₦airaland Forum

frosbel: True I blame his wife and uncle for his change

--- Then you probably don't understand what you're talking about.
--- Islam's pophet did in 23 years what the Jewish tribal god couldn't achieve in decades
--- The point is: your focus on violence in comparing Islam/Christianity makes no sense.
--- Islam's Prophet learned from the best, and then executed the strategy with superb efficiency

frosbel: His second coming is not for violence but for judgement of all mankind.

--- then we do not disagree, so far we also agree that the 'justice' you imply is impossible with world-wide violence
.

frosbel: God is not a tribal God, we have Christians from every nation, tribe and tongue even in greater numbers than the saved Jews.

--- The Jewish god wouldn't agree with you. He is the God of Israel. And not all nations are Israel. Why're you arguing this fundamental point??

frosbel: God is LOVE and he does indeed and will punish sinners.

--- Define 'LOVE'; and then define "sin"; and tell how those are relevant to the 'God' of whom you write and to humans.

frosbel: However he never coerces any of us to be his children.

?'?'?

How does this even make sense to you.

If he's our creator, then we're all his children.
If he says anyone who doesn't obey him will be killed/punished forever, then that ought to qualify as extreme coercion. What're you talking about?

.

.

Islam, like any other religion, must be ridiculed when Islam deserves such ridicule.

All 'prophets', 'seers', 'messangers of God' etc etc need to be ridiculed when they deserve it

It is laughable to any religion to claim some immunity from ridicule for its favourite prophet.

Take for instance: dogs. Is the irrational dogma about dogs in Islam not worthy of ridicule? It definitely is.

Take for instance: that six/nine year old girl kept for the prophet; it would've been okay if she was just kept; but Islam's Prophet began entertaining her with his 50-something member when the poor child was nine years. Now, we could - could - make allowances in view of the times then, but when Muslims today use that as justification for raping children, do you think this isn't ridiculous? Of course, it is! If you fail to see the point, we could make it even more explicit.

.

Babaji111: Jesus prayed by falling down with his face (which muslims do), he called his Lord ellah in hebrew which means ALLAH in Arabic. So does all other prophets from Noah, Moses, Abraham etc. Allah, the Creator of Heavens and Earth sent these

So?

-- Jesus may have prayed like that; nothing special. His ancestors did the same.
-- This manner of praying was not invented by Muslims; Daniel is reported to have prayed in teh same manner, facing Jerusalem, during his ordeal prior to being thrown to the lions

Daniel 6:10 >> When Daniel knew that the document had been signed, he went to his house where he had windows in his upper chamber open toward Jerusalem. He got down on his knees three times a day and prayed and gave thanks before his God, as he had done previously.

There're other examples.

Arabs 'falling down on their faces' and facing a particular direction is nothing special; these acts preceeded Islam; Islam borrowed them.

Actually:

1) Yes, Allah's Prophet became violent; but initially, he was peace-loving, until, of course, Islam became the dominant religion

2) But, how's Jesus any different? In his first coming, he was peaceful, but most and/or all Christian sects accept that his second coming will be quite very violent. Isn't that so? Mohammed's violence will be 'nothing' compared to the 'violence' predicted for non-Christians when Jesus the Christ returns.

It is a mistake to present the Christian God as pacifist. Yahweh, or Jehovah, the tribal god of the Jews is clear to present as a 'manly person of war' (he's lived up that reputation by engaging in serial genocides, infanticide, and all sorts); Jesus presented as a reformed version of that deity, but only for a while. . .

So please, it isn't pretty to misrepresent the Christian God as only loving; he is able to wage war and win it; his peaceful posture must not be mistaken as pacifist.

.

MyJoe,

I haven't managed a deserving response to your comprehensive post in reply to mine, but this: that was impressive weekend (re)search ;-), I'll have little to disagree with, and even less to seek clarifications on . . .

.

It is dangerous to equate the Seadogs with the thugs in PC cults in Nigerian universities. . .

For the Seadogs: you could apply this year, in November/December (becoming a member isn't as easy as you may think; try it)

There are branches in Nigeria and outside Nigeria.

You have an Internet connection, the basic information you need could be found here:

http://www.nas-int.org/

.

davidylan, old friend:

MacDaddy01 is up to something. . .

The definition of a troll here is ambiguous, note:

(1) A troll is a persistent trouble-maker --- who is a 'troublemaker', and when does the 'troublemaker' become 'persistent'?

(2) consistently posting irritating offtopic comments on other peoples' threads, --- note here that it isn't enough that the comment is offtopic, it must also be irritating; now, irritating to whom? Also note what is apparent: the fellow isn't a troll if s/he posts these things on a thread started by him/herself . . .

(3) insulting people for no reason whatsoever, --- so, you could insult people, so far there's a reason to do so . . .

(4) People who make the forum unpleasant for everyone else. --- ah. . . this strictly means if there's one person - just one person - who isn't feeling unpleasant, the condition isn't met. . .

(5) posting adverts in non-ad sections deliberately. --- note: 'deliberately'; that'll be generally difficult to prove, except there's a confession from the poster; and even then, we could legitimately doubt the confession . . .

