The crap selective Biblical literalism has fostered

[Omega Man]

It was a pagan practice, just as performing self-laceration was a pagan practice...Baal worshipers of the Canaanites followed detestable practices by performing self-laceration and lewd, disgusting, immoral rites...Numbers 25:1-3; 1 Kings 18:25-28; Jeremiah 19:5...

Back when gods were considered effective only as far as cultural borders were concerned.


OM

 

[Omega Man]

Ah.. your 'levite mentor' was one of the fringe folks actually. Was he a karsite?

I'm not overly familiar with that term off the top of my head.


OM

 

[RAMOSS]

I'm not overly familiar with that term off the top of my head.


OM

They are a fringe group that rejected rabbinical judaism

 

[Omega Man]

They are a fringe group that rejected rabbinical judaism

Oh, you mean Karaite's. Although he never declared to me for certain, I do recollect his saying he had a close colleague in Israel who was a Karaite scribe. And I'm fairly certain he had indicated at one time or another that Mishnaic Judaists didn't look favorably upon he and his contemporaries (Levites).


OM

 

[RAMOSS]

Oh, you mean Karaite's. Although he never declared to me for certain, I do recollect his saying he had a close colleague in Israel who was a Karaite scribe. And I'm fairly certain he had indicated at one time or another that Mishnaic Judaists didn't look favorably upon he and his contemporaries (Levites).


OM

However, if you agree with the talmud or not, if the practice wasn't common place in Israel at the time there would not have been an argument about it in the Talmud.

 

[Omega Man]

However, if you agree with the talmud or not, if the practice wasn't common place in Israel at the time there would not have been an argument about it in the Talmud.

As a rather late-breaking entry into the record, the Talmud itself also makes quite a lot of assertions without evidence to back it up.


OM

 

[RAMOSS]

As a rather late-breaking entry into the record, the Talmud itself also makes quite a lot of assertions without evidence to back it up.


OM

Never the less, the discussion is there... andt there had to be a reason for the argument

 

[devildavid]

lol...that would be whatif doing the slandering...

No, it was you. What if just flat out insulted him. You made a false claim about what Jehovah probably thinks about what if. That is slanderous.

 

[Xelor]

Ok, thanks for clarifying...as for there not being that many of us...here is a summary of our most recently recorded activity worldwide...

240​—Lands where Jehovah’s Witnesses worship​

8,579,909​—Jehovah’s Witnesses​

10,079,709​—Free home Bible courses conducted​

20,329,317​—Attendance at the annual Memorial of Christ’s death​

119,954​—Congregations​

How Many Jehovah’s Witnesses Are There Worldwide?

And in the US...

Fast Facts—United States of America
326,767,000—Population
1,234,877—Ministers who teach the Bible
13,016—Congregations
1 to 265—Ratio of Jehovah’s Witnesses to population​

United States of America: How Many Jehovah’s Witnesses Are There?

Let's get some stuff straight:

• As goes Christianity and its adherents' rhetoric, doctrine and dogma, the vagaries that distinguish JW-ism from the rest are relevant to JWs and chroniclers, and only to the latter as a matter of nominal accuracy, not as a matter of substance and/or influence.
• Nothing about JW-ism drives the direction Christianity goes or how most or even a preponderance of Christians comport themselves or to what notions most Christians ascribe. I.e., nobody's really looking to JW-ism for leadership, but we all are aware you exist.
• Among Christianity and Christians writ large, JWs (JW-ism) is an exception, an outlier. As such, I'm not wasting my time reconciling the vicissitudes of the nature of JW-ism in general, its doctrine, its dogma and its adherents' comportment with that Christianity/Christians writ large.
• Yes, 1M to 8.5M people is a lot of people, but the lot of JWs is still not enough to matter in the context of this thread's discussion.

In light of the above, if you can bring yourself to engage on the thread topic in terms of Christianity/Christians writ large, rather than through the lens of what JW-ism says/does, fine, and I welcome/encourage your participation thus. But don't sit there citing a denominational exception's practices -- as you obliquely/tacitly did when you remarked that JW's doctrine doesn't change -- as support for making or refuting broader assertions about the nature of anything having to do with Christianity.

Hell, JW-ism has only existed for ~150 years, give or take; thus it's hardly been around long enough, given the glacial rates at which faith-based belief systems change in the first place, for doctrinal change to happen.

• To put some perspective to the glacial rate of doctrinal change among churches:
  • The Church of England ordained its first women sometime in the 1970s. The doctrine of women's ineligibility for that station had remained in place since Henry VIII founded the Church of England in the 1500s.
  • The Roman Catholic Church rejected the doctrine of geocentrism in 1822. Thus the Church hewed to geocentrism for approximately 1800 years.
  • Not until 1950 did the Roman Catholic Church acknowledge that there's no conflict between its doctrine and the Theory of Evolution. That doctrinal change is an exception to the otherwise languorous pace at which such things have preponderantly occurred.

Faith-based belief systems are slow to alter doctrine because quickly doing so undermines the self-asserted validity of its doctrine.

Blue:
You didn't think the context of this thread is global Christianity, did you? I'm just trying to figure out why you bothered to share metrics about global JW adherent quantities. I mean, really. There are about three times as many Baptists in the US as there are JWs on the planet.


Red:
Right....1.23M JWs in the US....As I said, JWs do not register in my mind when I think of Christians, and especially not US Christians. The only time JWs register in my mind, on account of their being JWs, is when they knock on the door or approach me in a goddamned parking lot, wasting my time with their BS.

In terms of broad statements about Christians and Christianity:

• The 50M+ Roman Catholics register with me.
• The 33M+ Baptists register with me.
• Other denominations having 10M+ adherents register with me, but the rest do not.

