• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Who Has the truth? Who Will Bring World Peace?

ManSinha

Well-Known Member
Personally I see groups or individuals claiming to have 'THE WAY' as all pretty much the same

"THE WAY" to what? The more I think about it - like some people have pointed out - these are just claims without anything if ever, by way of verification - so going on faith alone - but you are right - different people have different levels of faith - I am willing to have faith in some entity that tells me to better myself and be kind to others - now if I was given the directive of "We are exclusive" - hopefully I would start to question that
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
"THE WAY" to what? The more I think about it - like some people have pointed out - these are just claims without anything if ever, by way of verification - so going on faith alone - but you are right - different people have different levels of faith - I am willing to have faith in some entity that tells me to better myself and be kind to others - now if I was given the directive of "We are exclusive" - hopefully I would start to question that

Very few dharmic faiths believe that at all, including yours and mine. Very different paradigms.
 

ManSinha

Well-Known Member
It is not true that Jehovah's Witnesses, as a rule, are hateful and stupid. But they who will never question the authority of The Watchtower are careless and blinded.

I am really sorry for bringing this up - probably has no place here - but since we were talking about authority

The 10th Master decreed that any 5 individuals who had been baptized - could speak for him - in fact - during a particularly rough battle - he was ordered to leave by the 5 - and he obeyed their directive - but in a sense we (the community) view it as the democratization of leadership not necessarily restricted to a chosen few
 

RedhorseWoman

Active Member
It is not true that Jehovah's Witnesses, as a rule, are hateful and stupid. But they who will never question the authority of The Watchtower are careless and blinded.

This is true. The majority of individuals in the JW organization are decent people. The problem, as you pointed out, is that they never question their leaders. In order to remain a "good JW" I think that you have to actively employ a form of cognitive dissonance. You are told by the Governing Body that punishing people by shunning them, causing them to lose their family and friends and perhaps their employment (if they were employed by another JW) is an act of "love" despite the fact that the person in question might be suffering greatly and by kicking them to the curb they might become so depressed that suicide seems to be the only answer.

To a JW, their criticizing other religions is an act of "love" but any criticism of their religion is "persecution." And the list goes on. Being a JW means that you have to give up any rational, logical thought processes and accept whatever you are told, even if it means that you have to twist yourself into knots trying to justify things so that they make some sort of sense.
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
I refuted this months ago but here you are still using the claim which include modern design knowledge not present in the Biblical record.

Refute what?
I don’t even remember you.

How can you refute a fact? Those ideal dimensions were in the Bible, thousands of years before we were born!

And they are ideal, fitting the vessel’s purpose it was designed for. Only within the last two centuries, have modern shipbuilders discovered that.

The links speak for themselves. Lol.
.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Refute what?
I don’t even remember you.

How can you refute a fact? Those ideal dimensions were in the Bible, thousands of years before we were born!

As per section 5 of your link.

"Since little information on the internal structures of the Ark are known, we made the following estimation from the viewpoint of modern shipbuilding technology, although we assume that the Ark was in fact built using relatively ancient technology."

Of course you do not remember that which refutes your indoctrination.

You didn't read what you linked thus you didn't know modern knowledge was injected into the Ark model. This is a bias in which any flaws are corrected ad hoc. More so this modern knowledge is what made the model work as with no internal structure provided. So the researchers can hand pick a system they know works. More so this "test" was done by those that already believe thus another bias which by the very nature of their indoctrination they will not go against.

Your linked test proved only the test was a farce.
 
Last edited:

sooda

Veteran Member
This is true. The majority of individuals in the JW organization are decent people. The problem, as you pointed out, is that they never question their leaders. In order to remain a "good JW" I think that you have to actively employ a form of cognitive dissonance. You are told by the Governing Body that punishing people by shunning them, causing them to lose their family and friends and perhaps their employment (if they were employed by another JW) is an act of "love" despite the fact that the person in question might be suffering greatly and by kicking them to the curb they might become so depressed that suicide seems to be the only answer.

To a JW, their criticizing other religions is an act of "love" but any criticism of their religion is "persecution." And the list goes on. Being a JW means that you have to give up any rational, logical thought processes and accept whatever you are told, even if it means that you have to twist yourself into knots trying to justify things so that they make some sort of sense.

What sort of person stays with JW?
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Kinds of animals can of course be interpreted or understood differently. Seeing the term as analogous to species makes the most sense as a way of distinguishing different animals as of course different species as a general rule can not interbred.