Y'see, it isn't as straightforward as it may appear . . .

.

No, the issue is not that the Jehovah's Witnesses have individuals who r.ape children

The issues are more important that that, and some of the issues with this are:

1) because you want to protect the name of your god Jehovah, you protect the child r.apists (see: www.silentlambs.org)

2) you don't inform parents in a congregation when a chid rapist joins the congregation, even when you have the record of the r.apist

3) you allow these child r.apists to go to people's houses to preach your bad news of the kingdom

4) you hire expensive lawyers to make trouble for your members who have been r.aped by your elders & ministerial servants

5) you value the name of your religion more than the safety of defenceless children

6) when a child reports that s/he has been r.aped, you require two witnesses to the crime (not much different than the Taliban) to believe it

And, you people lie:

7) In your congregations, you have a hierarchy: Presiding Overseer (PO), Body of Elders, Ministerial Servants; the PO is the main responsible

8') You teach that all Christians who are not Jehovah's Witnesses are unbelievers (even your Watchtower of 01 July 2012, pg 29 confirms this)

9) In advanced nations, your reputation as protectors of child r.apists is now fairly well-known; in Nigeria and other 'third world' countries, there isn't much information. Your religion continues to prey on the innocent and defenceless

. . .

When are you people going to answer the simple doctrinal question on Sodom & Gomorrah? Will those people be ressurrected or not?

.

.
.
Links to Jehovah's Witnesses' child r.ape enlightenment

These are links to www.silentlambs.org, an organisation floated by Jehovah's Witnesses tired of the policy of their organisation as a haven for child r.apists

For seeking reform, the Jehovah's Witness organisation booted these people asking for justice out of their congregations

1) http://silentlambs.org/OaklandLawsuit.htm - $21 million punitive damages against Watchtower

2) http://silentlambs.org/Mcleantoronto.htm - Ministerial Servant Jehovah's Witness hiding from police for raping children

3) http://silentlambs.org/Kozelisky.htm - Ministerial Servant, son of City Overseer, molester of childtren

4) http://silentlambs.org/Brotherallen.htm - Jehovah's Witness Brother Allen

5) http://silentlambs.org/BrotherCook.htm - Jehovah's Witness Brother Cook

6) http://silentlambs.org/Perfettobustedagain.htm - Jehovah's witness Brother Perfetto

Note: Jehovah's Witnesses do not prevent known rapists of children to carry a bag and 'preach' from house to house

Note: the above cases are reports from Western countries

Note: the problem exists in Nigeria too

.

Remember: "This story illustrates the key issue with p.aedophiles. They never stop and the average molester will hurt over 200 children in their life time. "

.

theking5: Damn u latsma official, fashola is now converting all alaye's in lagos now as latsma and kai offical's without giving them adequate and requisite training needed to execute d job, even giving them orientation on how to work with d people in d society, , how can somebody go and stand in front of a vehicle just bcs u want to arrest d person without fearing 4 ur own life, . . . .

Unfortunately, many LASTMA officers do this very dangerous thing.

Perhaps they believe in their immortality; but whatever juju they have hasn't been working

.

.

Fresky : I have one question for you:

In what year did the JWs recognise 607 BCE as the date for the destruction of Jerusalem?

If you don't know, go and find out and return.

Don't copy/paste anything yet, just answer that question with a date, and the reference from Watchtower literature.

That ought to put a break on the repetitive stuff you've been posting.

So:

In what year did the JWs recognise 607 BCE as the date for the destruction of Jerusalem?

.

Maximus85: NIMSHI, THIS IS HATRED. YOU MAKE THIS LARGE FINDING ON JWs, BUT I NOTICED YOU NEVER QUOTED THE BIBLE FOR ONCE. PLEASE WHICH CHURCH DO YOU ATTEND? BE BOLD TO TELL US...SO WE CAN ALL COMPAIR. HAVE YOU NOTICED ANY DIFFERECE BETWEEN MY POSTS AND YOURS? I AM ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT THE BIBLE, GOD AND JESUS. I'VE NEVER USED A NEGATIVE WORD AGAINST ANY CHURCH. I BACK MY POSTS WITH THE BIBLE. JW'S ARE THE MOST HATED IN THE WORLD, YOU CLAIM THAT WE ARE SPREADING LIES AND THAT WE ARE DANGEROUS. BUT BRO! I'VE GOT NEWS FOR YOU, JESUS FACED THE SAME SITUATION, PEOPLE HATED HIM, THEY SAID HE WAS TALKING ABOUT A STRANGE GOD, THEY TAGGED HIM "DANGEROUS" THEY HATED HIM AND THEY EVEN KILLED HIM. JESUS SAID THAT HIS FOLLOWERS WILL FACE MORE HATRED AND OPPOSITIONS.
NIMSHI, HAVE YOU EVER WONDERED WHY THE JW's ARE THE ONLY RELIGION GROUP HATED?

Maximus85: writing in uppercase isn't good.

First: it is difficult to read.

Second: it is the equivalent of shouting. Why're you shouting?

