not willing to complain about everyone that offend directly to the librarian to be removed. Then posts are made that others can't refute, because they are removed. In my opinion, that is called a cheap shot at someone else s expense. To me that seem hypocritical. That's all.

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, John Paul said:

Have you complained to the librarian about AlanF just like others apparently have about Allen smith?

AllenSmith was a loon. He may or may not have been a Witness, but he had serious issues of self-control and unrestrained anger, not to mention misperception, I don’t blame @The Librarian a bit. If his congregation elders got reports of his carrying on in field service as he carried on here, they would have very strong counsel for him.

Sigh.....they might not. They might not know what to do. Contrary to what many seem convinced of here, the Witness organization does not send people anywhere. Rather, they coordinate the efforts of those who choose to cooperate with the preaching work.

I think one thing that Allen demonstrated is that he is not real big on cooperation.

To be sure, he is not the only one given to extreme unpleasantness.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, John Paul said:

Why not bring the post back to its original topic, instead of gathering inconclusive opinions about the Bible, earth and the heavens.

Considering I am in ninth place for the amount of  comments on this thread, perhaps I am not the only one who has strayed off topic.  

 

2 minutes ago, John Paul said:

That’s a big assumption since Galatians is referring to the heavenly Jerusalem, not a physical organization. So, if witnesses use that term, I suspect they are referring to the spiritual Jerusalem, not the watchtower. Do you believe there are more than 8 million witnesses that don't understand the Bible?

Again, "Jerusalem above" is a promise of life. The scriptures I gave, verify it as symbolic.  It is not heavenly Jerusalem.  Does God need a wife to become complete?  

nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all [people] life and breath and all things;  Acts 17:25

You are saying that Christ was brought forth from of a "heavenly organization" Is that right?  Col 1:15-18

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

AllenSmith was a loon. He may or may not have been a Witness, but he had serious issues of self-control and unrestrained anger, not to mention misperception, I don’t blame @The Librarian a bit. If his congregation elders got reports of his carrying on in field service as he carried on here, they would have very strong counsel for him.

Precisely. Aren't you the same way, isn't AlanF the same way, isn't JTR the same way. If you don't blame the librarian, then you shouldn't complain since everyone here is the same way. That is hypocritical in my opinion. Just because a person makes and effort to expose a wrong perception about an organization in which they serve God under, doesn't give anyone a right to remove someone. Especially being insulting just as you are with the label "loon". What's makes you think, you're not more mentally diseased than that person?

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/27/2019 at 2:03 AM, Srecko Sostar said:

are not in position to "know more" if they are out of working range of holy spirit, to understand more about some subjects, if Bible text not explicit say or explain what is what. If it is, as you say, how Bible not give any prove to all of us, that FDS will know more, than what spiritual food they producing?

The spiritual food can only be what is in the Bible. But obviously, this is not what you’re talking about, but rather the interpretation of the Bible. The Bible says it’s good for setting things straight …so man of God is completely equipped for every good work.  This concerns the basic teachings, as you say: "To be good, not lie, love your neighbor, to preach Kingdom, not have idols ....and similar". If that was all there was, then it would be a much thinner book. I don’t know, what percent is here of the basic teachings? I have not looked into that, but let’s say it’s 50% of the Bible. So that leaves the other 50% that concern other things. Should we say that there is no use for that other 50%? What is for example the use of the book of Revelation? It’s a “A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place”. Would it be of any use unless it was understood? Verse five (of ch1) goes on to say: “Happy is the one who reads aloud and those who hear the words of this prophecy and who observe the things written in it, for the appointed time is near”. You can’t observe it unless you know what you are looking at.  That’s great because not only is it a highly symbolic book, but its chapters and verses are not always in chronological order! It’s a real challenge to interpret the riddles that are in it. Have the JWs done this perfectly. No, I don’t think so. We have changed how we understood a few things already, and some we still don’t understand. Does that mean we should stop trying to understand, and just ignore it? The same goes for the rest of the prophetic Bible books, such as Daniel etc. They are there for a reason. Does it mean JWs didn’t get enough holy spirit if they made mistakes in some interpretations?  Don’t forget the holy spirit does not work on our terms. God is perfectly in control of holy spirit and knows when and how much to give, it’s not up to us to judge. The Bible is full of examples where it appears that God’s servants were not getting help from God. Think about Joseph, all the things he had to go through before finally things worked out for him.

On 11/27/2019 at 2:03 AM, Srecko Sostar said:

Bible not say who is FDS. When and how will come or came. Will they originated from Pennsylvania and then move to Warwick. 

I would not expect it to say that. It would be out of character of all the other scriptures. It stands to reason that there should be a centralized system of direction. As you say, organizationally it’s doing very well, but your problem is with the spiritual aspect. Why should that be a problem though? Jesus said that the shepherds were to feed his sheep spiritually. It started of as one congregation. But now it’s thousands. You just have to look at it that the whole world of JWs is one big congregation, being fed by shepherds that happen to be in Warwick. You are putting too much emphasis on 8 imperfect men, whilst what you should be looking at is the arrangement which has a Biblical basis.  Congregations are not autonomous spiritually. All JWS are one big congregation. What about interpretation? There has to be a centralized tenet of belief. Otherwise no one would be able to identify Jehovah’s Witnesses by their beliefs. Every religion has their doctrine by which they can be identified. Jehovah’s Witnesses hope to have a doctrine based exclusively on the Bible, free of pagan influences, and as close to the 1st. century Christians as possible. As for complicated prophecies, well, that is a work in progress, but that should not be a deterrent. 

Share this post


Link to post
25 minutes ago, Witness said:

Again, "Jerusalem above" is a promise of life. The scriptures I gave, verify it as symbolic.  It is not heavenly Jerusalem.  Does God need a wife to become complete?  

nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all [people] life and breath and all things;  Acts 17:25

I don’t see the difference. It should be clear in ACTS 17, it's referring to Christ not coming to earth to be served, rather than to serve.

I don’t see where that compares to Galatians unless we are willing to accept a heavenly Jerusalem that will soon be in charge of the inhabitants of this world.

Do you believe in Armageddon? Do you think there are at least a few witnesses that believe in judgment day, and the persecution of faithful servants before that? Are there a few witnesses that believe, there is a gray area between tribulation and Armageddon when Jesus will separate the sheep’s from the goats?

However, I was not suggesting you are the only one off topic. I think everyone is, including myself.

Share this post


Link to post

Arauna said:

Quote

 

    22 hours ago, AlanF said:

    Hitchens almost always came out on top. He mopped the floor with his opponents.

This is cult-like.

 

Since when is agreeing with a debater's arguments cult-like?

This is yet another example where, rather than stepping up to the plate and providing rational arguments, you can only manage an ad hominem.

Quote

When an articulate celebrity goes on stage and his followers are so enamoured of him that they do not even see the flaws in the arguments.

Well by all means, point out the flaws! Otherwise this is just imitating the criminal Donald Trump's shouting "Fake news!"

Quote

I watched several of his debates - even the one against his brother - he is impressively  articulate but that is all.

You're completely biased, and that's what prevents you from acknowledging Hitchens' mopping the floor with his opponents. Much like when a biased ever-Trumper hears Donald Trump still claiming that Barak Obama was not born in the U.S.

Here is another challenge: Look at any video of a Christopher Hitchens debate that you choose, and give us three examples where his opponent defeated his arguments in the manner you claim. There are dozens of videos on YouTube with titles such as "Best of Christopher Hitchens . . .". Here's one to get you started:

    Hello guest!

