₦airaland Forum

Sand2022:
That's true for the most part, although the PIMO experience within the group shows that even if all say they accept what the leadership says, some silent voices may object but they may not do so publicly.

Anyway, my op is about my own studies in the scriptures, each one of us will make their own decision. But I feel moved to make it public to help sincere ones out there with points they themselves may need to consider before making their own decision. Their decision may be different from mine. No problem, but at least I shared mine.

True. But note. PIMO is a state of where one is awake but held back due to ties. But once you are mentally awake, nothing impresses you anymore.

Goosethetruth:
The main problem I have with Christmas like you is the propensity to spew ignorance and falsehood as the truth. The Internet is free. Books have been written by scholars on thrse issues but Christians are scared to seek the truth about the origins of their religion and the Bible.
It is just embarrassing.
Just goggle the date the first letter of Paul was written vis a viz the first gospel was written.

[While there's some debate about the exact dates, scholarly consensus points to Mark being the earliest. Several sources suggest that the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke were written later, drawing upon Mark as a source, along with another hypothetical source called "Q". The Gospel of John is generally believed to be the last of the four canonical gospels, written some timebetween 90 and 110 AD.

See how you are just wailing instead of proving your case. You made an allegation and now I have rebutted but instead of you to provide your proof, you are there shouting and committing the fallacy that I should have read.

It is not by force that I must read everything. And it is not the books or internet who spoke just now saying Paul's preaching came before the gospels where in fact we see that he was first taught by a disciple

So, come and prove your case if indeed you are saying the Truth and stop changing the post to "exact dates" and whatever some people called scholars agree about. (Fallacy of pleading people)

Goosethetruth:
Meanwhile the earliest Pauline letters was written between AD 48 -AD50.(The epistle to the Galatians)
This information is everywhere but because of obstinate dogma of Christians they keep on spreading ignorance all over the place.

Do you real eyes this is bad evidence called hearsay?

This is you ignorantly accepting anything that suits your preference

Goosethetruth:
I am not a Christian. Stop assuming things. Explain how you came to this conclusion and retrace your steps to read and understand my posts.
This is the issue I have with that Kobojunkie lady,always jumping in and assuming things. Never doing any research!

Ok I'm wrong then, my bad. I totally forgot the context - which was the parables in the gospel. I presumed you meant the whole gospels and new testament as a whole were allegory, so I was wondering why someone who has knowledge of the facts(your ref to the actual pauline texts) would say the gospels are allegory ergo my conclusion.

rottennaija:
I get your point and they are valid. However, I have since to realize that truth or lack of in a events in themselves don't matter, even if the truth came from Jehovah or Jesus himself. Whatever Jw leaders thinks the truth is, is what the truth is. And it's what the following will believe. Period.

I repeat, a Jehovah or Jesus can stand on earth today, says this is A. The jw leaders aka Governing body will say, it's B. The majority of the following will take B. Nothing else matters.

Honestly, you're right. I have always wondered why some people hold on to lies even when truth started them in the face.

I, as a person has constantly had the need to review my stand on certain issues of doctrine whenever I'm faced with real truth from the scriptures. I consider myself very knowledgeable in scriptures but my allegiance is to the truth and not to doctrines. However, I have discovered that many humans are like what you described. This is not just about the JWs. Even the Muslims and atheists. They would just turn a blind eye and pretend nothing happened while they continue in their false beliefs. It seems they have the notion that that what you believe does not matter. 'You're free to believe anything you want. Just believe something and hold on to it.' A very dangerous notion that has eternal consequences.

Sand2022:
There is something about the rich man and Lazarus story I didn't consider while a PIMI JW.

I had long believed that the story is a parable, so everything there had to be explained away as pointing to something else other than real life event. This is because of several scriptures including Eccl 9:5-10; Romans 6;23

However, aren't parables built from events familiar to once audience? Think about it, all the parables jesus told was not what his audience never knew about, it wasn't from fiction. It is true that some elements may be exaggerated or added to make a point, but events in a parable are not entirely from fiction. The good Samaritan story, the Wise Steward, the prodigal son all were stories his listeners could relate to. I mean the man who was robbed while journeying from Jerusalem to Jericho. That was a location people knew was dangerous. But the story Jesus told didn't actually happen. But the location exists, that actual event can also happen. It's not fiction.

There is a reason to think that Jesus was conveying something from the story/parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Assuming it is a parable, what reality did the parable draw from? We can quickly say, it was fabricated from unrealistic event. It is a fiction. But think about this, Jesus audience was the Pharisees, and the Pharisees believed in the immortality of the Soul, they believe also in after death torment of the wicked. Then Jesus began to tell this story of torment. The big question is:

If this torment after death was a false doctrine, why is Jesus making a parable from that? Will that act not in fact be validating a false belief? I was just thinking, let's say a JWs is trying to teach another that a wicked act is wrong, then he begins to tell a story that so and so did this wicked thing to Mr B, then after so and so died, he found himself in hell with torment, how would that JWs think his audience will view that parable, that hell is false? Never! he is in fact validating that doctrine by drawing from it to teach a lesson.