Now, I'll respond to the substantive parts of your post in brief:

NIMSHI, THIS IS HATRED.
*** Actually, it isn't. I do not hate JWs. You don't have to believe it; but were I to give you two pieces of information, you may come to agree; but I do not offer my pearls before hogs

YOU MAKE THIS LARGE FINDING ON JWs, BUT I NOTICED YOU NEVER QUOTED THE BIBLE FOR ONCE.
*** I don't need the bible to make findings about JW history; I only need to examine JW history.
*** You think I can't quote the bible? Well, I can.
*** I can quote the bible, and also spupport all I've written about JWs with references to JW literature
*** Even 'Satan the Devil' as you know him, also quotes the bible, so, it means little.

PLEASE WHICH CHURCH DO YOU ATTEND? BE BOLD TO TELL US...SO WE CAN ALL COMPAIR.
*** This is the eternal problem with JWs; it also shows you're suffering from something. I 'll explain:
*** In establishing the facts, my church is irrelevant; my faith is irrelevant; my beliefs are irrelevant
*** For all you know, I could be a ministerial servant in a congregation close to you
*** Or a former Circuit Overseer, or a former substitute CO, or a service overseer in a congregation, or a PO or sth
*** Or somebody on a test of fitness, or a regular or auxiliary pioneer, or a bible student
*** Or a disfellowshipped JW, or a recently reinstated JW, or a student in a Catholic seminary
*** In short: anything. . .
*** You think staunch JWs cannot astutely criticise the JWs? Well, news, 'brother': yes, they can

HAVE YOU NOTICED ANY DIFFERECE BETWEEN MY POSTS AND YOURS? I AM ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT THE BIBLE, GOD AND JESUS. I'VE NEVER USED A NEGATIVE WORD AGAINST ANY CHURCH. I BACK MY POSTS WITH THE BIBLE.
*** Actually, you don't.
*** But note: I do not quote the bible to exhibit my knowledge of the bible; and I avoid a ping-pong game with a JW like you on some matters of doctrine because I understand where that always leads.
*** I have also noticed that you - and at least one of your fellow JW travellers here have not demonstrated the rigour to examine details. For instance, I would be glad to discuss Trinity with you using the JW Trinity brochure and - and! - an Italian version of the JW Trinity brochure. (And no, you don't need a knowledge of Italian for that particular brochure, but I could tell you why it's significant. . . ) But going by what I've read here, it'll be pearls before hogs; so, no matter.
*** I have posited challenges to address for you as JWs, the most recent is the question about whether the people of Sodom & Gomorrah will be resurrected; this is a simple matter of doctrine; why don't you answer?

JW'S ARE THE MOST HATED IN THE WORLD,
*** That fact is very arguable.
*** A sizable portion of the world don't know JWs exist.
*** By repeating this, you betray your inattention to detail, and a penchant for saying things you've heard from your leadership.
*** And it's clear that at the moment, JWs cannot be the most hated in the world; think about it.
*** I know you the JWs like the title of the 'most hated' in the world; I am pleased to announce to you that the Taliban have now beat you to it ;-)

YOU CLAIM THAT WE ARE SPREADING LIES AND THAT WE ARE DANGEROUS. BUT BRO! I'VE GOT NEWS FOR YOU, JESUS FACED THE SAME SITUATION, PEOPLE HATED HIM, THEY SAID HE WAS TALKING ABOUT A STRANGE GOD, THEY TAGGED HIM "DANGEROUS" THEY HATED HIM AND THEY EVEN KILLED HIM.

*** You're lying again. Who said Jesus was talking about a 'STRANGE GOD'. The Jews knew the God Jesus was talking about. Try again.
*** Jesus said his followers will be witnesses of him; but you're categorial that you're not witnesses of Jesus;
*** Jesus the Christ didn't suffer a persecuting complex; it appears you do.
*** Don't worry, no one will kill you. But you must stop shouting; y'know, for your health and sanity . . .


JESUS SAID THAT HIS FOLLOWERS WILL FACE MORE HATRED AND OPPOSITIONS.
*** Apparently, you haven't: you're still alive.
*** None of your JW leaders in the governing body have ever been executed.
*** None of your leading/top (un)Faithful and in(Discreet) Slave class has been executed (I write that with the caveat that if they have, it may have been in Nazi Germany and perhaps elsewhere, but not as definite targets. That actually means I have to comment that the JW organisation for some time supported Hitler in Germany)
*** So, how can you claim that you're facing more opposition than Jesus
*** Even here on Nairaland, you weren't bothered until you presented yourself and belief as a target

NIMSHI, HAVE YOU EVER WONDERED WHY THE JW's ARE THE ONLY RELIGION GROUP HATED?

*** Wrong question; I don't believe you the JWs are, see my post above; this is a lie your leadership told you
*** and even if you are, it will be for good reasons, viz:

--- Teaching that organ transplants is cannibalism
--- Teaching that donating blood is bad, yet, using products from blood donated by others
--- Attacking the Catholic church on paedophilia while you guys do worse
--- Calling the UN the 'wild beast' of Revelation while secretly cooperating with the UN until being exposed
--- Teaching that God will kill everyone else unless they join your sect
--- Predicting the end of the world several times (while berating those who have done the same)
--- Teaching that your Governing Body has direct access to God (meanwhile, they make decisions by voting)
--- Teaching that you are God's prophets; lying for God, and destroying faith in him
--- And, well: you go disturbing people in their homes, usually without booking appointments; sure to annoy people, eh

Look, I won't blame people for not liking you; but, as noted, you're neither the most hated nor the only hated.

