₦airaland Forum

plaetton: Ha ha ha. that is very funny.
In your haste you missed one crucial point: Fishes wash up on shore when they are dead or near death. So even if there were no surfaces to wash up on, they would still be dead because of the prolonged turbulence and disruption of their ecosystem.

Pls take a refresher course in marine biology. Infact, marine life are much more sensitive to disruptions in their environment than terrestial lifeforms.

frosbel: This is were we part ways. Jesus Christ went to Hades or the grave , not Hell.

chukwudi44: This not about any catholic doctrine but rather about a misrepresentation of an explicit bible verse

chukwudi44: @frosbel

This is a shameful misrepresentation of an explicit bible passage.Please stop making a fool of yourself.where did you read it was the holy spirit that preached to these spirits.You just go and copy and paste from any stupid write up that meets your fancy.

Even when it was explicitly stated that this event occured during Jesus's three days in the grave,your stupid link claims it happened in the time of noah.How dogmatic can one really get?

plaetton: And what hole are you reffering to:

You guys are suggesting, if I am correct, that the fishes were not part of Noah collection because they were safe in their natural habitat, right?

That defies common sense. Ask people who live in riverine areas, fishes and other marine life wash up on shore after heavy torrential rains.
Now imagine a worldwide phenomenom where it rained, poured and hailed for 40 days nonstop, whereupon, every land surface is flooded and everything destroyed, then tell that fishes were spared?
Your bible says everything was destroyed, and you are saying, no no, not everything.
Someone is in denial and its not me.
Who is in the hole?

plaetton: And it makes perfect sense to you that a worldwide flood which lasted for 40 days or so, that destroys everything on earth, would not also kill all marine life?
The marine life was spared of god's wrath?
Na wa o

Goshen360: Chei....see drama between Mr Anony and mkmyers45. I knew where Anony was going when he said mkmyers45 should provide the scriptures.....not that he (Anony) doesn't know where the scripture is but alas, mkmyers45 was caught in the net.

lwkmd oooo. Anyway, make una continue with una drama.....I will brb.

Goshen360: Chei....see drama between Mr Anony and mkmyers45. I knew where Anony was going when he said mkmyers45 should provide the scriptures.....not that he (Anony) doesn't know where the scripture is but alas, mkmyers45 was caught in the net.

lwkmd oooo. Anyway, make una continue with una drama.....I will brb.

mkmyers45: then where the water creatures during the flood? did they survive?

wirinet: This is a brilliant exposé, the only problem is this is not a regular Christian world view but the position of a skeptic or an agnostics.

ifeness: You tell us how? Did he spread her legs wide open? Is the God of the bible same as Zeus of the Titans who slept with women?

If God is omnipotent (all-powerful), why did he take six days to create everything? Why not speak everything into existence all at once?

If God is so perfect, then why did he create something so imperfect allowing pain, suffering and daily atrocities?

If Noah did fit all of these species on the ark for forty days and forty nights, how did the penguins make it from Mt. Ararat to the Antarctic? How did the koala bears make it to Australia with no eucalyptus to eat along the way?

Why do innocent children have to suffer with terminal diseases such as cancer? What part of 'God's plan' is this exactly?

God wants everyone to worship and follow him and, if they don't, they burn in hell for all eternity. What does this type of attitude say about his character? By definition, he would be described as a tyrant.

Enigma: The phrase "he descended into hell" is most widely known from the "Apostles' Creed".

As modern translations of the Creed now shows, what is meant is in fact simply that "he descended to the dead".

In another manner, Christians seen as orthodox (i.e. non-heretical) can still say Jesus suffered "hell" in His agonies on the Cross.

However all of these is totally different from the Word of Faith heresy that Jesus went to "hell" where he was tortured by the satan and demons for three days.

Delafruita: jephtah sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering to the lord

wirinet: Thank you for being honest and accepting that he could not have been called Jesus Christ when he was alive. The question is if his real name could not have been Jesus, why ascribe so much power to the sound Jesus? Why is there power in the name Jesus and not the original Hebrew name yeshwa, yeshowa or Joshua or any of its other transliterations like ieseous, Jesu, or even isa?

Put in another way how come you believe that the sound Jesus is powerful and not his original Hebrew name?

