"The use of words expressing something other than their literal intention.... now that is irony!"

The warning is longer than the actual statement. Now while not as extreme, think of the multiple languages in the backs of manuals or the warnings in toys for little children that are of significant size related to what was actually needed.

This is my last and final post in this thread, if you want to continue this, PM me.

Witnesses don't hate any one. I am simply intolerant at the moment because of all the damage the Catholic church has done, I mean here, right in my town. I know I will regret saying that, but that is my feeling and my opinion, and it will change with time, hopefully.

I haven't lived long enough in the U.S. to come to a conclusion about the Catholics up there, but I know enough from seeing the ones down here. Throwing water at each other to wash away their sins, making people march on their knees for 1-2 miles to a church singing songs to the Virgin of Guadalupe and Mary, they try influencing the political system, take justice of what happens to their members in their own hands, etc. Whats worse, is that there is a local Catholic channel that is 24/7 repeating the same program OVER AND OVER AND OVER. Thats not brainwashing is it?

Now, I maybe confused again, but don't Catholics believe in the Trinity where Jesus, Holy Ghost and God are all the same in 1? Sounds like another religion from India (I saw on History channel a show about how the trinity was "sketchy")...

The whole thing of "God is a mystery" is a loophole phrase, like the one the mormons use when they contradict the bible or say something biblicly unfounded (mormons came to my house recently). The bible says "God is not a god of disorder".

I have a whole, non Watchtower list of Catholic contradictions with the Bible. In fact, Mexico being a "Catholic" nation is home to lots of heavy rock and metal anti-catholic music, which is ironicaly heard by lots of catholics. Bands such as Mago de Oz (who are now anti-everything really, reason why I stopped listening to them) have come here to play, also Rata Blanca, and others.

Now I could be wrong, there is always margin for error, and I know I am a very imperfect human, but if you could see what I have seen, and compared all that with all of yours, you may atleast understand my view. Since you don't, you can't.

I now will leave this thread, which I should have NEVER entered. This thread is just another magnet for me to make mistakes and everyone take it as the official message of the Watchtower and Jehovah's Witnesses Organization, which, it is not.

Except that the warning statement was part of your joke. If the warning statement was serious and it happened to be (unexpectedly) funnier than the joke it was warning against, that would be irony.

People who put those those warning labels did not intend for them to be humorous but overly serious. It is ironic to find the funniest things on warning statements on products that solely try to protect you from great harm.

You're thinking of Brahman, and, no, Brahman is not the same thing as the Trinity.

Seriously. Look things up before you use them. It's not hard.

Sorry about the late reply I've been packing and moving back into uni. This is a response to Wolfy, back here: http://forums.massassi.net/vb3/showthread.php?p=741037#post741037


So one woman sins and the punishment for it is visited on every single one of her decendants who happen to get a double XX in the big chromosome lottery that is conception? What a loving and benevolent god!



For an omnipotent and supposedly benevolent being that's a pretty heavy handed tactic. Wiping out not only the wicked but also any innocents and all but two of each type of living being. Meanwhile during the armageddon the same God will apparently rapture all the true believers away. Why didn't he just lightning bolt the individuals or do a reverse rapture on them and send them directly to hell?


He's still boasting about handing out the handicaps. The gist of what is being said is: "Is it not I, God, who makes the blind blind and the crippled crippled? Therefore it's within my powers to be nice to you and remove your speech impediment!"


It's still a "righteous" God imposing punishments on the innocent! Surely you don't think that it's fine to go round threatening and killing babies!?


God gives people free will to do things like not believing in him, right? So then he gets super-pissed and takes it out on a bunch of harmless cattle? What a guy!


Yes, you're right. That should've been Exodus 12:29-30 My apologies.


That last "don't covet" commandment labels slaves as possessions. It says you should not desire the possessions of your neighbour. I'm pretty sure wanting to free them would break this rule.


