No that takes a bit of moderation in my opinion.

It is one thing to discuss a position, and something totally different to propergate a religion here.

As far as I am concerned, telling people to contact anyone is wrong and nothing less than pandering.

I'll abstain from commenting or presenting my opinion on Joey's having worked for two different companies owned by a clutch of them.

I will say this though, Stephen one of the owners son ran as far and fast as he could when he hit 18 and they still constantly call and bother him to this day at the age of 40. I mean you would think they would get a clue from him telling them he can not wait to see the whole thing implode and has peace bonds against a number of them to keep them away from his kids, house, phone and business.

A foot note to that is they did destroy his marriage because they got to his wife and in the end he went to court to take complete sole custody of his children, and won. " They are worse than cocroaches with how they refuse to go away and leave you alone." in his words.

Hell, he is where I learned the term Joey

With Clearwater just a few miles north of me, Hubbards Science-Fiction Cult is a constant in the news. a freaking joke too, though they did Murder a lady a few years ago so they are not much of a Ha Ha joke.

IPlural: Yup. R3fr said in post #821 "Also, if there is a question or questions that you would like a better answer or to be answer in private, please write to your local branch office (for fastest reply) Link "

I think R3fr's posts go beyond 'C vs E' debate. I don't want anyone to think that I have a problem with his personal beliefs. I am fine as long as every individual has the right to choose. Kids can't make informed decisions, though, and the adults face serious censure by the JW leadership. I don't consider this a 'choice'.

As long as he keeps posting doctrine from a particular angle, and pasting huge amounts of watchtower doctrine with little or no citation, I think a balancing perspective is required. I wish he would cite more often that his is the Jehovah's Witness perspective.

It took me 30 full minutes once to get a visiting JW to tell me the truth about 'shunning' and their beliefs on blood transfusions. That is a sad way to proselytize, in my opinion.

Baker that's probably why focusing on Bibles, Churches and Religions is not a good idea cuz ppl get so wrapped up in them they completely lose site of God, they fight w/ each other over these "tools" that are suppose to assist in learning about God and get all messed up & lost over it...

"IF" there really is a God who made this earth it would only take (1) God not all these lil Gods that ppl have created themselves that are the ideal God that suits them and their needs, and I "think" the real God is not always a comfortable God and he's not for us to question but accept in faith "if" that is what our choice is.

this thing about transfusions is strange to me since in the Bible I could have sworn it says "not to eat blood" to me there is a big diff there in transfusions to save a life and eating blood w/ your mouth, I think branching off from the Bible into your understanding of it and creating yourself a separate name or Religion is kinda getting lost in the Bible and losing site of God...

Doreen: very, very true.

As I said before, this should not be a religious discussion. In that frame of mind the Creationists must convince Evolutionists of the truth of their *scriptural* beliefs, basically converting them. In turn, Atheists must convince Creationists there is no God, and therefore no Creation. Neither side is really addressing Evolution.

If so, why not just change the debate to "Atheism vs. Ultra-Conservative Christianity?" No other religion is really getting anything more than lip-service anyway. Every religion that addresses the origin of the universe is gonna have a few adherents that differ with the Atheistic/Evolutionary view. If you are gonna discuss religion, why half-ass it?

...of course, it is more difficult, and less fashionable, to call the Dalai Lama a hillbilly. Hrm, I guess I can see the benefits of using such narrow definition of religion after all.

As has been said, there are many ways Creation and Evolution can reside in the same system of beliefs, and you need not be a religious person to differ with Darwinism. That invalidates the topic of the discussion, imho. To be a valid debate, the topic should simply be 'Evolution', and then debate the merits of the theory.




[Message Edited]

Wow. Something weird happened to me just now. On JoeUser I wrote an article about the latest development in quantum computing. To my surprise a guy responded who had no profile, but was able to post (didn't know that was allowed, but OK). Instead of starting a discussion he started throwing random bible text. He even gave it a subject: "THE ONENESS EXPLAINED".

This is a quote from his text:

Here then the Father (Jehovah) is First and Last and His means fully come forth and formed and made to appear after His resurrection, His glorified Divine human, first begotten of the dead, His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen, amen, amen

This was my resonse:

lrm: I have the freedom of opnion. Just like you. However, I don't want you to respond to my threads. Everytime you will write the words "Bible", "God". "Jesus" or "Holy" I will delete your post. Maybe even defending your post will make me delete it. You may have the freedom of religion (which I call in your case a cult), but I have the right to delete your post and I have used that right.

Well!!!

I am glad I didn't invite anyone to my wonderful church.

H'umph! I say 2 H'umphs




Long live The Q
Copyright 1973

hehe Matt! God is chasing you! hehe

better grab his IP address...

and Baker anytime creation is a topic I would think the next words following typed would be evolution and then God and Religion
(to be expected)

He posted the same reply on another thread too.

Maybe we need an additional law against religious spamming?

well that would not even surprise me... hehe
but first they better focus on the buy Viagra online & make your penis bigger spams first! hehe!