Quote

Yes- I guess I'm a moron ......

Out of the mouth of babes. . .

Quote

so I wonder what that makes you?   Since you have not answered any of the most important points I have raised against your religion,  except raising insults.

Atheism is not a religion, you moron. Now try giving the four examples where I've not "answered any of the most important points" you've raised, as I challenged you in my previous post. When other readers see you refusing to rise to the challenge, they'll know that you're a lying hypocrite.


In the material below I refer to the book by paleontologist Donald Prothero, Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why it Matters (Columbia University Press, 2nd Ed., 2017). I consider this the best and most comprehensive book for non-experts.

Naturally, we know that Arauna and most of her fellow JWs will never read the book. That's their lookout.

Arauna said:

Quote

 

    16 hours ago, AlanF said:

    fact is that a number of fossils over more than 10 million years show the two-joint arrangement,

Evading the real question.

 

No, YOU are evading. The so-called "Cambrian explosion" (cf.

    Hello guest!
) is a myth, as I've carefully documented several times in this thread. Depending how paleontologists define the time periods when early life developed, the whole period lasted up to 140 million years, from the beginning of the Ediacaran Period (cf.
    Hello guest!
) to the end of the Cambrian Period (cf.
    Hello guest!
).

In some older works, the "Cambrian explosion" was narrowly defined to be the period from about 530 to 500 million years ago, but this is outmoded and the term is only used in non-scientific literature.

In most of the Ediacaran the few fossils that have been found were not fossils of bodies but of impressions of bodies in the soft mud of the ocean floor. Apparently virtually all of these were very flat, wide creatures that had no distinct organs. As time passed, more of these creatures appeared that seem to have had actual body plans.

There is good evidence that many of the various body plans that developed during the Ediacaran carried over into the Cambrian and, when environmental conditions were right (such as oxygen levels in the atmosphere) began to morph into body plans that had hard parts. This happened at the end of the Ediacaran and beginning of the Cambrian, as evidenced by the appearance of the so-called "Small Shelly Fossils" (cf.

    Hello guest!
) between about 550 and 520 million years ago. During that time more and more life forms appeared that had more hard parts. Among the earliest were the trilobites, some 520 million years ago.

I've posted all of the above in posts responding to various people, including Arauna, almost all of which has been duly ignored. So Arauna has no excuse for making claims like this:

Quote

  The cambrian explosion refers to an explosion of so many different kinds of animals in  a short period of time without any hint of " precursors"  found in earlier layers of the earth...........

Complete nonsense, as I've shown above. Neither 140 million nor 30 million years are "short periods". And precursors have certainly been found in the Ediacaran and early Cambrian periods.

Such false claims have been debunked by proper scientists for the past 30 years, as more and more Ediacaran/Cambrian fossils have been found. But because Arauna is basically a young-earth creationist and reads their obsolete literature rather than modern scientific literature, she knows nothing of it.

Quote

and you turn it into an argument of the jawbone during this time - totally missing the point.

Wrong. YOU have missed the point and set out another straw man.

My point about jaw/ear evolution over 10-20 million years is that the fossil record itself documents the gradual appearance and change of even complex features like the jaw/ear system. That was some 350 million years after the first appearance of life with hard parts, and has nothing to do with any 'Cambrian explosion'. Nor does it have anything to do with the origin of life some 3.5+ billion years ago.

Quote

Explain the sudden appearance of wings,

Not sudden at all. It appears likely that the earliest dinosaur precursors of some 230 million years ago had primitive, hairlike feathers, as well as many other features that are rather birdlike, including the lung system that has air sacs in the bones. Apparently many of the somewhat later true dinosaurs had feathers, as the fossil record increasingly shows. The family of Coelurosaurs (

    Hello guest!
), small theropod dinosaurs, first appeared about 200 million years ago, and traces of feathers have been found with their fossils. Their skeletons often look so much like those of primitive birds that non-experts have trouble telling them apart. By the mid-Jurassic through the early Cretaceous Periods, about 175-125 million years ago, many small feathered dinosaurs like Sinosauropteryx, Protarchaeopteryx, Sinornithosaurus, Caudipteryx, Mei long and Microraptor had appeared alongside Archaeopteryx and its relatives. The fossil record is relatively sparse, but what there is clearly shows primitive birds living alongside feathered dinosaurs for tens of millions of years.

Archaeopteryx (

    Hello guest!
), usually classified as the earliest known true bird, was a true intermediate between small carnivorous theropod dinosaurs like Compsognathus (the 'compies' of the Jurassic Park movies) and the true birds that appeared some 130 million years ago. Archaeopteryx's skeleton was so dinosaur-like that one early fossil specimen was misidentified as Compsognathus, and another as a pterosaur, and put in museum drawers for a century, only to be properly identified in the 1970s because a paleontologist going through the drawers happened to notice faint feather impressions. For more on this, plus many pictures, see Prothero, chapter 12. Also see
    Hello guest!

Quote

explain the explosion of all the different kinds of mammals without any hint of it in previous layers of the earth.

Already done in brief. See page 49 of this thread. For a comprehensive explanation, read Prothero's book. I need not throw more "pearls before swine".

Quote

The jawbone is a side issue..

Nope. It's central, as shown above.


Arauna said to James Thomas Rook Jr:

Quote

 

    Evading the real question.  The cambrian explosion refers to an explosion of so many different kinds of animals in  a short period of time without any hint of " precursors"  found in earlier layers of the earth.

Punctuated Creation's hard evidence.

 

Look at the above real information, James.


4 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. and Arauna said:

Quote

 

    Punctuated Creation's hard evidence

The question is not:  how stable is the structure AFTER  it has formed because we know from obserbation in nature that species can adapt to its environment.  Changes,  such as Darwin's finches, whose beaks changed when the food source changed and then changed back again when the food source changed again.... but never changed Io a different species of bird.....STABILITY OF SPECIES is confirmed.

But the Cambrian explosion was too short  and sudden  to produce / originate such a variety of complex animals..... which  brings us back to the " origin" of all species"    

 

Again ignoring the fact that 20 to 140 million years is not short.
 

Quote

 

    19 hours ago, AlanF said:

    is just old-time creationism in a tuxedo, as one critic said.

And this is just a punch line.  The proof  is the eating of the pudding...... so solid proof is needed.  

 

The fact is that most of the junk promulgated by Intelligent Design promoters was long ago promoted by young-earth creationists, including the notion of "intelligent design". ID is just the latest iteration.
 

Quote

 

    19 hours ago, AlanF said:

    Animals killing animals for food goes back 550 million years. Is that "good"?

I have a problem with their dates......

 

Of course! You're a young-earth creationist.

I've already pointed out that Mommy Watchtower says that YECism is an unscriptural view. So you're an apostate.

Quote

but this will open up another subject.  So I leave at that.

Go right ahead. If you do -- which I very much doubt -- be prepared to reveal your source references.
 

Quote

 

    19 hours ago, AlanF said:

    Her reliance on creationist sources

Wrong again!

 

It's clearly evident in your posts. Such as constantly referring to young-earth creationist talking points, and to ID-creationist memes.

Quote

I look at both sides.

I say again: bullpucky! You only read creationist and Watchtower publications. Prove me wrong, if you dare, by naming other sources.

Quote

You assume that all JWs only drink at mommies JWs  breast..... how silly of you. Some of us grow up and mature.

LOL! I don't think so. You're already 40 years out of date.