.

MyJoe,

1) We would have to disagree on whether the JWs are dangerous or not; I insist they are; whether that's what comes to mind when they're thought of is of marginal relevance. In fact, the argument is sound that they are dangerous precisely because they project and present as 'not dangerous'. And, your familiarity with the issues does not reduce the extent of their danger to others. My concern is more about new recruits, who, for all intents are tricked into the religion by omission/non-disclosure of the full facts prior to their baptism; it is also of marginal relevance whether the omissions are deliberate or not.

2) I don't think I misunderstood you statement about rape/Africa int eh context of this discussion, and there's nothing in your most recent post to encourage a revision of that position. This doesn't mean I am correct, neither that you're definitely wrong. . . I haven't read your comments outside of this thread.

3) It appears you have misinterpreted my comments on culpability: no, I do not argue that the leaders are to blame; I say that the leaders hare the blame - and that the results we see are most likely what they hoped for. In principle: I hold the decision maker primarily responsible. That ordinary JWs are severely constrained does not - as I see it - absolve those 'ordinary' JWs of responsibility.

4) On keeping it whiter than white . . . I do not disagree with you. Also this: the comments I have made are things I have heard JWs in good standing say (re: inheriting fantastic buildings after Armageddon); what I did not add (and perhaps unfairly) is that JWs taking the lead have counselled against such comments . . .

5) It appears we are agreed it is difficult to help dyed-in-the-wool JWs out; the reasons are obvious to me. But I generally do not mind the equivalent of whacking someone with a baseball bat in arguments to wake them up; it may or may not work. I also find that valid extreme statements have served as anchors to help some JWs think. As stated, I am more concerned about new recruits, and especially, those who join for doctrinal purity and things associated with that. I am not of the opinion that the JW religion is dangerous to everyone who joins it (anymore than I would suppose that it is always dangerous to join some religion). As a vehicle for social interaction, even the JW religion could be heaven for some.

6) Yes, the child rape scandals among JWs are becoming well-known in the West; but even at that, the facts are not well known, as well as he true implications. I would be interested to read exactly what was said at the conventions you mentioned. I know the tactic: the JW organisation releases just enough information to satisfy the curiosity of the faithful, but nothing beyond that; they're skilled at this. A look at the official JW website about the most recent case will confirm this. What they write is, er, 'beautiful nonsense'. But these are most important for places like Nigeria where information isn't that well available.

7) You wrote: "But, still, if something is on the international media and the Internet... " --- Perhaps you're overestimating the 'average' JW? I spoke to one two weeks ago (this is quite a smart young man, educated, and quite conscientious), but he still had to talk to an elder in his congregation before he would do a search for information about JWs on the Internet. When he mentioned 'Crisis of Conscience', he said the elder didn't know about it, but got word the next weak that he needn't read the book. I have been surprised only at why he would need the permission to do these things. . . Long story short: that stuff is on the Internet means little, and especially when the official position discourages using the Internet for finding out information about JWs

8') I'll look forward to what you will have to report regarding gains from compromising dividends; I would hope your 'report' will go beyond what I have offered here. And I must write again that it is a surprise, going by the things you've written here that you've not been aware (these're not new; I would suppose this is more than a decade old, and has been on the Internet for that long . . . )

.

Hmnnn. . . it's been said the late officer was killed by a danfo driver, not this lady . . .

.

truthislight: ...

Since you cannot see any false JW teachings from what I've written, I am unable to further assist you.
Recall I did hint at being you (only as a poster here) being constrained in ability to understand stuff . . . but:

1) you could learn a bit from the ongoing discussion witn MyJoe on this thread (MyJoe may well be a JW . . . )
2) it appears you have some difficulty in understanding structured arguments.

Now, youtube is your friend, so I will be recommending videos for you. Here's one Witness talking; 30 years a Jehovah's Witness:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNyg68Gg2MI

truthislight: (1) Why not . . . [point] out were the JW teaching does not agree with the bible.

(2) It like you are not aware that the act of disfellowshiping is a bible commend at 1cor 5:9-13. Whether you like it or not is immeterial, but what the bible says is of utmost important and final with the JW.

(3) If the JW so hate members of other religion why do they go teaching them the bible?

(4) Some people have been JW for upward of 40yrs but they are not delusional.

I've numbered the (marginally) substantive portions of your post; I respond according to the numbers:

(1) I have, but again; what were they thinking when they:
(a) said the end would come in 1914, 1925, 1975, and 2000?
(b) said organ transplants was cannibalism? (god however changed his mind about 15 yrs or so later)
(c) changed God's position on Sodom & Gomorrah and ressurrection up to six, seven, eight times?
(d) joined and retained membership in the UN DPI while also calling the UN the 'wild beast' of Revelation?
(e) dissociated with the UN after their association with the UN was exposed? Did they think people are stupid & won't notice?
(f) said in 1920: "millions now living will never die"?
(g) teach that Jesus is mediator only for those JWs who will go to heaven

Let me give you this assignment: search for the formulation fot he vows JWs take when they get baptised; compare it with the bible, and add your comment. This assignment is instructive, but you have to attempt it first.