In this case God's getting his own people to slay the unbelievers. What happened to the "Thou shalt not kill" part? That's a part of the Bible I really liked!
If say amongst these Israelites we rather unexpectedly had a bunch of converts to Hinduism, would you think it fine that God brings all his believers together to turn on their families and friends and kill 3000 Hindus? Just because they worshipped a religion you can no longer identify with doesn't make it any better.


Uh... Yes? It says it right there in the bible! In the link you made! Lev 19:20-22. It says if a man lies with a slave woman neither shall be killed. The woman gets scourged while the man makes an offering at the temple and is forgiven.



Uh... Yes? You seem to be quoting the bits mentioned and then saying "No" without bothering to read it yourself.
In that particular passage it says you may take slaves from the heathens of neighbouring countries and they and their families shall be yours forever. I'm pretty sure that's an endorsement for slavery if I ever saw one.


*Sigh* Yes. Read it! A man aged between 20 and 60 is worth fifty shekels of silver. Perhaps you disagree that it does not imply the value of slaves but it still definitely puts a price on the life of people which varies according to age and sex. That alone suggests it values the worth of a person upon the physical work they can do.


And since when was that just? We're all meant to be individuals with our own free will yet God still feels the need to punish the descendents of certain sinners? Amusingly this is then contradicted later in Deuteronomy 24:16 and Ezekiel 18:20, so I guess it depends on which part you decide is right.



Well, thanks for the ad hominem mate. Yes I'm guilty of quoting someone else who I felt put it in a manner much better than I could myself. I did check it. I checked about half a dozen quotes at random because I don't just read them and go "Christianity is stoopid LOL", what I did check was correct. My apologies that I don't treat posting on a forum like I'm preparing for a thesis. I've now gone and looked at your complaints and apart from a mistake where the wrong chapter of Leviticus was quoted you didn't really have much to say other than eventually just saying "No" in a childlike manner. You're welcome to critique the rest of that list if you want. I'm happy to concede if I've posted absolute crap. I've gone on and checked several further verses and have yet to find others that were misquotes or plain wrong. There's a lot of instances in the OT about God telling the leader of the Israelites to attack a certain city and then they destroy it and spare absolutely no one.
My main point is that the Bible is hardly the best place to derive your morals from. The god of the old testament in particular is a wrathful, petty god who decrees insane rules. To use this same book today to imply the immorality of things like homosexuality is laughable. The bible has been used in the past to justify slavery and racism (see the curse of Ham and the mark of Cain for example), it is not some perfect book to gain moral insight from.

It's simply punishment for the inherent fallibility that we, as humans, now have.



Humanity had descended into wickedness, according to the Bible. Aside from Noah and his descendents, there were no innocents. Why didn't God do a "reverse rapture"? Because God was disgusted with the way His creations had used their free will, and wanted to start with a clean slate.



And?



No, but then, I'm not God.



Cattle that, had they listened to God, would have lived.



God gave them warning. They didn't listen to God.



CTRL + F > Slave: Phrase not found.



God isn't leading those 3000 Jews-turned-Hindus to a promised land and out of slavery.



"If a man has carnal relations with a female slave who has already been living with another man but has not yet been redeemed or given her freedom, they shall be punished but not put to death, because she is not free."

lol, reading comprehension



It says you can acquire (not take) slaves from other countries, but it doesn't mention you owning their families. The only reference to families is that Israelites could purchase servants from the descendants of aliens who resided in the country.



It's a estimation value if they place vows to God. Not an estimation on how much money they're worth.



(I'll get back to this one later - lunchtime)

If it'd happen in America, I wouldn't be surprised. But in UK?

This thread is gay.

I'd start the Tyra Banks revolution but someone would gay it away

This thread is getting out of control.

-If I don't say it now, I'll never get the chance...

[QUOTE=Vincent Valentine]Speaking of gay horses...[/QUOTE]

Hahahahaha, "equine gaydar."

That's awesome.