Quote

On the other hand you only drink from the extremely  deceptive bottle of evolution.. and have scorn for anything that points to anything other than that.......

I was an ardent creationist as a JW or ex-JW for the first 40 years of my life. I gradually learned that the Watchtower Society was incredibly deceptive about virtually everything connected to the evolution/creation issue. That's because, unlike most JWs, I read extensively from real scientific sources, and learned for myself of the Society's deception.

Quote

now that is NOT smart.........just another religion masquerading as a science.  

Religion, LOL! Don't you know that religion entails worship of gods?

Yet another creationist talking point.

Now we can watch Arauna complain that I answered none of her challenges and TrueTomHarley complain that this post is too long for him to read.

Such clowns!

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Witness said:

Okay, it originated with AlanF and Arauna repeated it.  I do not keep up on AlanF and Arauna's involved conversations.   It was Arauna's mention of it, that I remember seeing.  Nonetheless, many, especially elders, have referred to the organization as "mother".  AlanF is not far off base in using it, at all.  

Mother is not inappropriate, for the reasons you say. Old-timers still use it from time to time. AlanF made it Mommy as a deliberate taunt.

1 hour ago, John Paul said:

Just because a person makes and effort to expose a wrong perception about an organization in which they serve God under, doesn't give anyone a right to remove someone. 

It’s a private website. The old hen can remove anyone she pleases.

1 hour ago, John Paul said:

What's makes you think, you're not more mentally diseased than that person?

I don’t know that I have said that I am. But I have so far not outraged her so that she should hurl me into the abyss.

49 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Naturally, we know that Arauna and most of her fellow JWs will never read the book. That's their lookout.

I doubt I will. But I have read one of Sean Carrol’s books and one of Carl Zimmers—I forget the titles just now, but I will look them up should you insist.

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Now we can watch Arauna complain that I answered none of her challenges and TrueTomHarley complain that this post is too long for him to read.

Such clowns!

I have read 24 "Jack Reacher" books in the last few years, and they take me about 9 hours each. 

So, I have no trouble reading long tomes that are interesting.

AlanF's messages are long, but they are so filled with hate and vitriol, that I lose interest.  

The good points he makes, and there are many, are dramatically overshadowed by general nastiness and contempt for the readers he is trying to inform.

Perhaps everyone in the Universe named Allen *.*  has this affliction (?).

 

Share this post


Link to post

Witness said:

Quote

 

    1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

    This is AlanF’s taunt, Witness. He has said it innumerable times and now Arauna has adopted it once or twice in her replies.

Okay, it originated with AlanF and Arauna repeated it. . .  Nonetheless, many, especially elders, have referred to the organization as "mother".  AlanF is not far off base in using it, at all.   

 

Let me clear this up. The first use I'm aware of comes from the Society itself:

The May 1, 1957 Watchtower said (p.274):

<< If we are to walk in the light of truth we must recognize not only Jehovah God as our Father but his organization as our mother. >>

This makes for a truly excellent taunt because the idea expressed is so cultish.

TrueTomHarley's comment that this is my taunt is true in the sense that I often use it to taunt braindead JWs, but I've used the quote several times in this thread and many times in old threads. TTH's failure to reveal what he clearly knows is the source is, as usual, thoroughly dishonest.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, John Paul said:

So, if witnesses use that term, I suspect they are referring to the spiritual Jerusalem, not the watchtower.

John is right here, and i misspoke it would be mother in the sense of Jerusalem above. I wouldn’t swear that no one ever said ‘Mother Watchtower,’ but if so, it would be most rare.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, AlanF said:

TTH's failure to reveal what he clearly knows is the source is, as usual, thoroughly dishonest.

It’s not dishonest at all. It is a very old expression, seldom heard anymore, and I don’t keep track of minutia. Besides, Jehovah’s organization is known to be heavenly with an earthly component. WT is only the earthly component. It is you who are dishonest.

Share this post


Link to post
43 minutes ago, John Paul said:

I don’t see the difference. It should be clear in ACTS 17, it's referring to Christ not coming to earth to be served, rather than to serve.

I don’t see where that compares to Galatians unless we are willing to accept a heavenly Jerusalem that will soon be in charge of the inhabitants of this world.

 

 

Look at Acts 17 again.  I think you'll see that it is speaking not of Christ, but of God.

 "God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. 25 Nor is He worshiped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things. "

God does not need a "wife-like organization" that the WT refers to as "heavenly Jerusalem".  God doesn't need ANYTHING, which I think you'll agree.  

"Jerusalem above" is a "mother"/covenant/promise of life.

but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all. 27 For it is written:

“Rejoice, O barren,
You who do not bear!
Break forth and shout,
You who are not in labor!
For the desolate has many more children
Than she who has a husband.”

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.  Gal 4:27,28

  The New Covenant promise is fulfilled once the "144,000"/Bride of Christ is sealed in the heavens.  Rom 8:24,25; Rev 12:1,2,5; 2:26,27

Just as the old covenant brought forth a "seed", so too does the New Covenant.  Gal 3:17,14,29; Eph 1:4,5,7-12; Rev 7:4; 14:1

These scripture tells us that "Jerusalem above" or "New Jerusalem" is the sealed Bride in Christ:

Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea. 2 Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God. 4 And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.” Rom 21:1-4

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Witness said:

Look at Acts 17 again.  I think you'll see that it is speaking not of Christ, but of God.

 "God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. 25 Nor is He worshiped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things. "

Same, circumstance. It's to a greater degree with God. When has god needed man for anything, yet man needs Jesus for salvation. I don't believe the watchtower is spoken as the wife of God, but rather an earthly instrument of God, which God has used from the starting of time. He gave the Holy Spirit directly to the prophets in the O.T. and he gave the Holy Spirit in the N.T. to those that would become his ambassadors by baptism. The difference is literal and spiritual. It has not stopped.

6 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Private clubs can set any rules that they want.

I have house rules that Ah wants, and have had quarrelsome guests removed by the police, so I did not have to shoot them, which would have involved a LOT of paperwork.

Then why give access to anyone. Do opposers and witnesses receive the same consideration? Let's just drop it. It's insulting to see the justification.

Share this post


Link to post

It has been my experience being her for more than seven years that insulting ideas is O.K. ... but without OBVIOUS prior justification, insulting specific people is verboten, but even then,  a great deal of patience is shown before the boom is dropped, and only after many warnings, hints and objections.

It's THAT simple, but the clueless never get it.

... but to be fair, I have known BRILLIANT people, with Master and Doctors Degrees, that could not find their way out of a room, if a stripe was painted on the floor, with arrows.

16 minutes ago, John Paul said:

Then why give access to anyone. Do opposers and witnesses receive the same consideration? Let's just drop it. It's insulting to see the justification.

The clueless will NEVER "get it", because they have Narcissistic Personality Derangement which is a very real affliction ( look it up), and they are literally incapable of understanding the concept.

They are no more capable of overcoming it than an amputee can grow new legs.

 

Share this post


Link to post

The Librarian said to James Thomas Rook:

Quote

 

 Yes... between WT, Google, Tumblr..... This has been the most stable platform yet that I have been able to land on in the last decade.

Sadly though... the "archive" is in Google's hand now....

And the threads don't offer an easy way to find stuff without going through the search feature...

I feel your pain.

I'm open to ideas guys...

 

You might look into the BB software that runs on this board:

    Hello guest!

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, AlanF said:

You might look into the BB software that runs on this board:

You do not fight a war with the army you WISH you had ... you fight with the army you HAVE!