(2) JWs don't only disfellowship, they also shun. But note this: how does the scripture you quote above correlate with what JWs do? How is it different? If you could attempt this, then you would probably have helped yourself.

(3) JWs go to preach because

(a) their leaders have indoctrinated them to believe that the salvation of each JW depends on this preaching (the only exceptions are the so-called remnant).
(b) if you don't preach and report hours on the report card, you will br branded as 'weak'; you probably know the implication of this:
--- you may end up being 'marked'
--- if you're single, you may not find another JW to marry
--- you may become isolated by other JWs in your congregation
--- there's more. . . As a JW, you know your 'reputation' in the organisation depends a lot on your report card which you submit every month

(4) JWs for 40 years? Ok, let's do a little arithmetic with this 40-year JW:
--- this person became a JW in 1972
--- let's assume the person was 20 years when they became a JW; the person will be 60 years today
--- when that person was 17 years in 1969, the JW organisation said this person will never grow old in this system of things
--- when that person was 23 years in 1975, the JW leadership whipped up expectations for something 'big' happening
--- May be this person was one of those who sold their belingings to spend more time preaching
--- If this person listened to JWs, the person would not have attended university:

Watchtower 1st September 1975 p543: No Jehovah's Witness should want to go to college. Rather, work in the Watchtower Organization
Watchtower 1st August 1975 p451: It is foolish to want to be a doctor or a lawyer

--- Just two years after theis person joined the JWs, here is what the JWs said:

Kingdom Ministry May 1974 p.3 How Are You Using Your Life? Yes, the end of this system is so very near! Is that not reason to increase our activity? In this regard we can learn something from a runner who puts on a final burst of speed near the finish of a race. Look at Jesus, who apparently stepped up his activity during his final days on earth. In fact, over 27 percent of the material in the Gospels is devoted to just the last week of Jesus' earthly ministry!—Matt. 21:1-27:50; Mark 11:1-15:37; Luke 19:29-23:46; John 11:55-19:30.
By carefully and prayerfully examining our own circumstances, we also may find that we can spend more time and energy in preaching during this final period before the present system ends. Many of our brothers and sisters are doing just that. This is evident from the rapidly increasing number of pioneers.
Yes, since the summer of 1973 there have been new peaks in pioneers every month. Now there are 20,394 regular and special pioneers in the United States, an all-time peak. That is 5,190 more than there were in February 1973! A 34-percent increase! Does that not warm our hearts? Reports are heard of brothers selling their homes and property and planning to finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service. Certainly this is a fine way to spend the short time remaining before the wicked world's end.—1 John 2:17.

--- and then, even in 2001: Kingdom Ministry June 2001 for week starting July 2nd 2001
15 min: Youths—Be Wise in Choosing Your Career. This is the first of three Service Meeting parts that will review Scriptural principles relates to supplemental education. Some Christian youths are pursuing secular careers through higher education, which is having a negative impact on their spirituality. This part is a discussion between two parents and their teenage son or daughter. The youth is at a point where a serious decision needs to be made about future goals. Although some may want to pursue financial advantages, prestige, or comforts of life, the family examine the Bible to see what it recommends. (See Young People Ask, pages 174-5; The Watchtower, August 15, 1997, page 21, and September 1, 1999, pages 19-21, paragraphs 1-3 and 5-6.) The youth agrees that it is wise to pursue a course in life that will serve him or her well in achieving theocratic goals to advance Kingdom interests.

--- If this person is isn't delusional, they ought to be privately questioning what they've spent the last 40 years following. I won't say their life has been wasted; no; some JWs are aware and just ignore it; they've spent too long in, and there's no point disrupting their lives in old age . . .

truthislight: Actually, for one who says he is not an atheist and claims to know the much you know and said that YAHWEH/JEHOVAH is a tribal God of the Jews do you still think it is reasonable carrying on a discussion with you?

What's your problem with my characterisation of Yahweh as a Jewish tribal god? I could give you any number of references of well-known Christian (and still unrepentantly devoted Christian) scholars who have said the same and even gone into more details you may find unplatable.

I think you're mistaking an assessment (whcih may be disputed) with something you haven't explicitly expressed. And I tell you: it will be a mark of rank irrationality to not discuss with someone because they made a characterisation you disagree with.

Abbreviations:
--- Governing Body (GB).
--- 'Faithful and Discreet Slave' (FDS)

I've placed challenges/notes for you as a defender of the JW religion:

--- JWs are false prophets; they have predicted the end of the world, or, 'this system of things' (a mouthful, but JW code; henceforth: TSOT) many times.
--- JW doctrines are not special; they almost entirely have no unique doctrine. Their most important doctrines are derived from the the 7th day adventists
--- The 'love' JWs claim to be among them is nothing special; other Christian groups show love in even more profound ways
--- Because JWs claim that their FDS is the channel through which God communicates with earth, we are able to show that the FDS have taught falsehood
--- JWs have a doctrine that 'light gets brighter' (meaning: knowledge improves); we can show that their light does not always get brighter, that it may get bright, go dim, flicker, die out, etc etc; essentially: their FDS/GB do not have God's Holy spirit even according to JW criteria
--- Hence: the Jehovah's Witness organisation cannot be God's representative on earth.

