|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 14, 2018 15:30:25 GMT
The JW that I used to talk with told me arbitrarily that there is no hell. It is their interpretation although not many (if any major sect) had made such an interpretation for the first 19 centuries of Christianity. It's the first century of Christianity that matters.
Everything else is irrelevant if it deviates from original teachings.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 14, 2018 15:35:56 GMT
They actually believe in quite a few things that stray from mainstream Christianity. They believe it was more likely Jesus was nailed to a stake rather than a cross and reject infant baptisms (it has to be done as consenting adult).You're mistaken there. You don't have be an adult. JWs baptize children, as this JW.org article to "help parents determine whether their children are ready for baptism" shows. wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2011441
It's worth noting that, for once, CoolJGS☺ didn't bother to tell you that you were wrong, as he promptly does whenever any poster states something inaccurate about JWs. It appears that when an inaccuracy reflects badly on the Watchtower, he's sure to knock it down, but when an inaccuracy might reflect well on them, he's satisfied to let it stand.
I hadn't come back to the thread until today since my last post.
I hope I don't have to go through my rules of posting again...
Besides he's not wrong. There are no infant baptisms and I assumed by adult he meant someone that understood what they were getting into and consented to it. It's not like we're talking statutory rape or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Aug 14, 2018 15:56:32 GMT
You're mistaken there. You don't have be an adult. JWs baptize children, as this JW.org article to "help parents determine whether their children are ready for baptism" shows. wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2011441
It's worth noting that, for once, CoolJGS☺ didn't bother to tell you that you were wrong, as he promptly does whenever any poster states something inaccurate about JWs. It appears that when an inaccuracy reflects badly on the Watchtower, he's sure to knock it down, but when an inaccuracy might reflect well on them, he's satisfied to let it stand.
Besides he's not wrong...and I assumed by adult he meant someone that understood what they were getting into and consented to it.
That's total horseshit. Everyone understands that the term "consenting adult" is a term that excludes children (not just infants). |
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 14, 2018 16:43:29 GMT
It is their interpretation although not many (if any major sect) had made such an interpretation for the first 19 centuries of Christianity. It's the first century of Christianity that matters.
Everything else is irrelevant if it deviates from original teachings.
I don't think my wondering that none of the major sects got it right in the first 19 centuries of Christianity in anyway says that first century of Christianity doesn't matter. Which schools deviate from original teachings is for schools to debate among themselves. I do not think I have any claim in it. |
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Aug 14, 2018 16:48:50 GMT
The only thing that I stand for is that I respect all schools of Christianity and count them as Christianity. Many would call JW a cult. I don't. It's as Christian as any other school.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 14, 2018 16:49:36 GMT
It's the first century of Christianity that matters.
Everything else is irrelevant if it deviates from original teachings.
I don't think my wondering that none of the major sects got it right in the first 19 centuries of Christianity in anyway says that first century of Christianity doesn't matter. Which schools deviate from original teachings is for schools to debate among themselves. I do not think I have any claim in it. I didn't say that to start a disagreement. Only making a statement
|
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 14, 2018 16:49:59 GMT
Besides he's not wrong...and I assumed by adult he meant someone that understood what they were getting into and consented to it.
That's total horseshit. Everyone understands that the term "consenting adult" is a term that excludes children (not just infants). Ok, my misunderstanding. |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 14, 2018 17:01:13 GMT
You're mistaken there. You don't have be an adult. JWs baptize children, as this JW.org article to "help parents determine whether their children are ready for baptism" shows. wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2011441
It's worth noting that, for once, CoolJGS☺ didn't bother to tell you that you were wrong, as he promptly does whenever any poster states something inaccurate about JWs. It appears that when an inaccuracy reflects badly on the Watchtower, he's sure to knock it down, but when an inaccuracy might reflect well on them, he's satisfied to let it stand.