One characteristic of Narcissistic Personality Derangement is that EVERYTHING that is sub-optimum is someone else's fault.

Be a sport ... look it up.

Share this post


Link to post
55 minutes ago, John Paul said:

I don't believe the watchtower is spoken as the wife of God, but rather an earthly instrument of God, which God has used from the starting of time.

Well, check this out.

Here is one version of “wifelike organization”

Contrary to the advice of the organization of Jehovah’s witnesses, the appointed servants in the Christian congregation and even their parents, some youngsters will at an early age get romantically involved with one of the opposite sex.

Further, they fail to heed the counsel of 

    Hello guest!
 of the same chapter which says, “Listen, my son, to the discipline of your father, and do not forsake the law of your mother.” They do not listen to their parents and they do not listen to their heavenly Father, Jehovah, and their “mother,” Jehovah’s wifelike organization. w71 9/1 p. 526-527

This alludes to an earthly organization as Jehovah’s wifelike organization.

Here is another:

In what way did Jesus come forth from God’s “woman”? God sent forth his Son, his first creation, from His wifelike organization of spirit creatures in heaven to be the promised “seed.” w09 12/15 pp. 20-24 

This appears to be saying that an organization of angels conferred together with God to bring forth a “seed” – Jesus Christ.  Which is really impossible.

“The Lord possessed me at the beginning of His way,
Before His works of old.

Then I was beside Him as a master craftsman;
And I was daily His delight,
Rejoicing always before Him  Prov 8:22,30

 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.   Col 1:15-17 

 

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

The clueless will NEVER "get it", because they have Narcissistic Personality Derangement which is a very real affliction ( look it up), and they are literally incapable of understanding the concept.

They are no more capable of overcoming it than an amputee can grow new legs

I agree. There is plenty of proof here, I wouldn't suggest otherwise. But I can also see an amputee walking a straight line with prosthetic's. I've seen some run a better marathon than those with real legs. Don't sell the disabled short.

Share this post


Link to post

James Thomas Rook Jr said:

Quote

 

    1 hour ago, AlanF said:

    Now we can watch Arauna complain that I answered none of her challenges and TrueTomHarley complain that this post is too long for him to read.

    Such clowns!

I have read 24 "Jack Reacher" books in the last few years, and they take me about 9 hours each.

So, I have no trouble reading long tomes that are interesting.

AlanF's messages are long, but they are so filled with hate and vitriol, that I lose interest.  

The good points he makes, and there are many, are dramatically overshadowed by general nastiness and contempt for the readers he is trying to inform.

Perhaps everyone in the Universe named Allen *.*  has this affliction (?).

 

You seem to forget that when I use "hate and vitriol" it's always in the spirit of returning like for like.

You know very well that I've never been 'nasty' or you or to Anna or certain other posters. Do you know why?

On the other hand, TrueTomHarley and Arauna scream bloody murder when I give them back what they first gave me. Do you have different standards for me and them?

If you actually wade through my responses to Arauna, you'll not only learn much, but you'll see her lies -- which I don't hesitate to point out -- her misrepresentations, her sidestepping and her hypocrisy. Same for TTH, to the extent that I bother with his overt nonsense any more.

It seems to me that you expect me, an atheist, to be a better Christian than these clowns.

Share this post


Link to post

Try using reason and logic and common sense instead of disparaging personal insults.

It may not work, but at least you have done your duty in a civil manner ,,,, AND ... don't get expelled.

Destroy the arguments .... not the person.

Pretend you are Spock,

.... and get a thick skin, and a sense of humor.

10 minutes ago, John Paul said:

Don't sell the disabled short.

Well, a person without legs WOULD be short.

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, John Paul said:

Then why is it in an open forum? This justification makes no sense.

And it has to make sense (or be "justified") to you because you are...(insert impressive title here)?

 

Let's have everyone start to use the new rule: BNBR .  Be nice, Be respectful.

Or at least stop calling one another names.

Attack the ideas and not the person directly.

That is why I banned Allen Smith who cannot seem to help himself from ad hominem attacks... and John Butler for his calling harm to be done to actual human beings (illegal).

 

Share this post


Link to post

TrueTomHarley said:

Quote

 

    48 minutes ago, AlanF said:

    TTH's failure to reveal what he clearly knows is the source is, as usual, thoroughly dishonest.

It’s not dishonest at all. It is a very old expression, seldom heard anymore, and I don’t keep track of minutia.

 

Yet another dishonest sidestep, a clumsy red herring. Let's examine the relevant parts of the exchange, shall we?

TTH: This is AlanF’s taunt, Witness. He has said it innumerable times and now Arauna has adopted it once or twice in her replies.

Now, exactly what in your statement is "a very old expression, seldom heard anymore"? Plain old English?

After that I wrote:

<<<<
The May 1, 1957 Watchtower said (p.274):

<< If we are to walk in the light of truth we must recognize not only Jehovah God as our Father but his organization as our mother. >>

This makes for a truly excellent taunt because the idea expressed is so cultish.

TrueTomHarley's comment that this is my taunt is true in the sense that I often use it to taunt braindead JWs, but I've used the quote several times in this thread and many times in old threads. TTH's failure to reveal what he clearly knows is the source is, as usual, thoroughly dishonest.
>>>>

So, TTH, exactly where in your latest post did you respond rationally to what I actually said? Obviously you did not; hence your red herring response.

Quote

Besides, Jehovah’s organization is known to be heavenly with an earthly component. WT is only the earthly component. It is you who are dishonest.

LOL! One of the JW organization's many myths its leaders promulgate.

There are so many disproofs of this myth it's hard to count them.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Witness said:

In what way did Jesus come forth from God’s “woman”? God sent forth his Son, his first creation, from His wifelike organization of spirit creatures in heaven to be the promised “seed.” w09 12/15 pp. 20-24 

This appears to be saying that an organization of angels conferred together with God to bring forth a “seed” – Jesus Christ.  Which is really impossible.

Wife like organization from heavenly creatures. Does this mean the Watchtower doesn’t understand the implication of how God views his creation? Does it mean God can’t be the mother and father figure of his creation?

Still, the mention continues to be applied from heaven, not from earth.

However, the article is expanding on Jesus Credentials as the messiah. With it, could the foundation not then be more understood after the baptism?

*** w09 12/15 p. 21 par. 9 The Messiah! God’s Means of Salvation ***

9 People’s expectations, however, needed to be adjusted. Jesus was properly hailed as King, but that his rule would be future and from heaven would only later be fully understood.

I don't see where the article is proposing the angles gathered to vote Jesus in as the Messiah, but instead God was predisposed to use his first creation to accomplish, what Adam could not as sinless creatures, and it was to be coming from the linage of David.

 

50 minutes ago, The Librarian said:

Let's have everyone start to use the new rule: BNBR .  Be nice, Be respectful.

Or at least stop calling one another names.

Attack the ideas and not the person directly.

How is this working out for JTR, and AlanF so far? I think Tom called Allen Smith a loon. Wouldn't that be considered a personal attack. It would be nice to have a good understanding on the rules of this open forum. Who is allowed and who isn't allowed to be irresponsible with their comments.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, John Paul said:

It would be nice to have a good understanding on the rules of this open forum. Who is allowed and who isn't allowed to be irresponsible with their comments.

While that might be 'nice'..... for now you'll have to suffice with ... push too hard yourself and find out what triggers me to ban you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, John Paul said:

Wife like organization from heavenly creatures. Does this mean the Watchtower doesn’t understand the implication of how God views his creation? Does it mean God can’t be the mother and father figure of his creation?