Jesus never said nor condemned torment after death, rather he even used imagery that conveys that doctrine.

We need to also consider that there is no way to allegorize all that Jesus said there. All attempt to convey the meaning in literal sense fails.

The interpretation assigned to this parable by JW leadership doesn't match the account. I will talk about their interpretation and why it doesn't fit next time.

Tags:
jimRohn or Kobojunkie or FxMasterz, maynman, Dtruthspeaker, Image123, DrJones109, Jesusjnr2022, LordReed, Jaephoenix, JessicaRabbit, Knownunknown, DeepSight, BBIA HellVictorinho6, SIXFEETUNDER, OkpaNsukkaisBae, Bacteriologist, FRANCISTOWN, SIRTee15, Aemmyjah, TheSourcerer,
Busybrain2233, 1Sharon, TakeNigeriaBack,
Botragelad, isan, Fourthpredator,
seun, hopefullandlord, bobestman, Lorrayne, HardMirror, Hahn, SlawG, albreezy4eva, Muslim, Dominique, Mrbroke, EnemyofGod2, kkins25, Wilgrea7, A001, Maynthemayn, achorladey, Jozzy4, MightySparrow, NowYouKnow, TemmyT002, johnw47, Boomark, Emusan, Dtruthspeaker, Gabrielshow24, rottennaija

You have made very important points but you see, these people love their lies.

They will never examine the important questions you asked especially about Jesus validating something that is not true through His parables. Most times, in all Jesus' parables, he uses real places and realistic events mixed fictional characters to drive home His points. The events He describes are always realistic, and the places He mentions always exist. He might just place fictional people in the story but every other thing about the story will will be real. That's the manner of Jesus' parables. If hell does not exist, or torments in hell is not a real event that happens, Jesus will never use them in a parable.

A parable, as we already realized by now, is a usually short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle

Sand2022:
➜There is a reason to think that Jesus was conveying something from the story/parable of the rich man and Lazarus.
➜ Assuming it is a parable, what reality did the parable draw from?
➜ We can quickly say, it was fabricated from unrealistic event. It is a fiction.
➜ But think about this, Jesus audience was the Pharisees, and the Pharisees believed in the immortality of the Soul, they believe also in after death torment of the wicked .
➜ Then Jesus began to tell this story of torment. The big question is: If this torment after death was a false doctrine, why is Jesus making a parable from that?
➜ Will that act not in fact be validating a false belief?
➜ I was just thinking, let's say a JWs is trying to teach another that a wicked act is wrong, then he begins to tell a story that so and so did this wicked thing to Mr B, then after so and so died, he found himself in hell with torment, how would that JWs think his audience will view that parable, that hell is false? Never! he is in fact validating that doctrine by drawing from it to teach a lesson .

1. Well, a parable is used to convey a message. The fictitious elements of the story aside, the message is what is valued instead of value.

2. A parable draws from the imagination, from real-life stories, ideas, etc. However, the story is fictional, meaning the actual event never took place. What matters in a parable is the message embedded in the story for the readers.

3. You don't quickly say this because this is the very definition of a parable.

4. And Jesus Christ of Israel used many of the elements from their belief in fabricating the story— the parable — making it easily understood by the Pharisees to convey the important message He wished for them to have at the end of the story.

5. You stated that the Pharisees believed in this idea of eternal soul and torment, all while living under the Old Law of Moses— this law never prescribed any such to them. And since the context of the parable was framed as that which applies to those still under the Law of Moses, what reasons do you have to regard the elements of the parable as having factual grounding in that instance?

6. How can it be if the information is presented in the form of a parable — a fictional story intended to convey a message, meaning the fictional elements are of no value?

7. Ignorance of the fact of what a parable is and how not to apply literal meaning to the elements of the parable remains the major issue here.

Kobojunkie:
The better point here is that Parables are fictional stories, and should not be taken at face value. Rather, the focus should instead be on the message intended by the teller of the story.

That should be the main thing, the message. However, it doesn't mean the element mentioned are to be ignored. For eg, imagine if someone were to say that there is no road leading from Jerusalem to Jericho. Now while the parable of the good Samaritan is not told to mention route, that element in that parable can be referenced to prove that there is in fact a road leading from Jerusalem to Jericho. It is obvious that although the lesson is the primary thing, but parables draw from realistic circumstances.

Sand2022:
➜That should be the main thing, the message. However, it doesn't mean the element mentioned are to be ignored.
➜For eg, imagine if someone were to say that there is no road leading from Jerusalem to Jericho. Now while the parable of the good Samaritan is not told to mention route, that element in that parable can be referenced to prove that there is in fact a road leading from Jerusalem to Jericho.
➜ It is obvious that although the lesson is the primary thing, but parables draw from realistic circumstances.

That's exactly what it means, though. You considered the elements of the story as fictional and, as such, do not give focus to them but to the message instead by the author.