Oh that's right. I guess the point I was trying to make is you have to be old enough to actually understand what a baptism is, so obviously that rules out infant baptisms. My apologies for not chastising you on the proper use of words, context and meaning. |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Aug 14, 2018 17:04:18 GMT
That's total horseshit. Everyone understands that the term "consenting adult" is a term that excludes children (not just infants). Ok, my misunderstanding. No, you've already tried claiming that you misunderstood the term "consenting adult". And that's not credible because (as I just said) everyone understands it to exclude children. |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 14, 2018 17:06:50 GMT
No, you've already tried claiming that you misunderstood the term "consenting adult". And that's not credible because (as I just said) everyone understands it to exclude children. I didn't. I took it to mean what he said he took it to mean.
Can you please just accuse me of something in order to speed this along.
|
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Aug 14, 2018 17:27:56 GMT
No, you've already tried claiming that you misunderstood the term "consenting adult". And that's not credible because (as I just said) everyone understands it to exclude children. I didn't. I took it to mean what he said he took it to mean.
Can you please just accuse me of something in order to speed this along.
I already made that clear in my first post to lowtacks86. It goes to your bent toward intellectual dishonesty on any topic that might implicate JW teachings or practices. Your posting history (on this and the old board) amply shows how you are always "johnny-on-the-spot" to contradict any inaccuracy reflecting poorly on JWs. But the first time someone posts something inaccurate that can reflect WELL on JWs, you just let it stand. No correction from you, even after two days. (And now that I point that out, you offer the ridiculous excuse that you thought that "consenting adults" includes children. Not a credible excuse at all.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Rodney Farber on Aug 16, 2018 23:58:04 GMT
Rodney Farber Yeah, I concede that JW's are not Baptists or Catholic which both have their own version of proselytizing. I'm not cajoling anyone. I couldn't care less what you do lol. People come and go by choice and desire. You are under the mistaken impression that the main goal of JW's is to gain as many members as possible. If that were the case, they could reconfigure their requirements to bring their numbers to 20 or 30 million rather than 8.5 million. Instead, their goal is similar to the one Jesus had. Tell people about God's promises (Or warn them of his future judgement on the wicked) and let them choose to go through the effort of qualifying to be one of them. That's the funny part. It is actually difficult to become one of them unless you either want it or you lie. Liars probably don't last too long which is why they leave or are given the boot. It's a tough religion to be a part of if you don't actually like, agree, or believe in it. There are easier churches to belong to. Well, that would be on their website for full details, but they would argue there have been Jehovah's Witnesses on the planet since Abel. They believe that prophecy explained the love of the greater number would cool off and true Christianity would be all by non-existent for a long time with scatterings of people trying to cut through false teachings...blah, blah, blah. Like said, it's all on their website. The organization itself exists as a result of legal requirements. For example, in Russia, the organization no longer exists. By your view, that would mean the teachings no longer exist. It was dismantled and their property seized. However, there are still over 100k JW's there because they are bigger than their legality. They don't. There are new translations that simply match up to the language of the day. If they are around for another 30 years, then they will have an updated translation. They have a bunch of Bible translations on their app/website and a pretty thorough explanation of most verses. Here's the link: wol.jw.org/en/wol/binav/r1/lp-eIt's so thorough while easy to read that it's my primary Bible although I use NIV here since it doesn't really matter. Are you saying this account is only in the NWT or are you just stating a basic dislike of Bible verses? Same question but I'll add that there was never an indication that God didn;t kill bad people in the Bible before, during, or after the commandment concerning murder, a concept God would never be beholden to anyway. As an aside, it's ha-ha funny that you are whining about the NWT but use a KJV of the commandment. Same question, but I'll add that there was never an indication in the NT that God wouldn't kill bad people. Meh, that's a pretty good reason. I point out four instances where Jehovah killed a multitude of people. None of these people killed or caused bodily harm to another, yet Jehovah killed them to maintain his power over week minded people. And your basic comment is, "Meh, that's a pretty good reason." That's almost verbatim of the comment a JW in the subway said about the great flood: "He must have had a good reason."
You people have your own language where you have been programmed to trivialize any negative comments. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Aug 17, 2018 0:08:37 GMT
, I didn't. I took it to mean what he said he took it to mean.
Can you please just accuse me of something in order to speed this along.