There are abundant scriptures where God is referred to as "Father", but do you know of any scripture where God is referred to as Israel's "mother"?    Jesus never made reference to a "mother" organization.  

Share this post


Link to post

If @The Librarian follows through on her plan for one master thread....

A typical conversation in the new system:

Say, what ever happened to that semi-apostate website, the WNMF? Did Allen Smith ever succeed in his scheme to take it out?”

”He didn’t have to. The Librarian did his work for him. She eliminated all threads but one, and so much energy focused into that one that the whole site blew up like a supernova!”

Did any good come out of the change?”

“Well, yes. All those who contended with JWs that because an organization is imperfect it should be destroyed came to see the result of total chaos.”

Ah, here comes the Librarian herself (that young hen) fresh from the resurrection.....Ms Librarian, do you have any regrets in funneling all writing into one master thread so unwieldy that nobody could find their way around in it, and they abandoned it in droves?”

”Absolutely not! There are rules! Mathematics is not the same as geology, which is not the same as history! These naughty pupils were deliberately mixing them all up, and I only did what I had to do. They thanked me for it later!”

What was the end of the matter?”

”Well, everybody left except for Alan, and he was itching for a fight. So I readmitted AllenSmith and the two of them battled it out all the way till the new system! They were both pretty evenly matched in insult-power.”

Share this post


Link to post

James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Quote

Try using reason and logic and common sense instead of disparaging personal insults.

See where failing to read posts gets you? You have no clue what you're talking about.

If you read my posts -- as I just suggested and you've refused -- you'll find that I certainly use "reason and logic and common sense", but along with that I use "disparaging personal insults" whenever I find a poster lying, misrepresenting, disparaging, ignoring, or otherwise deliberately trying to throw the discussion off the track.

What's wrong with that? Isn't that what Jesus did with the lying Pharisees? "Vipers . . ." Or maybe you don't think Jesus is a good model.

Again, do you expect me to be a better Christian than the hypocritical clowns?

Quote

 

It may not work, but at least you have done your duty in a civil manner ,,,, AND ... don't get expelled.

Destroy the arguments .... not the person.

 

I always try to destroy the arguments, but when it's called for, the liars, too. Often there's no difference with deliberate liars. Remember, I've been dealing with these types for nearly 30 years, and from experience I know that taking a hard line with liars is the most effective. Sometimes telling them to their face that they're a liar eventually gets them to think, and quit lying.

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, John Paul said:

So, if witnesses use that term, I suspect they are referring to the spiritual Jerusalem, not the watchtower.

Sorry but you are wrong in this thinking. JW members not separating spiritual and literal Organization. Because that is one and the same in their thinking. They consider JHVH asOwner or Master of One Organization in Spiritual and Earthly place, not two. Because JHVH love Unity :))) 

8 hours ago, Anna said:

You are putting too much emphasis on 8 imperfect men,

If i am correct in thinking, this 8 men running all job, governing how all work should be done and giving complete direction to JW organization :)) 

8 hours ago, Anna said:

Does it mean JWs didn’t get enough holy spirit if they made mistakes in some interpretations?  Don’t forget the holy spirit does not work on our terms. God is perfectly in control of holy spirit and knows when and how much to give, it’s not up to us to judge.

On question answer is: No, they didn't get enough spirit. Because JHVH spirit can't make such mistakes because of my perception how JHVH spirit is absolute in this context. If i believe in wrong premises than that is my problem :)))

On second quote:  Agree, spirit doesn't work on our terms. (Perhaps spirit can and doing in "adaptable manner" because spirit have to deal with blood and flesh and bones in us). But on other part of thinking if we accept your good statement, than GB are not entitled to speaking about one and only "Channel of Communication", because spirit not work in GB terms. Spirit can give "communication" to other sort of channels too, because spirit work on own terms not on ours. :))

On third quote: I will just add to your fine words. Spirit knows When and How .... and to Whom.

Waiting for your thoughts :))

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, AlanF said:

On the other hand, TrueTomHarley and Arauna scream bloody murder when I give them back what they first gave me. Do you have different standards for me and them?

Today’s quiz for all forum contributors:

Name two participants (one who has been sent packing) who both are hypersensitive to the slightest disparaging remark (or even disagreement) and at the same time are completely oblivious to their own nuclear abuses?

Hint: Both names begin with “A.”

GASP!  You don’t think THAT’S the hidden alias connection we have all been missing, do you?

(Nice, gracious @Arauna who....yes.....when pushed long enough gets a tiny bit sharp, but is NOTHING like the abuse from the “A”s

And blessedly pleasant TTH, who occasionally lets loose with what for him qualifies as a swear word: “loon.” That saint? Mean? There ought to be a law.)

Why, then, do you look at the straw in your brother’s eye but do not notice the rafter in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Allow me to remove the straw from your eye,’ when look! a rafter is in your own eye?”

 

14 hours ago, Witness said:

Okay, it originated with AlanF and Arauna repeated it.  I do not keep up on AlanF and Arauna's involved conversations. 

The answer to this problem with be for @The Librarian (that old hen) to throw EVERYTHING into one master thread, and then you will not be able to keep up even with your own material. Let us see if you will then say as you have with the WT: “Who needs organization?” Because it is not perfect, she eliminates it.

Hmmm. One way to adapt (short of leaving) if the Librarian DID go ahead with her nefarious scheme would be to forget all about following the master thread, which would be a 24/7 project, and just tick off a few names to follow—a few allies, and one or two villains such as Agent Jack, who reliably keeps me up to date on controversial things but otherwise keeps his personality largely at bay. 

It might not be a bad thing at all, though it would change the nature of participation. Certain individuals who (I admit it) affect me like waving a red flag before a bull would be cut out of the picture. They would cry about their free speech being cut off, but I would respond that the Librarian has formed a culty wall....how did Jack put it?....to cordon them off. Yes.....it might be something I could adapt to, especially if a little of that punctuated equilibrium kicks in.

Share this post


Link to post

A few pages back, Arauna challenged my acceptance evolution with the example of the supposed bad routing of a nerve in the giraffe's neck. She complained that Richard Dawkins' demonstration to show why the routing is bad was ridiculous. I answered in some detail, but of course, Arauna completely ignored the facts I presented. The way the argument stands now is shown here:

spacer.png

The left hand routing scheme is what a competent Designer would use. The right hand scheme is actually in the giraffe, and in humans, and in all other vertebrates 'higher' than fish. The 15 foot (4.6 meter) loop around the heart blood vessel and back up is why it is called the recurrent laryngeal nerve.

Which scheme makes more sense to you? Why?

Note that this is one of the nerves that controls the larynx (voicebox).

Share this post


Link to post

ALANF:

IT'S OBVIOUS YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT HYDRAULICS IN A FLEXIBLE PIPING SYSTEM, WHICH IS WHAT AN ANIMAL IS.

NERVES ALL HAVE CAPACITANCE, ELECTRONICALLY, AND THE FIGURE ON THE RIGHT  SHOWS A BYPASS WITH LESSER CAPACITANCE, FOR THE LOW VOLTAGES BEING TRANSMITTED.

.also, ... think of a wiring harness on an automobile ... going to sensors, fans, pumps, lights, ignition systems, etc.

now... think of what happens if there is wear on the original routing, and damage occurs, and you have a spare wiring harness already in place. A spare wiring harness that as the first one is damaged, the second spare adapts, without the need for surgery to install replacement parts.

or ... A WIRING HARNESS THAT BYPASSES AN AREA TO SERVE OTHER AREAS.