Delafruita: thats good to hear


one thing that is very clear from the bible especially the old testament is that yahweh isnt really into the "love thing".his relationship with the jews was more of a master and slaves affair.all he demanded was that his rules be oneyed and that there be no grumbling.he was quick to anger and didnt hesistate to strike.with the arrival of jesus on the scene,love came to be.it became sort of a "good cop bad cop" routine.jesus was more of love but even he exhibited some traits of anger by cursing a fig tree and some other things.like i said earlier,my interpretation of hell isnt of a fiery fire burning for eternity.i believe the grave is hell not because i want to believe so but because the bible says so.there are 3 words translated "hell" in the bible however this translations have been proven to be wrong."gehenna" referred to a refuse dump outside of jerusalem which used to be constantly on fire.reference was made to gehanna in the bible and it became translated to mean an everlasting furnace.
"sheol" which is also translated hell is also curiously translated as grave and pit in other verses which shows that translators made translation to suit the meaning they intended.
the third one "hades" definitely refers to the grave.


lol.


again,hell isnt a place of eternal torment as some bible translations paint it.the unrighteous wont wake up forever and thats their hell.the righteous would enjoy the bliss of heaven for eternity


isreal were his chosen people.why he chose them is beyond me but he chose them

Delafruita: the bible aptly demonstrated that just as god expresses love,so does he mete out punishment as he deems fit.his ways are not our ways just as his ways are our ways.a loving human father will sometimes in a fit of anger,do things that will hurt his offspring.you might argue that god isnt human and should be above human emotions.however,man was created in the image of god and our emotions(good and bad) were part of the image of god we were created in.going by this analogy,god isnt the anomaly you think he is,he is just as emotional as we are.the bible talks about his jealousy.he even says that he is a jealous god and wouldnt want any deity to share in his glory.that shows just how emotional yahweh is.

there is evil in the world.thats a fact.god knows there's evil in the world and he lets the evil remind us that there is a bliss we are working towards.sunny days wouldnt be special if it wasnt for rain,joy wouldnt feel so good if it wasnt for pain.heaven wouldnt feel so wonderful if it wasnt for the pain and evil of this earth.however,he promised to give us the strenght to cope with every evil and pain.even when believers die in brutal circumstances,they know they are going to a better place

the concept of a burning hell hasnt found a universally accepted framework in christendom.some are of the belief that hell refers to a situation in which those who didnt accept the lord jesus christ as their lord and seviour will not be awakened to be part of the new earth.their "hell" will be their grave forever.some are of the view that hell is an actual everlasting flame which will burn for all eternity.in reality there is no evidence of this in the bible.proponents of this idea cite the parable of lazarus and the rich man in which the rich man was pleading for just a drop of water from hell.this story is allegorical at best and is similar to other parables of jesus.

god is a multi-linguist.whatever language it was that adam and eve could understand was the language he spoke.it couldnt have been hebrew because the garden of eden must have been located somewhere in modern day iran based on bible description.god speaks the language of our minds.he reads our thoughts and thats why he said "once have you spoken,twice have i heard".

MyJoe: I'm certain you closed your eyes where I explained I neither saw a dire need or duty nor had the inclination to change anyone's views. Never mind, since you have problems reading and understanding what it says.

Please highlight the portion of that post where I suggested a system and approach to Nimshi and implied it would help to de-convert anyone or where I said hate sites were not effective and at what.

MyJoe: I'm certain you closed your eyes where I explained I neither saw a dire need or duty nor had the inclination to change anyone's views. Never mind, since you have problems reading and understanding what it says.

Please highlight the portion of that post where I suggested a system and approach to Nimshi and implied it would help to de-convert anyone or where I said hate sites were not effective and at what.

MyJoe: Wrong. It was preached that Christ’s presence (last days) began in 1874 and would end in 1914 along with the Gentile Times. It was only in 1925 they CHANGED to saying that 1914 was now the beginning of the parousia. Here:

***

Page 235 of The Harp of God:
"This date, therefore, when understood, would certainly fix the time when the lord is due at this second appearing. Applying the same rule, then, of a day for a year, 1335 days after 539 A.D brings us to 1874 A.D, at which time, according to Biblical chronology, the Lords presence is due…[/b]The searcher of truth can find an extensive treatment of this question in volumes 2 and 3 of ‘Studies in the Scriptures’.”

And, here, the [b]Zion’s Watchtower of 15 July 1894, page 1677:
“We see no reason for changing the figures – nor could we if we could. They are, we believe, Gods dates and not ours. But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble.”

And then, here is the Proclaimers book, pp138-9 10, talking about the year 1925:
“A real milestone was reached, therefore, in 1925, when The Watch Tower of March 1 featured the article ‘Birth of the Nation.’ It presented an eye-opening study of Revelation chapter 12. The article set forth evidence that the Messianic Kingdom had been born – established – in 1914, that Christ had then begun to rule on his heavenly throne, and that thereafter Satan had been hurled from heaven down to the vicinity of the earth. This was the good news that was to be proclaimed, the news that God’s Kingdom was already in operation.

frosbel: A good question.