Madam... Words of that kind... And from your mouth... Naughty

how about those school boys in the UK who took the Viagra at school and ended up in Hospital, well having a throbbing hard time of it in so many words!

oh no I said the word penis I'm going to hell! hehe

Doreen

The Jehovah's Witness hierarchy has the tools in place to punish, shun and isolate those that threaten their power, openly question doctrine, and cause 'dissent'. They are in charge of the lives of their members.

That from a non-JW...
This from a JW: No, my life is controlled by me. I make my own decisions. I choose to serve God according to how the rest of the JWs do. The site you posted tells lies. The only site that truely tells of our activities is our own.

From their own site: Link and other examples of the JW isolation practice and 'spin':

In my religion, when people commit a serious sin they are disciplined. They may be talked to by the elders and disfellowshipped. Why we're told not to talk to the disfellowshipped person is because they might get us to think the way they are. A Scripture some of you may know is 1 Corithians 15:33 which says: "Do not be mislead. Bad associations spoil useful habits." How true it is.

A black and white example: As a Jehovah's Witness, if the only means of saving the life of your child is a blood transfusion you must refuse. You are required to watch your child die. R3fr will call it a "personal choice", but not when you consider the methods above. Participation in the church *requires* a decision that is psychologically difficult after years of such psychological programming. As your secular and religious authority, they can shun you from family and friends, and even punish you in the afterlife. This is not a "personal choice".

No, it is a personal choice, but one of the decisions we strongly recommend you take. It is a difficult decision, but we know we will see them again in paradise, if they do die. As for the advanceds in technology, we no longer have to make that choice.
No programming, you just got that from a website.
Punishing in the afterlife? I guess you mean in the paradise earth? In the paradise earth, everyone will be perfect so there will be no need for punishment. Thats not even a teaching of ours, the punishing in afterlife. Also, and it does make a difference, but we don't have a 'church,' but a Kingdom Hall.

In my opinion the Jehovah's Witnesses are solidly a cult.

With the 'facts' you've read, yes, we could be considered a cult, but if you get the FACTS, then you're conclusion may be very different. To get the facts, go to the OFFICIAL website www.watchtower.org and not some other website that tells lies.

oh no I said the word penis I'm going to hell! hehe Doreen

Look at yourselves.

why?

What do you see that I do not?

Then I would like to ask, why should I care?

You have your religious beliefs and I will not single you out and vilify you for them, don't presume to do that to me for not accepting yours as my own truths and reality.

Thats the point, stop preaching.

[Message Edited]

Look at yourselves.
992 by Citizen r3fr - 11/4/2003 4:36:22 PM

/me grabs a mirror to look at herself

if saying the word penis will actually send ppl to hell then we're all in big trouble, I can however think of lots of other words that might qualify me though...

and me will try to stay out of this thread, before I get into trouble *sigh*
[Message Edited]

Don't worry. If they send all those people to hell, we'll have a hell of a good time there.

[Message Edited]

Hey MadIce, I was wondering, what did the persons post have to do with your post about quantum computing?

No, it is a personal choice, but one of the decisions we strongly recommend you take. It is a difficult decision, but we know we will see them again in paradise, if they do die. As for the advanceds in technology, we no longer have to make that choice.

No offense but it has always been clear to me that the pressure is on you to follow the beliefs of JW. So if that is your only option to get a blood transfusion because other methods have been tried and failed or shown to not work in a particular case of the patient what do you do?

Is it really a choice? Loose the family of people you love and care for in your church? To feel shunned?


I do not pretend to think that other religions do not have such 'rules' as to how to make a choice but even my friends do not have an answer for that. One in particular does not care what people think about her so her choice was easy.



As I have written before, the Bible seems to be interpreted in many different fashions. If you can not admit that others can not be just as passionate about how it 'should' be done and how (much like you) feel that they are right then there really isn't much to debate.


You will surround yourself with like minded people that never challenge ideas, interpretations, understandings or the experts.





How exactly is there to be spiritual growth without opposing opinions?

I do not say there is any true religion but those who allow individual thought and growth without 'nagging points' or 'mental games' are usually the best.


Now about Creation....

joetheblow: Nothing at all. In the other thread it was identical. That was a political thread. So, to me it was a clear case of religious spamming.

I like term. Religious spamming. Don't you?

R3fr: , such lies. It isn't a personal choice if you are punished for it. That would be like saying Armed Robbery is just a personal choice for the average US citizen. If a JW takes a blood transfusion they lose their peers and possibly family. The same has been done to people who are forced to go outside the church to report child molestation.

When someone is shunned by the Jehovah's Witnesses, the remaining JWs are *compelled* not to have contact, even with family. If they do, they can be shunned as well. This isn't an easy choice either when you are brainwashed. This is administration by isolation and fear. It is a classic example of cultish control; the main symptom of it, actually. Separate people, indoctrinate them, and then they must obey unquestioningly or face expulsion and loss of their friends and family. Shameful and sick. It prevents cultish religions from having light shed on their cultishness.

Rules like this only protect people who abuse power, and they are indicative of shallow beliefs that wouldn't stand up without them. I have no use for any belief that takes this much control to keep its sheep in line.

I'll take Religious Spamming for 15 !