"Seeing the term as analogous to species makes the most sense as a way of distinguishing different animals"......sure, if you want to confuse the issue.
There is a marked difference between a "kind" of creature and "species" within a kind. When Darwin was formulating his ideas on the evolution theory, what was he observing? He saw finches, but not like the ones on the mainland.

Darwin%27s%20Finches%20Poster%2C%20Galapagos%2C%20Ecuador%20%2811-2011%29-S.jpg


These are all varieties of one "species" of bird. These are all finches. There are many more. To suggest that all representative members of every bird family needed to be on the ark is ridiculous...and not what the Bible says at all. One pair of representative finches would in time produce many varieties due to natural adaptive changes according to the food source or environment in the locations where they ended up.

The iguanas on the Galapagos had also adapted to a marine environment, but were still clearly a "variety" of iguana....a "species" of the reptile family. Darwin saw evidence of adaptation, not the kind of evolution that science suggests, but cannot prove.

All creatures possess adaptive capabilities as a survival mechanism....even humans. How many different varieties of humans are there? Their location on earth usually determines skin, hair and eye color. Hot climates usually produce people with dark skin, dark hair and dark eyes as a protection from the sun....in cold climates the skin is usually fair, the hair can be dark or blond or even red. Eyes are often blue. There are fat ones and skinny ones, tall ones and short ones.....infinite variety, but all of the human "kind".

There is the horse kind, the feline kind and the canine kind...these can include every species of horse, cat or dog in one classification. A "kind" is not a "species" but encompasses the whole taxonomic family. That is not hard to understand surely?

The reason bible literalists reject species as not being the same as 'kind' is because its so easy to prove the impossibility of physically locating all species on Noah's Ark. The evidence against placing all known species aboard the Ark is so overwhelming as to be practically irrefutable....that is to all bexcept die hard literalists who are never going to believe anything other than their church teaches them.

No Adrian, it is merely stating a fact. It was not necessary for all species to be on the Ark. God brought them, so he chose them, not Noah. I think God knows what he's doing, but you seem to doubt him for some reason?

Spiritually speaking, what do you believe other than what your prophet tells you? Are you seriously going to go there?

o the next step is to fudge the issue by taking about "kinds of animals" as not being species but something else. However once bible literalists go down that road, their conflict with science just becomes even more insurmountable.

I find none of it insurmountable actually. Science is the only thing that makes it complex. What the Bible says simply makes perfect sense to me. There was plenty of room on the ark for all the basic "kinds" and obviously there was no problem with them breeding after they came out of the Ark, because we have all these amazing varieties of creatures now, all over the world. Maybe God put them where he wanted them to be.....as I said, Genesis concentrates on what became of the humans, not the animals. Who knows for sure? God does obviously. In faith I believe him. I don't necessarily believe science as if it must know better than the Creator. You can if you like....

That's the kind of "faith" you need to apply. You could have a never ending food supply for every 'kind' of animal.

Is that impossible for the Creator? Are you placing limitations on him again, as though he has some? It says clearly in the scriptures that God accomplishes all that he sets out to do. (Isaiah 55:11) Are you saying that he can't do that for some reason?

Baha'is don't need to twist science or it malign it as under the influence of Satan. We don't need to create pseudoscience to debunk established science.

Pseudo-science debunks itself.....it only takes a little bit of digging to see that none of what it believes about macro-evolution is actually provable. That makes it a belief, not a fact. Facts are provable. Suggestions and assumptions are not facts. There is no "established science" relating to macro-evolution. Its mostly guesswork based on adaptation, but taken way beyond anything provable by science.

We don't live in a world of magical proclaiming ourselves 'faithful' and attacking everyone else as 'faithless'. We have very different world views.

Giving my view of things is not attacking.....I am just speaking the truth as I understand it and responding to what you have said. When people misrepresent the God of the Bible, and twist his words to suit their own beliefs, then I will call them out on it. Are you not doing the same? We each give our reasons for why we believe as we do, and others are free to take away from that what they wish.