I admit that this is not 100% clear to me at this moment. Allow me time to do some bible research.


However , the fact remains that there is no bible verse to suggest that Christ descended spiritually into the grave.

Facts are :

1. He committed his spirit to the father

2. His body was buried.

I will come back to the valid point you mentioned.

thanks,

Delafruita: am sure he doesnt even understand what he posted

Ivynwa: @Nicky4life
Girl you wan kill person? You had me laughing. E be like say I know that church that you are talking about that needs I billion to build their church, they never finish building that church since 19 kpirigidim? . Are you sure that it is not that my favorite Swanky church in Lagos that you are talking about? They talk about money too much to the extent that sometimes I walk out when it becomes too much yet I love that church of talented people and they give my spirit sweet praise and worship songs too. Anyway make we no talk too much about it.

Did you say that the pastor of the other church was making a move on you after selling the blessings to you. Chineke mee! Abeg make we leave tori for another day, you don finish them sef. Give me a high five. Hahaha!

Maximus85: Satan is here on this thread to make the Jws here go against each other but it wont work. Truelight, you were the first poster to insult on this thread. At that point i doubt if you are a jw. And if you are, you should know better that no matter how angry they make us, we must remain respectful in our teachings/preaching.
I intentinaly left some issues unattended to because they'll only lead to more arguments. Lets not allow satan here. They know the truth but they dont want to accept it. The Bible said that in this situation, we should let them be and we should go in search for those that are ready to listen and accept the truth. Being a Jw is not easy but its a sacrifice we must make. Jesus gave his life, so why can't we endure the hatred and insults?

MyJoe: @Nimshi
1, 2 & 5. I guess we will disagree on that. But I suspect it’s our definitions of “dangerous” that differ. For example, I don’t go to bed worrying that my uncle and his entire family, or his married children and their entire families, will come to any danger as a result of being Witnesses. I am close to them and I believe they are fine. It is at this basic level that I am considering danger and asserting that the religion is not particularly dangerous. That is at the individual level. For societal danger, I don’t think any beliefs held by the JW pose any danger to the society the way some people’s beliefs have posed danger to babies across Africa. I cited the case of raped babies across Africa earlier. Now, I cited that case as an EXAMPLE of how BELIEFS HELD BY INDIVIDUALS can put a society in danger – nothing more. I still don’t get how you related it to the discussion about child abuse among the JW and concluded that I was sanitising the issue. There is a misunderstanding there, as the statement was not made in the context child abuse among the JW.

Your definition of danger probably differs and is more encompassing. Religious danger to me is Jim Jones and similar stuff. But for you, it’s probably temporary trauma resulting from disfellowshipping and shunning. For example, plaetton asserted in one thread that the religions pose a danger and should be ridiculed – or something like that. He cited the example of people who give 10% of their income to their churches even when their families are in dire financial straits. I think that is their choice and that is it. But that is not how plaetton sees it.

And, yeah, MyJoe’s familiarity with an issue does not impact on its level of danger. Ha.

Now about the new recruits you are concerned about. I agree many of them don’t fully realise what they are getting into. But if they did, what would change? You seriously think that telling someone who has just “found the truth” and has been subjected to the JW’s highly effective insulation techniques will give it up once you tell him that he is going to be disfellowshipped and shunned if he commits “fornication” or is sighted with a stick of cigarette? Or that she will listen when you walk up to her and “your religion is dangerous. You’ve been brainwashed?” You have mentioned that Watchtower invested money in arms and tobacco companies. That would cause outrage in normal people considering the dictates handed down on such matters to the rank and file, but have you seen anyone evince a slight angst here? A Witness reads all you have written here and he is happy that Witnesses are hated and persecuted just like Jesus said.

A couple of years or so back I saw your exchange with a new Witness recruit called Perrito4u. What reaction did you get from her? Once you start, she remembers all the talk about the fact people would try to discourage her and her faith in the religion (which has been sly substituted for God in her mind) is strengthened. She feels “vindicated”. She had been fortified for just the kind of things you were saying. Bear in mind that Perito4u was calm and had some capacity to follow arguments, even though she often gave pre-fabricated responses, unlike most of the ones in this thread who happen to represent the average JW who loses it once you display close knowledge of the church rather than stick to Trinity and heaven where they have verses lined up and love to, as you put it, “play ping pong”.