It's called redundancy.

ALSO ... nerves can send signals both ways, and do not just serve one area or have a singular function.

I know nothing about a giraffe's voicebox .. hell ... I did not know they had a voice! ...

... but I do understand wiring diagrams, and electromechanical hydraulic controls.

... which apparently you do not.

BUT ... having Narcissistic Personality Derangement ... you think you do know ... about everything.

You are wrong.

DUH!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

ALANF: IT'S OBVIOUS YOU KNOW NOTHING .....BUT ... having Narcissistic Personality Derangement ... you think you do know ... about everything. You are wrong.

Oh, boy, this is gonna be GOOD!

The voice of @admin is seldom heard in this neck of the woods. But the last time he chimed in it was to thunder: “Geez, you guys are a piece of work!”

What could I tell him? That we’re not?

Share this post


Link to post

Srecko Sostar said:
     

Quote

 

    14 hours ago, Anna said:

    You are putting too much emphasis on 8 imperfect men,

If i am correct in thinking, this 8 men running all job, governing how all work should be done and giving complete direction to JW organization :))

 

The Governing Body is assisted in many ways by the "Governing Body Helpers", which in the early 1990s was a newly created 'class' of Christians called the "Nethinim". Yes, there is a Watchtower article on this.

These helpers, in reality, run the JW organization, but with input from the actual GB.

Quote

 

    14 hours ago, Anna said:

    Does it mean JWs didn’t get enough holy spirit if they made mistakes in some interpretations?  Don’t forget the holy spirit does not work on our terms. God is perfectly in control of holy spirit and knows when and how much to give, it’s not up to us to judge.

 

    
This notion of "quantity of holy spirit" is completely unscriptural and ridiculous on its face. Many JWs, in public prayer, might say something like, "O Jehovah, please give us a double portion of your holy spirit." What? As if God's holy spirit is quantifiable like measuring water in a cooking pot? Please!

Quote

On question answer is: No, they didn't get enough spirit.

Do you see what I mean?

"Yesterday Jehovah gave my congregation two liters of holy spirit!"

"Well the day before yesterday he gave mine five liters of holy spirit!"

Because JHVH spirit can't make such mistakes because of my perception how JHVH spirit is absolute in this context. If i believe in wrong premises than that is my problem :)))

This is one place where JWs go royally astray in their thinking.

Share this post


Link to post

JAMES THOMAS ROOK JR.:

I want you to note the rank, self-serving hypocrisy and dishonesty in TrueTomHarley's comments below:

TrueTomHarley said:

Quote

 

    12 hours ago, AlanF said:

    On the other hand, TrueTomHarley and Arauna scream bloody murder when I give them back what they first gave me. Do you have different standards for me and them?

Today’s quiz for all forum contributors:

 

Sin 1:

Quote

 

Name two participants (one who has been sent packing) who both are hypersensitive to the slightest disparaging remark (or even disagreement) and at the same time are completely oblivious to their own nuclear abuses?

Hint: Both names begin with “A.”

 

I am in no way "hypersensitive" to disparaging remarks. I've not commented on plenty of such from the clowns.

I am sensitive to lies. TTH here uses the euphemism "disagreement" to try to take the bite out of my doing what Arauna said the she, as an African, prefers: calling a spade a spade; hence calling a liar a liar.

TTH's doing these things is yet another instance of lying. Here he is also lying by omission, by failing to clearly state what I have repeatedly and clearly said is my beef with these clowns: lies, misrepresentations, failure to respond to crucial points of argument, general hypocrisy, etc.

Sin 2.

Quote

(Nice, gracious @Arauna who....yes.....when pushed long enough gets a tiny bit sharp,

Gracious? A tiny bit sharp? More deceptive euphemisms.

Sin 3.

Quote

And blessedly pleasant TTH, who occasionally lets loose with what for him qualifies as a swear word: “loon.” That saint? Mean? There ought to be a law.)

Again misrepresenting my beef with this clown.

Sin 4.

Quote

“Why, then, do you look at the straw in your brother’s eye but do not notice the rafter in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Allow me to remove the straw from your eye,’ when look! a rafter is in your own eye?”

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! The rank hypocrisy is so thick you can't cut it with a chain saw.

I am not the one making loud complaints about these clowns. I simply point out in my responses to their lies where they have lied. It is they who make complaints about my forcefully pointing out their lies.

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, AlanF said:

TTH's doing these things is yet another instance of lying. Here he is also lying by omission, by failing to clearly state what I have repeatedly and clearly said is my beef with these clowns: lies, misrepresentations, failure to respond to crucial points of argument, general hypocrisy, etc.

C’mon, Jimbo. Don’t take that one lying down. Stick up for me. Remember how you said you had my back when that apostate thug at Twitter threatened me? Same now, please. Need a little help, here.

Even though you have said that you don’t mind, I will even hold off calling you ‘the ol pork chop’ for a time—or even a time, times, and half a time. @James Thomas Rook Jr.

Share this post


Link to post

For James Thomas Rook Jr:

I'm going to presume that your entire post was deliberately farcical, since I understand your curmudgeonly ways.

Nevertheless, I'm going to comment partly as if you were serious and partly as if you're funnin' me, because at least a few readers might learn something.

No doubt the tongue-in-cheek will be wasted on certain clowns.

First, WHY ARE YOU POSTING IN BOLDED CAPS? Don't you know that that's a sign of derangement?

Quote

 

 ALANF:

IT'S OBVIOUS YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT HYDRAULICS IN A FLEXIBLE PIPING SYSTEM, WHICH IS WHAT AN ANIMAL IS.

 

To a simplified degree, sure. We consist of an outer pipe and an outer one, with a gazinta at one end and a gazouta at the other.

Note that you're talking to a retired electrical engineer who has designed dozens of analog integrated circuits over some 33 years of active employment, has an education in the appropriate fields from MIT, Oregon State University and Oregon Graduate Institute, and has done much design work for Tektronix, Lecroy Corp, National Semiconductor and Allegro Microsystems. You cannot bluff your way through this.

Quote

NERVES ALL HAVE CAPACITANCE, ELECTRONICALLY, AND THE FIGURE ON THE RIGHT  SHOWS A BYPASS WITH LESSER CAPACITANCE, FOR THE LOW VOLTAGES BEING TRANSMITTED.

Complete gobble-de-goop. Tell me, where in a nerve is its capacitance located? How much capacitance is there? How does it affect the transmission of nerve impulses? How do you even know? Are you not aware that nerve impulses travel not by purely electrical means, but by electrochemical means?

What do you mean by "bypass"? A bypass of what? What does "lesser capacitance" for this "bypass" mean for the transmission of nerve signals? The system on the right is physically larger than the one on the left, and EE's know that larger physical systems generally have larger capacitances. Justify your claim by calculating, or at least estimating, the capacitance for each system.

Quote

.also, ... think of a wiring harness on an automobile ... going to sensors, fans, pumps, lights, ignition systems, etc.

Yes, a bigger wiring system has more capacitance per unit length, more resistance and more inductance, making it less efficient than a smaller one.

Quote

now... think of what happens if there is wear on the original routing, and damage occurs, and you have a spare wiring harness already in place. A spare wiring harness that as the first one is damaged, the second spare adapts, without the need for surgery to install replacement parts.

Normally, damage of that extent kills the giraffe.