2. But this is wrong! It can't be referenced for any reason. Why? Because the story was meant instead as a parable. 🙄🙄🙄

3. It does not matter whether they draw from what may seem realistic circumstances; the point remains that you are not to take anything contained in the story literally. That is the essence of a parable.

FxMasterz:
You have made very important points but you see, these people love their lies.

They will never examine the important questions you asked especially about Jesus validating something that is not true through His parables. Most times, in all Jesus' parables, he uses real places and realistic events mixed fictional characters to drive home His points. The events He describes are always realistic, and the places He mentions always exist. He might just place fictional people in the story but every other thing about the story will will be real. That's the manner of Jesus' parables. If hell does not exist, or torments in hell is not a real event that happens, Jesus will never use them in a parable.

That's the point. See what there book, Benefit from Theocratic Ministry School book says,

"Although not all examples have to be actual occurrences, they should reflect true-life attitudes or situations. Thus, when teaching how repentant sinners ought to be viewed, Jesus illustrated his point by telling about the rejoicing of a man who found his lost sheep. (Luke 15:1-7) In reply to a man who was failing to get the full import of what the Law meant by the command to love one’s neighbor, Jesus related a story about a Samaritan who helped an injured man after a priest and a Levite failed to do so. (Luke 10:30-37) If you learn to be a keen observer of people’s attitudes and actions, you can make effective use of this teaching device."

Sand2022:
That's the point. See what there book, Benefit from Theocratic Ministry School book says,

"Although not all examples have to be actual occurrences, they should reflect true-life attitudes or situations. Thus, when teaching how repentant sinners ought to be viewed, Jesus illustrated his point by telling about the rejoicing of a man who found his lost sheep. (Luke 15:1-7) In reply to a man who was failing to get the full import of what the Law meant by the command to love one’s neighbor, Jesus related a story about a Samaritan who helped an injured man after a priest and a Levite failed to do so. (Luke 10:30-37) If you learn to be a keen observer of people’s attitudes and actions, you can make effective use of this teaching device."

They said all these and still refused to apply it fully to.the parables of Jesus. If hell is not a true place of torment, hasn't it rendered this statement of theirs useless?

Sand2022:
➜You're right. Fiction will match both scenarios. I felt the description should have prevented a misunderstanding. The difference is between Realistic Fiction and Fantasy Fiction.
➜ My point is that parables are realistic fictions, as opposed to fantasy fiction that is not known to happen in reality. Thanks for pointing that out.

Fiction is another word for lie — and a lie is a lie, whether realistic or fantasy. The difference that you are trying to extract here is in the source of the elements for the fiction(lie).

2. The elements used in the construction of Parables — whether realistic or fantasy — are still nothing but lies. So, again, you need to be able to look beyond the lies to instead zero in on the message — the supposed truth — hidden and presented by way of the Parable.

rottennaija:
I get your point and they are valid. However, I have since to realize that truth or lack of in a events in themselves don't matter, even if the truth came from Jehovah or Jesus himself. Whatever Jw leaders thinks the truth is, is what the truth is. And it's what the following will believe. Period.

I repeat, a Jehovah or Jesus can stand on earth today, says this is A. The jw leaders aka Governing body will say, it's B. The majority of the following will take B. Nothing else matters.

Na person wey understand go know wetin this mean

FxMasterz:
They said all these and still refused to apply it fully to.the parables of Jesus. If hell is not a true place of torment, hasn't it rendered this statement of theirs useless?

You are looking for prime examples of those who don't practice what they preach or creators of double standards. Na dem dem. They sabi accuse others of the very same thing they do.

OkpaNsukkaisBae:
I don't really get your point bro.

Because the parables, jesus himself are all fairytale. Leadership of JW is just like any non governmental organization which solely exist to push a certain agenda.

Do you know how the bold is so difficult for members of that religious organization to understand?

Goosethetruth:
Naaa waaa ooooo!!!!
How many monikers do some people have?
Is this not against forum rules?


😆🙃😂🤣😃😀

Wetin you go do. Humans are difficult in terms of following rules

rottennaija:
True. But note. PIMO is a state of where one is awake but held back due to ties. But once you are mentally awake, nothing impresses you anymore.

Yes, when a individual is mentally awake they see beyond the veil.

GothamCities:
Honestly, you're right. I have always wondered why some people hold on to lies even when truth started them in the face.

I, as a person has constantly had the need to review my stand on certain issues of doctrine whenever I'm faced with real truth from the scriptures. I consider myself very knowledgeable in scriptures but my allegiance is to the truth and not to doctrines. However, I have discovered that many humans are like what you described. This is not just about the JWs. Even the Muslims and atheists. They would just turn a blind eye and pretend nothing happened while they continue in their false beliefs. It seems they have the notion that that what you believe does not matter. 'You're free to believe anything you want. Just believe something and hold on to it.' A very dangerous notion that has eternal consequences.

You can't underestimate captive organizations

FxMasterz:
They said all these and still refused to apply it fully to.the parables of Jesus. If hell is not a true place of torment, hasn't it rendered this statement of theirs useless?

That's the point.