Look at the angry responses your comments have invited here. I know Witnesses tend to get angry once discussions take this turn. Still, there is no need to hand them just what the leadership of the church wants. The typical Witness reaction as seen here – disowning reason, refusing to consider anything unfamiliar or capable of showing the church in bad light, calling you the devil’s spawn, etc – can’t be prevented, considering what you are dealing with, but you can present your case in such a way that when any thinking person, including Witnesses, comes around he can relate to it. This reminds me of the words of Salvador that it takes a highly elevated spirit or intelligent mind to accept certain truths. I don’t take Witness hate sites seriously because of the manner they go about things. I have read Randy Waters and I think the sort of things he writes will hardly impress any sincere and active Witnesses. You’ve read Franz’s Crisis of Conscience or In Search of Christian Freedom? Now, that is how to present a case. I am not surprised that Randy Waters does not think much of Crisis of Conscience. If these acerbic methods work on anyone, I would be surprised and it would be an exceptional case.

Many new recruits are aware of these things and that has not stopped them. I seriously doubt anyone can “save” them. I’m not discouraging you, though. I may even be wrong. Just stating it the way I see it.

No, I don’t believe that Witnesses are in serious danger and I have a duty to safeguard them and help them get out. Even if they were in danger I doubt I can help them or that it’s a task I’d be hungry to undertake. All I do here is to point out inconsistencies and inaccuracies in arguments where I see them and have the inclination to do so. I then leave things at that. Well, that is all I try to do –opinionating is fine as long as it is not allowed to overshadow facts. I do the same with other faiths and religions since I treat them all alike. If my adult child or brother wants to become a JW, I would try to present facts in a non-judgemental manner and leave matters at that. At the end of the day, we all make our choices. But you do have a different approach – that is your prerogative.

3. Of course, I was talking about the balance of responsibility. Both the leadership and the rank and file are to blame for any folly, no doubt about that. I was making that post from a mobile phone and wasn’t explicating things sufficiently.

4. Ok. I was hearing it for the first time and have definitely read or heard it said that physical structures will not make it into “the new system”.

6. I can’t get the exact quotes right now, but I have a definite recollection of it. It was announced that these things done by some brothers had cost the church money as the society had had to make pay outs. This was at conventions throughout the US that year.

7. Well, that is sad. Anyway, it’s called “protecting the flock”. That individual had to “protect” himself from the danger posed by certain websites and books so he had to get clearance to read a book. Not following the society’s recommendations on the internet and on reading can lead him to leave the church – something worse than death. Why? Because “that is what the Society said!” I would personally not suggest such a book to a Witness or give him links to “anti-Witness” websites, though. Apart from the fact that I am generally respectful of people’s wishes, including those of people who have given up their fundamental right to read and meditate freely, there’s more than enough inside the church’s own publications for anyone who is prepared to pause, to think and to remember. The JW leadership is convicted by its own literature. I know the Watchtower Society’s censorship goes as far as its own publications as it routinely removes articles with the potential to do some damage from its own “comprehensive” library on CD ROMs. But there’s always enough left there.

MyJoe: You talk randomly, so you do say anything. Go back there and bring out the fight I fought. And what do you call fighting here if not what you and your beloved Barristers are doing? No, I don't imagine you relied on my support. You just stand at the ringside of threads cheering anyone that appears to support a JW idea and insulting anyone who appears not to. For you, it's automatic. You have neither break nor common sense.

Your church joined UN as an NGO. Write a constructive paragraph either defending or rationalising that.

Your church has paid out millions to victims of child s.exual abuse. Write an argument on that.

MyJoe: To you, none, since I did not write it supporting some JW idea. You are too far gone. Too confused. It's far easier to slouch on than try to think things through.


The person you who gave you that word, the one you are licking his backside and saying people cannot talk to outside of here, doesn't even know what it means. But you really feel dazzled by any colours around here? By my guest.


Yeah. Except when I appear to support your JW ideas. Keep repeating the above, you hear?

Nimshi: This is a cornerstone JW strategy

- execute payouts
- impose gag orders (this reinforces the JW org as amoral; fight for freedom of speech, but deny it to those you've raped).
- admit nothing (this, also, reinforces the JW org as amoral).

The most recent case of the award of more the USD 20 million was one exception.

Lol. Truthislieisdarkness was mad at the warrior for good reason: the JW org doesn't lie admitting they've been wrong, even f they've predicted the end of the world in 1914, 1925, and 2000; and even though they promised in the 1920s: 'millions now living will never die'; most people then living have now died. And even though they told people in the 60s: 'you will never grow old in this system of things'.

We're here in 2012, and our resident militant JWs can't see it. Except for Maximus, who is now being chastised for being somewhat human.

.



.