As for a spare already in place, can you not see for yourself that neither nerve system has any spares? The one on the right has a double length loop that doubles back to the larynx, thus making the entire nerve nearly 100 times longer than necessary.

And how would your supposed rewiring come about? Magic?

Quote

or ... A WIRING HARNESS THAT BYPASSES AN AREA TO SERVE OTHER AREAS.

But no such thing is there.

Quote

It's called redundancy.

A non-existent spare is redundant? LOL!

Quote

ALSO ... nerves can send signals both ways, and do not just serve one area or have a singular function.

Yes, Arauna and I already 'discussed' that. What's your point, Einstein?

Quote

I know nothing about a giraffe's voicebox .. hell ... I did not know they had a voice! ...

Wow! Why am I not surprised? But giraffes do growl at lions.

Quote

... but I do understand wiring diagrams, and electromechanical hydraulic controls.

No you don't. Your lack of ability to answer any of the questions I've put to you above will prove it.

Quote

... which apparently you do not.

I've shown that I do.

Quote

 

BUT ... having Narcissistic Personality Derangement ... you think you do know ... about everything.

You are wrong.

DUH!

 

Nope. I know virtually nothing about most things, but a lot about a few things. Jack of few trades, master of one.

Obviously you know as much about electromagnetics as Donald Trump does about running a country.

There! How did I do?

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, AlanF said:

First, WHY ARE YOU POSTING IN BOLDED CAPS? Don't you know that that's a sign of derangement?

Better people than you have tried to break him of that habit. He responds with larger fonts.

10 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Yes, Arauna and I already 'discussed' that. What's your point, Einstein?

It starts already.

3 minutes ago, Anna said:

[JTR vs AlanF]   Please place your bets here

YEAH!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
53 minutes ago, AlanF said:

This notion of "quantity of holy spirit" is completely unscriptural and ridiculous on its face.

By saying "how much", I did not mean quantity at a given time. I meant how many times hs would be given over a period of time. So correction: "how often or how many times it would be given"

Share this post


Link to post
48 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Obviously you know as much about electromagnetics as Donald Trump does about running a country.

That’s Alan’s fourth completely irrelevant reference to Trump—a political taunt that is guaranteed to fall flat amidst an apolitical audience. Knowing this (because he knows everything), why does he do it?

BECAUSE HE IS SUFFERING FROM TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME!

And who is (as far as I know—I have seen it nowhere else) the originator of that term? JTR!!!!

Buckle up for the ride!!

By continually inserting Trump where it is absolutely unnecessary, irrelevant, and even off-putting to those who he would like to convince, Alan shows that he is a leftist. He is without a doubt a close ally-in-spirit (even a “double-portion” of spirit!) of Steven Hassan, the David Splane of anti-cultists, originator of the BITE model of “mind control”—Behavioral, Informational, Thought, and Emotional Control! 

Mr Hassan, the man stupid enough as a youth to join the Moonies—the robe-dressing, flower-hawking Moonies! and now, having quit them, writes that even the most intelligent people [read: himself] can be misled into a cult—and he expands the C-word into ever more frontiers, including Jehovah’s Witnesses, and beyond.

His current book is: “The Cult of Trump—A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind-Control.” A review of it begins with: “Can’t understand why a loved one would vote for Donald Trump? Let the experts who spend their lives studying cults help break it down.” Of course! It is completely inexplicable otherwise. Only cult delusion can account for such a vote.

When you think that half the country has fallen victim to cult influence and mind-control, it is strong evidence that you have drunk too much of the Kool-Aid yourself!

(Note to @The Librarian: This would be good to start as another topic. I don’t do so partly because I am not sure people would follow, but mostly because I would want the comment or two from the people who triggered the remark to head the new thread. I do want to cooperate with you—I really do, but there are those drawbacks that I don’t know how to get around. You could give me the broad powers that you gave JWI to split up existing threads. But it would not be a good idea because I would do it only for those I cared about, whereas JWI will do it for everyone. I would not make a very good administrator.)

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, Witness said:

There are abundant scriptures where God is referred to as "Father", but do you know of any scripture where God is referred to as Israel's "mother"?    Jesus never made reference to a "mother" organization.

I guess it would have to depend on how the word mother is viewed. Off hand, I can’t think of one directly quoted with the word mother, but many that use an inference, like Isaiah 40:11. Who carries their babies in their arms if not a father and mother? A relative, someone in authority.

A more expressive text would come from the psalmist.

NAS  Psalm 127:3 Behold, children are a gift of the LORD; The fruit of the womb is a reward. (Ps. 127:3 NAS)

06529 פְּרִי periy {per-ee'}

Meaning:  1) fruit 1a) fruit, produce (of the ground) 1b) fruit, offspring, children, progeny (of the womb) 1c) fruit (of actions) (fig.)

Origin:  from 06509; TWOT - 1809a; n m

Usage:  AV - fruit 113, fruitful 2, boughs 1, firstfruits + 07225 1, reward 1, fruit thereof 1; 119

There are no notes for this verse.

The same expression can be found in Matthew 18:1–5 to infer to Jesus as tending to his flock like a mother would to a child.

Matthew 18:1-5 New International Version (NIV)

The Greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven

18 At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Who, then, is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”

2 He called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. 3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me.

Now if a child is discarded by their mother and father, Then God becomes the surrogate with both spectrum as mentioned by the psalmist. Psalms 27:10. Therefore, the inference of a “mother like” is just an expression on how the Watchtower feels like a shepherd. When I state the watchtower, I mean those anointed by God’s Holy Spirit that have undertaken that responsibility to care for God’s sheep until the master returns to reclaim his kingship on earth. When I say the “master’s return” it is a symbolic gesture since Jesus won’t be visible again. Jesus ascended as a higher being, “God Like”, “a god” not just the God.

The rejection of Greek children can be seen in the works of Plato and Aristotle.

To be clear, the Watchtower is not referring itself like a "mother organization" but instead as a caregiver that feeds God's children with spiritual food.

 

13 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Ah, here comes the Librarian herself (that young hen) fresh from the resurrection.....Ms Librarian, do you have any regrets in funneling all writing into one master thread so unwieldy that nobody could find their way around in it, and they abandoned it in droves?”

To use a biblical passage with this commentary, comes from Romans 1:18. I would certainly not be that presumptive to see what judgment God and Christ will make other than what is written.

Share this post


Link to post

ALANF:

There are good detectives, and there are bad detectives.

Both looking at the exact same evidence come to different conclusions.

That's why there was an ongoing "war" between Stephen Hawking, and Leonard Susskind, about black holes.

The fact is that giraffes have a nervous system that you think is poorly designed, or more to the point, poorly evolved.

I think it is WONDERFULLY designed.

It's a shame that we cannot get the giraffe to lend its voice to the debate.

However, there is one overriding engineering principle:

"If it ain't broke ... don't fix it!"

...and as to you challenges ... I really don't care what you believe ... unless your check clears the bank.

To me, this is all casual banter.

For dissertations, you have to pay in advance.

 

Video_2019-11-29_151941.wmv

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Anna said:

By saying "how much", I did not mean quantity at a given time. I meant how many times hs would be given over a period of time. So correction: "how often or how many times it would be given"

What are the units of holy spirit? Cubic meters? Gallons? What?

Share this post


Link to post

TrueTomHarley said:

Quote

 

    51 minutes ago, AlanF said:

    Obviously you know as much about electromagnetics as Donald Trump does about running a country.