Other curious facts that the resident JWs here have not expressly accepted:
--- They are controlled by a group of men based in the US, called the Governing Body (GB).
--- The GB claim to be representatives of a 'Faithful and Discreet Slave' (FDS)
--- This FDS claim to be the remainder of the 144,000 people who will go to heaven (therefore, everyone alive today who will go to heaven is a JW)
--- They reach that all other Christians are fake, and that they are the only true Christians: they will be the ones to survive destructions at Armaggeddon.

MyJoe: On blood transfusion, I think what medical treatment an adult decides to accept is his business. My concern, though, is about the children. But this shouldn't be a problem if legislatures are alive to their responsibility. The courts should have the power to do what is right when children are put in danger by their parents. Some countries have already made progress in this area.

But you probably assume that even adults JWs are free to make a choice; this is almost certainly not the case, with elders 'hovering' around the ill to make sure they're standing firm with the faith, the issue of free choice isn't truly an option. I differentiate between 'free' choice and informed choice: even many experienced JWs do not understand the complicated doctine/practice schism within their own religion on the issue of blood. Many of them don't appear to understand the implication of the acceptance of so-called blood fractions by JWs; haemoglobin factor VII(I?), is one; the issues around this has implications unrealised. JW literature also misrepresents statistics regarding non-human blood options.

MyJoe: We know how dangerous beliefs can be. For example, many babies have been rap.ed accross Africa because people believe having sex with a virgin cures Aids. Societies seem to face no threats or dangers from having JWs around. Please expound on what you wrote.

You are generalising and being apologetic for the JW religion; I consider this disingenous.

We're not here talking about the r.ape of children across Africa, but specifically about a higly organised religious group providing an environment fertile for the abuse fo children; you do injury to the plight to JW victims by attemting a sanitisation of what we know is a cancer in the JW religion.

You repeat the JW lie that "Societies seem to face no threats or dangers from having JWs around"; on this, those who have had close association with JWs, and especially dissenting JWs who have either diassociated or beeen difellowshipped - and branded as apostates - are quite well positioned to expose the raging cancer of the rape of children amongst JWs; they recogniose this as a threat huge enough for them to risk almost everything to expose it.

Now: we know that the JW religion int he West shores up their ranks through the recruitment of family members, usually children of JWs (the rentation rates are dismal; you're probably aware fo the statistics), but in third-world countries, where poverty is rampant and all sorts of issues enter the mix, new people are being recruited. Have you given a thought to the disruption to family life that would most certainly occur if a woman married to say a Catholic Christian man were to become a JW? I offer this as a thought experiment for you. There are other aspects; I could get to them.

.

Nimshi: The JWs keep [the incidence of paedophilia] silent; yet, the JW leaders have a list of up to 30,000 JW rapists of children in a database

MyJoe: Right. But I doubt any group would publish such things on the pages of its Watchtower or take out newspaper ads to announce them. The church’s child abuse problem is now fairly well known. CNN, ABC and other major networks have done stories on it, if my memory serves me right. If there is ignorance about such matters among the rank and file, I think that should be blamed on their tendency to refuse to listen to, much less, believe anything bad about the church, as the church is equated with God in the subconscious without the person even realising it. Just look at how someone reacted to an extract showing a specific prediction the church made – that it was a forgerry since the church would not be so silly to publish that.

*** No: the organisation does not encourage the publicising of such information. One very important aspect of the religion is to maintain a facade of 'good conduct'; unfavourable news is never publicised. One very dangerous consequence of this is this: when a child molester knownt to the the JW organisation moves from one congregation to another, the elders in the new congregation would most certainly know the fellow is a child molester, but they are not allowed to announce the danger to the congregation; parents with small children then remain at risk. This is one very important/depressing way in which the JW religion provides a haven for child molesters.

*** What the dissenters in the JW religious sought was a reasonable solution to the problem of active paedophilia in the religion; the JW organisation refused any reform. You may know of the most damning of the JW rule: if a child makes an accussation that he/she has been sexually assaulted by a JW, the accused JW,m usually an adult male, and frequently either an elder or a ministerial servant, cannot be investigated nad/or sanctioned until there are two witnesses. This is a throwback to Taliban evidence standards: what child molester would do the act in the presence of witnesses?! Since the JW molester knows this, he exploits it, and can do it for years. This is one reason that when JW child molesters are found guilty via a legal process, the JW organisation is ordered to pay punitive damages; the Napa California cases of 2007 and the 2012 cases are examples. There are other ways the JW system 'encourages' paedophiles.