Nimshi: Barristers: one man, barristers; lol. What passes for your brain has been fried by years of JW propaganda.
May be Satan the Devil (hehehe) made you a JW to give JWs a really, really bad name; just look at the nonsense oozing from all over you.
Barristers: Time registered: July 08, 2012 | Time spent online: 1 day & 12 hours | Last seen: 3:31pm

JWs don't take blood or what? Just say JWs don't donate blood. JWs who need human blood products use them all the time; like, a certain Haemoglobin Factor which JWs use ;-) The problem is that JWs like to reap where they've not sown: they deplete the supply but are not allowed to replenish it. Shame on you. That's not moral. It's not even Christian.

And, I don't have time to educate you about the years of fornication of the JW organisation with the wild beast.
Just like those pictures in your nonsense Revelation Climax (gasp!) book, you JWs rode the wild beast for years, until a journalist published your hypocrisy, and then you quickly dissociated. Here, in all its simple glory is the original article by Stephen Bates which exposed the JW sect for what it is:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/oct/08/religion.world

And, Hitler: yes, JWs supported Hitler when it was expedient. You want proof too? No, won't be casting pearls before hogs ;-)

truthislightisdarkness: why're you turning on warrior Maximus? Don't do that; he's one of you. You can't disfellowship him now! In any case, Yahweh is watching you. He will inform your elders that you're enjoying the secret pleasure of posting on the Internet. What will you do when they announce to your congregation that's you're walking in a 'disorderly manner', or charge you for 'loose conduct'?

.


.

MyJoe: You are getting knowledge of nothing. How can someone who lacks basic thinking skills acquire the right knowledge from a write-up, no matter how well-written?


Highlighted is a dumb question – Watchtower never admits anything. Poor Maximum85 thought they do about their predictions and got himself into trouble with Mr truthislight who has now accused him of misrepresentation. They have paid out millions yet they never admitted anything. And who’s talking about elder? You are the one making issues out of the fact priests were accused and only 11 elders were accused, and that they only abuse girls at JW while the Catholics abuse boys.

So it was only the “believed to run into” portion that you read? Again you cover a portion with your finger hoping and praying to Jehovah no one will notice. Why did you not comment on the portion where it said the church announced it in a conventions in US about the payouts running into millions it had been forced to make? I expected you to, at least, say it is “concocted”. Okay, so you admit the $788,000 case was in the article. Now, $788,000 is closer to $1m than half a mil. If that is the only case ever in which the church has paid out money, I would only be guilty of an exaggeration, not an outright lie. But the fact would remain that you ignored it in the Wiki article you lifted from, thus misleading the unwary reader into believing that only the Catholic Church has paid out money while the JW is clean. In any case, I am not exaggerating, as anyone will find when they research the matter.

@Hitler pictures
We get characters like you every now and then. There was one a couple of years back posting nude pictures and labeling a respected lady in the section. Mr truthislight, the ringside cheerleader who claps happily for anyone who supports a JW idea, still thinks you are good rep of his church. Pity.

MyJoe: You gotta be kidding me! A repudiation of an intention to de-convert equals a threat to do so?

There is a proverb nuclearboy used to relate about a tortoise that said he was going to disgrace himself. People pleaded with him to turn back but nothing would make him change his mind. So they let him go on to disgrace himself.



Maybe it’s not just reasoning challenges he has. Take your time to go through the conversation below and decide if this is simply a spiritually blind, small minded, confused, drunken and insane guy who will go to any extent in the hope of tarring someone, probably praying to Jehovah when posting, to blind everyone and make his lies stick or if there are mind problems involved.

****

Barristers


MyJoe


Barristers

Here:


***

Somebody once told someone that the Bible could be used to prove anything. To “demonstrate” that, he opened to a verse, covered a part of it with his finger and asked the other fellow to read. The fellow read the verse aloud, “There is no God.” That was some kind of joke, of course, because once he removed his finger, it said “The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God”. That is what Barristers does seriously here in his wretched efforts to sustain his campaign of lies against me, using the highlight function, and hoping and praying no one will notice.

After reading the above, my first thought was of his comprehension - perhaps his comprehension problems are just as bad as that those of Maximus85 who looks at text and sees what is inside his own head and Mr truthislight who doesn’t even take a good look before rushing off to click the reply button and type an unthinking response attacking you if you said what appear to be against the JW or praising you if you appeared to support them. But no. What we have here is deliberate, depraved, slimy lying. A repudiation of an intention to de-convert equals a threat to do so!

I asked him to reclaim his credibility but he sank it further.

But he came back with this:

I’m having second thoughts. Maybe he has serious comprehension problems, then. Or he’s too plastered from whatever he has been smoking.