That’s Alan’s fourth completely irrelevant reference to Trump—a political taunt that is guaranteed to fall flat amidst an apolitical audience. Knowing this (because he knows everything), why does he do it?

 

Most everyone in the world is familiar with the concept that Trump is a criminally insane, inept, wannabe politician -- even if they don't agree with it. Most everyone knows this, and so it's a fine example to use.

Just as they're familiar with the criminality of Richard Nixon -- "I'm not a crook" and all that.

Quote

By continually inserting Trump where it is absolutely unnecessary, irrelevant, and even off-putting to those who he would like to convince,

Nonsense. I use examples familiar to most people. You don't like it because you're a Trump supporter. Bad, bad boy!

Quote

Alan shows that he is a leftist.

As if that's bad.

Leftist more or less, but I disagree with a lot of leftist ideology, especially the "woke" movement.

And of course, TTH is a dyed-in-the-wool ever-Trumper, despite claiming to be nonpolitical. There's that H word again.

Quote

He is without a doubt a close ally-in-spirit (even a “double-portion” of spirit!) of Steven Hassan,

Indeed, because I've seen the cultishness he fights for myself. A good example is the small group of truly braindead cultists on this forum, who suffer so blazingly from Orwellian doublethink.

Quote

the David Splane of anti-cultists, originator of the BITE model of “mind control”—Behavioral, Informational, Thought, and Emotional Control!

Don't know of him. Maybe I should.

Quote

Mr Hassan, the man stupid enough as a youth to join the Moonies—the robe-dressing, flower-hawking Moonies!

Yes, kind of like someone stupid enough as a youth to join the JWs, hawking JW literature on the streets. At least Hassan had the smarts to quit, unlike the clowns on this forum.

Quote

and now, having quit them, writes that even the most intelligent people [read: himself] can be misled into a cult—and he expands the C-word into ever more frontiers, including Jehovah’s Witnesses, and beyond.

He's exactly right. As time passes, almost all truly intelligent people quit being JWs. That's why JW leaders have always valued loyalty to themselves over competence -- again much like Donald Trump. That's why JWs are, on average, among the least intelligent of religionists and at the bottom of the educational level. JW leaders understand this well, forcing them to dumb down their literature to 3rd-grade reading levels.

Hassan is hardly the first to show that JWs are a classic destructive cult.

Quote

His current book is: “The Cult of Trump—A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind-Control.” A review of it begins with: “Can’t understand why a loved one would vote for Donald Trump? Let the experts who spend their lives studying cults help break it down.” Of course! It is completely inexplicable otherwise. Only cult delusion can account for such a vote.

Yep.

When you think that half the country has fallen victim to cult influence and mind-control, it is strong evidence that you have drunk too much of the Kool-Aid yourself!

Wrong. Look at some of Jay Leno's man-on-the-street interviews with random people. More than half of Americans believe in astrology, conspiracy theories, creationism and all manner of nonsense. As George Carlin once said, consider the average intelligence level of Americans, and then consider that half of them are even dumber than that!

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Most everyone in the world is familiar with the concept that Trump is a criminally insane, inept, wannabe politician 

Of course! Half the country knows this. And the other half does, too.

He just may win again, you know. And a ton of celebrities who swore that they would leave the country will again have to second-guess their words.

Share this post


Link to post

James Thomas Rook Jr said:

Quote

 

 ALANF:

There are good detectives, and there are bad detectives.

Both looking at the exact same evidence come to different conclusions.

 

Relate that to our discussion here.

Quote

That's why there was an ongoing "war" between Stephen Hawking, and Leonard Susskind, about black holes.

So? Scientists argue about stuff all the time. At this point it's all theoretical.

Quote

The fact is that giraffes have a nervous system that you think is poorly designed,

Not quite, I've demonstrated it. If you designed a similar rube-goldberg system for a college project, and presented it to your class and professor, they'd laugh you out of school.

Quote

or more to the point, poorly evolved.

No, it's just evolved. If it works, in evolution it's "good enough for government work".

Quote

I think it is WONDERFULLY designed.

You, with your decades of experience in electrical engineering. You, who can't answer any of my challenge questions.

Quote

It's a shame that we cannot get the giraffe to lend its voice to the debate.

It can only growl.

Quote

 

However, there is one overriding engineering principle:

"If it ain't broke ... don't fix it!"

 

Like I said, "good enough for government work."

Which does NOT say it's good enough to be the product of a supremely intelligent designer.

Quote

...and as to you challenges ... I really don't care what you believe ... unless your check clears the bank.

I think you should pay me for educating you about capacitance and such. I have a PayPal account.

Quote

To me, this is all casual banter.

Of course.

Quote

For dissertations, you have to pay in advance.

There's my PayPal account . . .

Share this post


Link to post

Today is Friday. I haven't looked on here since Wednesday.  There must be around 8 new pages. 

BUT it's full of rubbish !    People being personal about each other. My Harley being as stupid as usual.

Mr Rook and Dilbert.  Alan F filling up pages for the sake of it. 

Well, I'm glad I've spent my time doing more sensible things. Materialistic things, but sensible.

When's Armageddon My Harley ?  Ten years time I reckon.

And @The Librarian I do feel sorry for you. Don't let the ba.. (no, i can't say that on here) Don't let people upset you. Maybe some topics should have a cut off point at 30 pages. (Just a suggestion).

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Anna said:
2 hours ago, AlanF said:

This notion of "quantity of holy spirit" is completely unscriptural and ridiculous on its face.

By saying "how much", I did not mean quantity at a given time. I meant how many times hs would be given over a period of time. So correction: "how often or how many times it would be given"

Perhaps we can include general idea in human and in Bible context, how all have to be, to done something and so on:  "to the right extent, measure, quantity". Salt is good, but to put too much salt into meal will not be good. Patient is good, but too much patient not  necessary mean how things will be solved because we show patient till the day we die .....etc.

As i can recall we can find:

For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit (measure).  - John 3 34  

But we will not boast of things without our measure, but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed to us, a measure to reach even unto you. - 2 Cor 10 13

And he measured the wall thereof, an hundred and forty and four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of the angel. - Rev 21 17

 When they had crossed, Elijah said to Elisha, “Tell me, what can I do for you before I am taken from you?” “Let me inherit a double portion of your spirit,” Elisha replied. 10 “You have asked a difficult thing,” Elijah said, “yet if you see me when I am taken from you, it will be yours—otherwise, it will not.” - 2 King 2

We have here interesting descriptions. It seems how "measuring" and to be inside "measure" have correct logic and positive need, positive consequence. Of course, if lexically we have correct Bible text. 

Perhaps this is not very easy issue to discuss. So, why not go back to Topic. It is more real (actual) and it's easier to handle with the facts, evidences, proofs.....  :)))

Share this post


Link to post
51 minutes ago, Anna said:

It's holy molys of course!

One of my pet expressions.

Around 1960, give or take a few years, there was a New York TV comedian named Soupy Sales who used "Holy Moly!" to good effect. I loved that guy!

Share this post


Link to post
24 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

When's Armageddon My Harley ?  Ten years time I reckon

It is five weeks away. That is when the JW schedule of weekly Bible reading hits Revelation 22, and it would be too inconvient to make them start all over again at Genesis.

Share this post


Link to post
43 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

It is five weeks away. That is when the JW schedule of weekly Bible reading hits Revelation 22, and it would be too inconvient to make them start all over again at Genesis.

Way too specific. Real Soon Now or Just Around the Corner are better.

Share this post


Link to post