*** I don't think you're on firm ground to claim this is a failing of the rank and file. The JW leadership attempts to insulte JWs from the outside world, controlling the information available to their members and letting them live in a 'Jehovah Witness bubble'. What posters Maximus85 - who has identified as a JW, and truthislight - who is possibly a JW, or perhaps most likely a JW associate - are doing here is taboo amongst JWs; the Internet is not a tool recommended for JW religious research; this is also the reason the leadership forbids reading literature written by exJWs; of these, Ray Franz, former governing body member and author of 'Crisis of Conscience' is definitely on the do-not-read list. So rathe rthan blaming rank-and-file JWs, I recognise this as a strategic policy to insulate the membership.

*** Re your last sentence above: this reaction is the standard/expected JW response; coupled with the determination not to discuss anything they may find objectionable, particularly from anyone who appears to demostrate an intimate understanding of theri doctrines, teachings and prectices, this is exactly what the Governing Body would hope for.

Nimshi: They also have shares in companies producing weapons of singular and mass destrcution; yet, they criticise war. Do you see the hypocrisy?

MyJoe: I’m not aware of this and I’d be surprised if it is true. I will do some findi

Ok. Do search and perhaps share what you come up with. I am slightly surprised that while you claim child molestation is fairly well-known (I seriously doubt this for JWs in Nigeria), you report ignorance of what the JWs get from Lockhead Martin stocks, say. Now you could do an easy search and share your impressions. This is only one.

MyJoe: I have observed the group and I don’t think they are particularly harmful to the individual or the society. It may be the case that I have not given enough thought to the matter. Why do you think they are dangerous?

You asked a direct question, I'll answer it thus:

--- (1) I have some limited data on what happens to Christians who become JWs and then discover that the doctrinal purity that attracted them to the JWs is a sham. The final effect - and this conclusion is almost complete - is that they end up losing all faith in God or religion. This is fascinating. There's an ongoing study to figure out why. It is my inclination that research will confirm what is already known: the JW religion casts all other Christians as members of 'Christendom' (this is disingenous and dishonest), and since the JW religion goes to great lenghts to discredit Christendom, most almost all JWs and JW associates find Christendom detestable. Now, when converts/recruits are opened to the true history of the JWs, they see the JWs for what they are, and then they lose all hope, finding no refuge anywhere and having lost all hope in God. This effect can be devastating to individuals whose lives are dependent on believing in a supreme being, and particularly, the God of the bible.

--- (2) Do you know of the JW doctrinal practice of disfellowshipping people? This is perhaps the singular/most destructive doctrine. If you respond that you know, then I will go into details why this makes the JW religion a dangerous one; I will furhter show how this policy destroys lives, distrups families and hasdicaps people who, having being JWs, decide to want to lead a different kind of life.

--- (3) I would classify the JW religion as a high control sect (this is not my invention; many researchers have arrived at this correct conclusion long ago); I do not say this lightly and for effect; there's credible evidence thatthis is the case; this makes the group dangerous. There are many doctrines that characterise this group, including the surrender of natural/fundamental rights at baptism, the draconian no-blood doctrine, the (presently) immutable position that what Brooklyn orders as 'doctrine' is always right: dissent is absolutely unallowed, as is independent consideration of scriptural points ...

There's more . . .

Now, a note: I don't claim that individual rank and file JWs (those whom you're wont to see on the streets) are necessarily dangerous as individuals; no. It is only when acting as agents of the Jehovah's Witness organisation, preaching as they have been indoctrinated, that they assume the mantle of danger. If you are willing to discuss, I could expound on this.

Maximus85: tell me one bad news, if what we preach that: God will change this world into a paradise, remove pains, sickness and death, bring peace, joy and happiness is a bad news to you, then i salute you. Or have come to you with teachings that a Loving father like God will burn his disobedient children in a lake of fire for eternity? All you want is go to heaven. To do live with God and his angels. I wish you safe journey.

Here is the bad news:

--- Jehovah's Witnesses teach that at Armageddon, everyone living on earth will be killed except Jehovah's witnesses.
--- World population: ~7 billion; JW population ~ 7 million
--- Do you see how it is that you bring very bad news?
--- 99.999% of people living on earht will be killed according to Jehovah's witnesses. Do you see that that's bad news?

Regarding hell fire:
--- Yes, many Christian groups preach this, but JWs are not the only ones who don't preach it
--- For instance:
* Seventh-day Adventists do not teach hell fire
* Christadelphians, and do not teach hell fire
* Other Advent Churches do not teach hell fire

In fact, the founder of the JW religion, CT Russell borrowed this no-hell fire position from the Adventists.

There is superb scholarly work by some Protestant and Anglican writers who have proposed similar doctrines.

Regarding heaven: of course, you JWs too want to go to heaven, only that you say 144,000 will get to heaven.
You also teach that of those remaining alive today of the that 144,000, 100% of them are Jehovah's Witnesses, and you know them.
Amongst you, you're secretly 'envious' of those you think will go to heaven, and only them are allowed to take the Lord's evening meal.

Your religion is full of bogus teachings and ridiculous ideas.
Your FDS & GB are nothing special.
Your most important teaching were borrowed from other religions.
Your religion habours paedophiles.
You were members of the UN depart. of public information before being exposed.
You're not as separate from the world as you think; and you only succeed to recruit the misinformed into your religion.