If the dissenters want to put their 2 cents worth in then that is up to them. I have no wish to read their distorted ramblings....why would I?
This is a religious debate forum.....its about debating the subject of religion, is it not? When you feel as if you have to attack someone yourself, perhaps its time to take that break? o_O ......
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
That is a pretty dystopian view of life

It would be if it were true o_O.....deliberate distortions posted by people with an axe to grind are not a good basis for getting to the truth of any matter. Those playing the victim are always after sympathy and justification. Isn't this why judges are appointed to hear both sides of a case before passing their judgment, and after hearing from a jury after they have deliberated on both sides? If the judge or the jury were to come to their conclusions by hearing only one side, how would justice ever be carried out? :shrug:

We are to contribute to the good in the world by being imitators of Jesus.....if that is a bad model to follow, then I'll let others be the judge of that....
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
What sort of person stays with JW?

The sort who don't judge people based on what dissenters with an axe to grind have to say about them.

"As you judge so shall you be judged".......be careful about what you want to believe.....that is what happened to the Jews. They took the wrong advice from the wrong people and ended up murdering their own Messiah.

The people of Noah's day felt secure in the knowledge that no one believed him.....they did eventually.

Appearances can be deceptive.....
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
As per section 5 of your link.

"Since little information on the internal structures of the Ark are known, we made the following estimation from the viewpoint of modern shipbuilding technology, although we assume that the Ark was in fact built using relatively ancient technology."

Of course you do not remember that which refutes your indoctrination.

You didn't read what you linked thus you didn't know modern knowledge was injected into the Ark model. This is a bias in which any flaws are corrected ad hoc. More so this modern knowledge is what made the model work as with no internal structure provided. So the researchers can hand pick a system they know works. More so this "test" was done by those that already believe thus another bias which by the very nature of their indoctrination they will not go against.

Your linked test proved only the test was a farce.
Lol! The Bible reveals some of the internal design, but that has no bearing on the outside dimensions, which are given.


BTW, Dr. Seon W Hong, then Director of KRISO which performed the study, is not a supporter of the Bible. (Believes ‘life came from the sea.’) Your claim of bias is a faulty assumption.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
Where do the Brahmakumaris serve the purpose of war !

I don't believe I mentioned them in that regard.....are you a member of their religion?

Peace can come only with tolerance and acceptance.

If that is the case, then there will never be peace. Humans are not interested in tolerance and acceptance....they are only after what is good for themselves and they don't care about anyone else.

According to Wiki....there are concerns about the Brahmakumaris.....

"Adherents have been criticised by nonmembers for hiding or downplaying their prophesied physical destruction of the world[84] particularly as they still believe that such an event will happen "soon". However, they maintain that their primary purpose is to teach meditation and peace of mind, not to push their views about the different challenges the world is facing on nonmembers who may be visiting the group to learn about meditation or values based living.[46]

In the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Howell reported that the Brahma Kumaris protected itself from the practice of families "dumping" their daughters with the organisation by requiring a payment from the families of those wishing to dedicate their daughters to the work and services of the organisation. The payment is intended to cover the living expenses incurred during the trial period.[85]

John Wallis wrote a book examining the status of tradition in the contemporary world, which used the religion as a case study,[86] focusing on recruitment methods, the issue of celibacy, reinterpretation of religious history. He reported the rewriting of the revelatory messages (Murlis) by the Brahma Kumari.[87][88] They have been accused of breaking up marriages.[89][90]

When the organisation started, empowering women to assert their right to remain celibate, particularly in marriage, was a prime factor in the controversy that arose in 1930s Sind, as it directly challenged the dominance of men over women in the patriarchal Indian subcontinent.[1] Feminist commentator Prem Chowdry has criticised the practice of celibacy within the organisation as being a form of patriarchal control.[91]"


Would you like to address these concerns? I know how things can become distorted when they are reported on by others, so please tell us how you would answer these criticisms? To remain celibate in marriage seems a bit extreme....is it true?

Well, I have never seen the devil except in horror films. Same with Dracula, Werewolf , Frankenstein and the rest of the dudes.

I have never seen God either, but I can see what he has made, and I see that the kindness of Jesus Christ as reported in the scriptures towards the afflicted, is a reflection of his Father's loving personality.....I also see what kind of influence the devil can have on those who throw the door open to him by their choice of entertainment, and how they relish the bloodshed and violence of war both on the screen and in real life. The world is a horror film at present. :( The blood is real.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
The sort who don't judge people based on what dissenters with an axe to grind have to say about them.

"As you judge so shall you be judged".......be careful about what you want to believe.....that is what happened to the Jews. They took the wrong advice from the wrong people and ended up murdering their own Messiah.