I already made that clear in my first post to lowtacks86. It goes to your bent toward intellectual dishonesty on any topic that might implicate JW teachings or practices. Your posting history (on this and the old board) amply shows how you are always "johnny-on-the-spot" to contradict any inaccuracy reflecting poorly on JWs. But the first time someone posts something inaccurate that can reflect WELL on JWs, you just let it stand. No correction from you, even after two days. (And now that I point that out, you offer the ridiculous excuse that you thought that "consenting adults" includes children. Not a credible excuse at all.)
Well... This is a religious discussion... and religiously speaking, aren't people considered a religious adult at 13... at least, according to my rabbi.  MAZAL TOV!!!  |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 17, 2018 0:14:48 GMT
I didn't. I took it to mean what he said he took it to mean.
Can you please just accuse me of something in order to speed this along.
I already made that clear in my first post to lowtacks86. It goes to your bent toward intellectual dishonesty on any topic that might implicate JW teachings or practices. Your posting history (on this and the old board) amply shows how you are always "johnny-on-the-spot" to contradict any inaccuracy reflecting poorly on JWs. But the first time someone posts something inaccurate that can reflect WELL on JWs, you just let it stand. No correction from you, even after two days. (And now that I point that out, you offer the ridiculous excuse that you thought that "consenting adults" includes children. Not a credible excuse at all.)
There it is! So just so we're clear...You think that it makes more sense for me to be intellectually dishonest, something you have NEVER proven even once, then it is think the same thing lowtacks * was thinking? And to add to that, my intellectual dishonesty involves directing people like you to a website that would prove this intellectual dishonesty. You're too smart for me.  * |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 17, 2018 0:19:14 GMT
Rodney Farber Yeah, I concede that JW's are not Baptists or Catholic which both have their own version of proselytizing. I'm not cajoling anyone. I couldn't care less what you do lol. People come and go by choice and desire. You are under the mistaken impression that the main goal of JW's is to gain as many members as possible. If that were the case, they could reconfigure their requirements to bring their numbers to 20 or 30 million rather than 8.5 million. Instead, their goal is similar to the one Jesus had. Tell people about God's promises (Or warn them of his future judgement on the wicked) and let them choose to go through the effort of qualifying to be one of them. That's the funny part. It is actually difficult to become one of them unless you either want it or you lie. Liars probably don't last too long which is why they leave or are given the boot. It's a tough religion to be a part of if you don't actually like, agree, or believe in it. There are easier churches to belong to. Well, that would be on their website for full details, but they would argue there have been Jehovah's Witnesses on the planet since Abel. They believe that prophecy explained the love of the greater number would cool off and true Christianity would be all by non-existent for a long time with scatterings of people trying to cut through false teachings...blah, blah, blah. Like said, it's all on their website. The organization itself exists as a result of legal requirements. For example, in Russia, the organization no longer exists. By your view, that would mean the teachings no longer exist. It was dismantled and their property seized. However, there are still over 100k JW's there because they are bigger than their legality. They don't. There are new translations that simply match up to the language of the day. If they are around for another 30 years, then they will have an updated translation. They have a bunch of Bible translations on their app/website and a pretty thorough explanation of most verses. Here's the link: wol.jw.org/en/wol/binav/r1/lp-eIt's so thorough while easy to read that it's my primary Bible although I use NIV here since it doesn't really matter. Are you saying this account is only in the NWT or are you just stating a basic dislike of Bible verses? Same question but I'll add that there was never an indication that God didn;t kill bad people in the Bible before, during, or after the commandment concerning murder, a concept God would never be beholden to anyway. As an aside, it's ha-ha funny that you are whining about the NWT but use a KJV of the commandment. Same question, but I'll add that there was never an indication in the NT that God wouldn't kill bad people. Meh, that's a pretty good reason. I point out four instances where Jehovah killed a multitude of people. None of these people killed or caused bodily harm to another, yet Jehovah killed them to maintain his power over week minded people. And your basic comment is, "Meh, that's a pretty good reason." That's almost verbatim of the comment a JW in the subway said about the great flood: "He must have had a good reason."