Any more?

truthislight:

you're in the grips of a common fallacy: that's one's belief/position on one specific subject invalidates their position on others. This is a fallacy which religious people use to block access to discussion.

So what if I believe that Yahweh is a tribal god of the Jews? That statement is correct; and I'm not unique to believe it. There're other Christians who believe the same. Does that invalidate their Christianity?

It's excellent you checked my profile, but that's still irrelevant to the fact that you have been duped by the Jehovah's Witnesses:

- The Faithful and Discreet slave are not directed by God's holy spirit
- There's nothing unique about Jehovah's Witnesses
- Jehovah's Witnesses' doctrines are neither unique to them nor correct

These are the facts; and you appear to have been duped by this sect; you are followers of Charles Taze Russell, the unFaithful and inDiscreet Slave, the bungling Governing Body, and a host of other man-made doctrines. Of course, I understand it is hard to come to realise this; but sometime, you have to realise the earth isn't flat. Such is the nature of facts.

It is clear from your posts that you're making the best of constrained abilities; this is noble; but: it is still your responsibility to find the facts.

You can receive help from former Governing body member Raymond Franz; his book "Crisis of Conscience" exposes the inner workings of the JW religion; that is why JWs are forbidden from reading the book. Excerpts from the book are online. It's up to you. But please, stop misleading others while 'preaching' from house to house; it is not right; it is not even Christian.
.

To the original poster:

1) At which university?
2) What's your estimate of your intelligence and ability to reason?
3) What ambition do you have for the quality/grade of your first degree?
4) What're your plans after your first degree?

.

truthislight & Maximus85 : I have a straightforward bible question for you (this is a one-off):

Will the inhabitants of Sodom & Gomorrah who were destroyed by fire be ressurrected?

Note: so that you don't claim you have been ambushed, I will tell you why I am asking: the purpose is to show how JWs answer simple questions, and how they provide justifications for every - every - side of an argument. (This is why it is difficult to convince a JW of almost anything, unless by the special power of a deity which shall remain unnamed). So, quick, asnwer the question:

Will the inhabitants of Sodom & Gomorrah who were destroyed by fire be ressurrected?

.

truthislight: look, there's no need to copy/paste anything from anywhere regarding 607BCE. I will posit clear challenges here:

1) Do you know that JWs have not always believed in 607BCE?

2) Do you know that 606BCE was initially the first date being peddled (+ 2520 years)? This mistake is elementary, as I would soon show.

3) Do you know that the man who raised the issue of the mistake JWs were making between 606BCE & 607BCE, Raymond Franz, who was then a member of the Governing Body, left the JWs? His book "Crisis of Conscience" is one of the books JWs are forbidden to read. You could test this out sometime and tell one of the JW elders that you want to read this book. . .

Now, let me ask you a direct question: what are those teachings of JWs that you believe are unique?

(I can easily show you that 606BCE, 607BCE and 1914 are not indeed original JW teachings: Charles Taze Russell, who founded the JW religion, borrowed these beliefs from the 7th Day Adevntists; this is documented, and the evidence can be provided).

So, please itemise why you believe the JWs are special.

Regarding child molestation, it appears you don't want to examine the evidence.

1) Just two/three months ago, the sum of over USD20million was awarded by a US court against the JW organisation for child abuse. Here are the links:

--- http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/18/us/28-million-awarded-in-jehovahs-witnesses-abuse-case.html
--- http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2160605/Candance-Conti-molested-Jehovahs-Witnesses-member-age-NINE-wins-28milion.html

2) This is not the first time; it happened a few years ago: in 2007 , JWs paid out millions of USD to settle child abuse cases. NBC news investigated and obtained documents showing one of the victims was paid USD 780,000 by the JWs; this is coming from some of the money you donate to the JWs.

3) Some members of the JWs who say what was happening but could not stomach it due to their conscience were hounded out of the JW organisation; this is documented.

4) I can explain why the JW congregations are a haven for paedophiles; it is quite easy once you understand the JW system for dealing with things like this.

Maximus85: GOD TOLD NOAH CATEGORICALLY TO ABSTAIN FROM BLOOD. GENESIS 9:4,5

That's a lie. God never told Noah any such thing.

I challenge you to show where God told Noah to "abstain from blood", or - I would allow you some latitude - words to that effect.

You're betraying your little knowledge of the scriptures, and exhibiting the marks of your religious sect.

Now, take the challenge and who where God 'categorically told Noah to abstain from blood".

Here is a bonus: JWs - God's prophets, and God's channel - claimed that organ transplant is cannibalism.

Watchtower 1967 November 15 pp.702-4 Questions from Readers: • Is there any Scriptural objection to donating one's body for use in medical research or to accepting organs for transplant from such a source?—W. L., U.S.A.

Answer: Humans were allowed by God to eat animal flesh and to sustain their human lives by taking the lives of animals, though they were not permitted to eat blood. Did this include eating human flesh, sustaining one's life by means of the body or part of the body of another human, alive or dead? No! That would be cannibalism, a practice abhorrent to all civilized people. . . . Those who submit to such operations are thus living off the flesh of another human. That is cannibalistic.