The people of Noah's day felt secure in the knowledge that no one believed him.....they did eventually.

Appearances can be deceptive.....

I had a couple of bad experiences with JWs that are simply terrible both in terms of repeated invasion of privacy, trespassing and threats of lawsuits for saving the life of a young mother of 5.

I have never understood WHY. Now I do. .. so thank you.
 

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
I had a couple of bad experiences with JWs that are simply terrible both in terms of repeated invasion of privacy, trespassing and threats of lawsuits for saving the life of a young mother of 5.

I have never understood WHY. Now I do. .. so thank you.

Could you please provide the detail of these horrors :eek:.....when did they occur and how did JW's repeatedly invade your privacy and trespass?
I assume that the "saving of the life of a young mother of 5" involved a blood transfusion against her wishes?

Please share the details, so that the other side of the story can be told. I'd like to highlight the distortion. o_O
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Could you please provide the detail of these horrors :eek:.....when did they occur and how did JW's repeatedly invade your privacy and trespass?
I assume that the "saving of the life of a young mother of 5" involved a blood transfusion against her wishes?

Please share the details, so that the other side of the story can be told. I'd like to highlight the distortion. o_O

She dropped in the ER in end stage labor having had NO prenatal care. She was delivered and proceeded to bleed out. She lost consciousness and couldn't consent or refuse a transfusion. She was transfused saving her life (she had four children under 5 at home).. within 20 minutes my office got a call from a JW lawyer 300 miles away.

The other .. trespassing and invasion of privacy was in two different locations 150 miles apart.. Knocking on the door morning after morning and refusing to leave the property when asked.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
This is what I am hearing from @Deeje and it is reminiscent of how I have observed some people think.

We former Jehovah's Witnesses who have been given back our mental vision are just providing real facts about the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses but @Deeje calls it "ax grinding" and she says that people should look at the other side but the other side isn't about the facts we are providing. I am sure what the other side she would submit is just something about what hope they have and that the Bible really teaches everything that they live by.

I have to live with my daughter and she is sometimes friendly and helpful but at other times she is as though processed by a demon. And her idea is that because she is at times friendly and helpful I should accept that at times she is incorrigible. BUT the two are not related!
 
Last edited:

Deeje

Avid Bible Student
Premium Member
She dropped in the ER in end stage labor having had NO prenatal care. She was delivered and proceeded to bleed out. She lost consciousness and couldn't consent or refuse a transfusion. She was transfused saving her life (she had four children under 5 at home).. within 20 minutes my office got a call from a JW lawyer 300 miles away.

Where was this and how long ago? For us, blood transfusions are a serious issue. It would be highly unlikely for a JW to enter a dangerous medical situation without prior notification of their refusal to receive blood. This issue would not even arise today because the medical professional who have kept up to date on best practice understand that blood is not the "life-saving" procedure it was once thought to be. It's dangers in fact, greatly outweigh its benefits.

It would also be highly unlikely for a woman to go through a pregnancy without medical supervision unless these people were not in a financial situation to afford such. Having already delivered 4 other children she was not exactly a novice at childbirth. The medical systems in some countries don't treat the poor with much compassion.

If your hospital heard from a lawyer within 20 minutes, then the medical professionals who administered the transfusion without the patient's permission were obviously liable. Would he even call if there was no case to answer? I don't believe this is the full story. Your version of it is a little suspect in view of your biased comments so far. What details are you leaving out?

The other .. trespassing and invasion of privacy was in two different locations 150 miles apart.. Knocking on the door morning after morning and refusing to leave the property when asked.

This is also a bit suspect because we have permission by law to approach your front door. We are only trespassing if we refuse to leave when asked to do so. We are not calling to bother people but to offer a message of hope. If you are such disgruntled people, why would we bother to keep calling? "Morning after morning"? Are you seriously going to ask me to believe that we actually do that? We go door to door as the first Christians did.....but we don't call on those who tell us not to come back. Nor do we go back to the same house, unless someone is not at home on our first call. Perhaps you didn't answer the door? It is the only reason we would have returned so soon. Ignoring us doesn't make us go away. You can politely tell us not to call again and we will politely follow your wishes. It doesn't have to be ugly unless you make it ugly. We are not breaking the law.

Do you really think that we have nothing better to do than invite law suits on ourselves....or to take out lawsuits on others? Please....:rolleyes:
 
Top