You people have your own language where you have been programmed to trivialize any negative comments. That wasn't my basic comment, but since you clearly cannot grasp paragraphs, I suppose we can leave it at you don;t like it when God kills people. I acknowledge that and look forward to the next addition of fictional anecdotes with you. |
|
|
|
Post by Rodney Farber on Aug 17, 2018 1:47:26 GMT
Rodney Farber I forgot to add that none of that actually revealed that they were lying. In my original post I mentioned that JW said the proselytizing was something they "wanted" to do. I believe my photographs of them hightailing it home at precisely 6pm demonstrates that they only stayed as long as they were required to do so and fulfill their quota.
From this, I presume that you have no problem when Jehovah kills people for petty misconduct such as laughing at a bald man. You will continue to worship this egomaniac.
Religion isn't about beliefs; it's about lust for power and the desire to control others.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Aug 19, 2018 6:52:20 GMT
Rodney Farber I forgot to add that none of that actually revealed that they were lying. In my original post I mentioned that JW said the proselytizing was something they "wanted" to do. I believe my photographs of them hightailing it home at precisely 6pm demonstrates that they only stayed as long as they were required to do so and fulfill their quota.
Dude... You're a fcking idiot.  - "Deciding that you are going to a waterpark from 10 - 6... and actually leaving at 6... means that you don't really like to ride waterslides." |
|
|
|
Post by Rodney Farber on Aug 21, 2018 17:54:48 GMT
In my original post I mentioned that JW said the proselytizing was something they "wanted" to do. I believe my photographs of them hightailing it home at precisely 6pm demonstrates that they only stayed as long as they were required to do so and fulfill their quota.
Dude... You're a fcking idiot. - "Deciding that you are going to a waterpark from 10 - 6... and actually leaving at 6... means that you don't really like to ride waterslides." If that happened once or twice, I would agree with you. However ... Even a person with your limited logic sense should realize that anyone who - goes to a water park everyday without ever taking the waterslide,
- leaves at exactly 6pm (sometimes 6:01pm) everyday (even though the park is open until midnight),
- keeps a log book to show that they have met their water-park-quota
probably is not there to have fun. Knock knock. Who's there? ARGO. ARGO, who? |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Aug 21, 2018 18:04:34 GMT
Dude... You're a fcking idiot. - "Deciding that you are going to a waterpark from 10 - 6... and actually leaving at 6... means that you don't really like to ride waterslides." If that happened once or twice, I would agree with you. However ... Even a person with your limited logic sense should realize that anyone who - goes to a water park everyday without ever taking the waterslide,
- leaves at exactly 6pm (sometimes 6:01pm) everyday (even though the park is open until midnight),
- keeps a log book to show that they have met their water-park-quota
probably is not there to have fun. Knock knock. Who's there? ARGO. ARGO, who? This going to come as a shock, but JW's do indeed have schedules. They stay out for specific periods of time and then head home to do other things such as work, eat, sleep, etc...
They are not the Bible equivalent of Waffle House.
Plus when they are doing the public witnessing thing, they may only be allowed to preach during certain hours or locations.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Aug 21, 2018 18:59:51 GMT
Dude... You're a fcking idiot. - "Deciding that you are going to a waterpark from 10 - 6... and actually leaving at 6... means that you don't really like to ride waterslides." If that happened once or twice, I would agree with you. However ... Even a person with your limited logic sense should realize that anyone who - goes to a water park everyday without ever taking the waterslide,
- leaves at exactly 6pm (sometimes 6:01pm) everyday (even though the park is open until midnight),
- keeps a log book to show that they have met their water-park-quota
probably is not there to have fun. Knock knock. Who's there? ARGO. ARGO, who? Thanks for clearing it to me that you're not a complete fucking idiot...  But: Every waterpark enthusiast who has a 7pm job still knows that you're still a complete dipshit.  EDIT:
How the hell did you ever come to the conclusion that the people in my comparison aren't riding the waterslides?.....  And, hell... What's wrong with riding the lazy river for 7 hours? |
|