 

[Xelor]

Obvious you didn't read it. I mean, if what you were saying is true, then blood letting (a common medical practice of the time, even if it was nonsense) would have been forbidden, but it was not.

And for anyone interested...blood letting was NOT a practice of the Israelites but was a common pagan practice...Jehovah God would never approve of His people practicing such a thing...



Bloodletting - Wikipedia

The Bible tells us how Jehovah God felt about pagan practices of the Egyptians...they were something detestable to him...Exodus 7:11-13, 22; 8:7; 2 Timothy 3:8...

Red:
That phlebotomy was a pagan practice has no bearing on whether non-pagans practiced it too; moreover, the nature and extent to which faith-based belief systems that accord validity to one or more Biblical texts is demonstrated by looking not what groups didn't practice bloodletting, but rather by identifying what groups did/do apply that practice.

• If Judaism is among the belief systems you deem pagan:
  • Encyclopedia Judaica: Bloodletting
  • A Qualitative Study of Cultural Bloodletting -- Apparently "Yahweh God" didn't mind phlebotomy as practiced by Ethiopian Jews.
• Among Christendom, bloodletting was practiced abundantly:
  • History of Bloodletting
  • Bloodletting
    • "The use of leeches in Europe peaked between 1830 and 1850, then fell into decline. This was firstly a result of the invention of ‘mechanical leeches."
• In general and without regard to theistic predilection:
  • Clinical applications of therapeutic phlebotomy
    • "Phlebotomy is the removal of blood from the body, and therapeutic phlebotomy is the preferred treatment for blood disorders in which the removal of red blood cells or serum iron is the most efficient method for managing the symptoms and complications. Therapeutic phlebotomy is currently indicated for the treatment of hemochromatosis, polycythemia vera, porphyria cutanea tarda, sickle cell disease, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease with hyperferritinemia."

From the preceding, one observes that pagans and non-pagans practiced and/or condoned bloodletting.


Blue/Off-Topic:
How would you know? We know God at least once changed his mind, which at the very least means he could do so again. How do you know that's not something about which God changed his mind? Did Jehovah God send you an email or text message? Maybe sent a carrier pigeon?

 

[Daisy]

Let's get some stuff straight:

• As goes Christianity and its adherents' rhetoric, doctrine and dogma, the vagaries that distinguish JW-ism from the rest are relevant to JWs and chroniclers, and only to the latter as a matter of nominal accuracy, not as a matter of substance and/or influence.
• Nothing about JW-ism drives the direction Christianity goes or how most or even a preponderance of Christians comport themselves or to what notions most Christians ascribe. I.e., nobody's really looking to JW-ism for leadership, but we all are aware you exist.
• Among Christianity and Christians writ large, JWs (JW-ism) is an exception, an outlier. As such, I'm not wasting my time reconciling the vicissitudes of the nature of JW-ism in general, its doctrine, its dogma and its adherents' comportment with that Christianity/Christians writ large.
• Yes, 1M to 8.5M people is a lot of people, but the lot of JWs is still not enough to matter in the context of this thread's discussion.

In light of the above, if you can bring yourself to engage on the thread topic in terms of Christianity/Christians writ large, rather than through the lens of what JW-ism says/does, fine, and I welcome/encourage your participation thus. But don't sit there citing a denominational exception's practices -- as you obliquely/tacitly did when you remarked that JW's doctrine doesn't change -- as support for making or refuting broader assertions about the nature of anything having to do with Christianity.

Hell, JW-ism has only existed for ~150 years, give or take; thus it's hardly been around long enough, given the glacial rates at which faith-based belief systems change in the first place, for doctrinal change to happen.

• To put some perspective to the glacial rate of doctrinal change among churches:
  • The Church of England ordained its first women sometime in the 1970s. The doctrine of women's ineligibility for that station had remained in place since Henry VIII founded the Church of England in the 1500s.
  • The Roman Catholic Church rejected the doctrine of geocentrism in 1822. Thus the Church hewed to geocentrism for approximately 1800 years.
  • Not until 1950 did the Roman Catholic Church acknowledge that there's no conflict between its doctrine and the Theory of Evolution. That doctrinal change is an exception to the otherwise languorous pace at which such things have preponderantly occurred.

Faith-based belief systems are slow to alter doctrine because quickly doing so undermines the self-asserted validity of its doctrine.

Blue:
You didn't think the context of this thread is global Christianity, did you? I'm just trying to figure out why you bothered to share metrics about global JW adherent quantities. I mean, really. There are about three times as many Baptists in the US as there are JWs on the planet.


Red:
Right....1.23M JWs in the US....As I said, JWs do not register in my mind when I think of Christians, and especially not US Christians. The only time JWs register in my mind, on account of their being JWs, is when they knock on the door or approach me in a goddamned parking lot, wasting my time with their BS.

In terms of broad statements about Christians and Christianity:

• The 50M+ Roman Catholics register with me.
• The 33M+ Baptists register with me.
• Other denominations having 10M+ adherents register with me, but the rest do not.

So it's is the quality, not the quality that registers with you...got it...

 

[Daisy]

Red:
That phlebotomy was a pagan practice has no bearing on whether non-pagans practiced it too; moreover, the nature and extent to which faith-based belief systems that accord validity to one or more Biblical texts is demonstrated by looking not what groups didn't practice bloodletting, but rather by identifying what groups did/do apply that practice.

• If Judaism is among the belief systems you deem pagan:
  • Encyclopedia Judaica: Bloodletting
  • A Qualitative Study of Cultural Bloodletting -- Apparently "Yahweh God" didn't mind phlebotomy as practiced by Ethiopian Jews.
• Among Christendom, bloodletting was practiced abundantly:
  • History of Bloodletting
  • Bloodletting
    • "The use of leeches in Europe peaked between 1830 and 1850, then fell into decline. This was firstly a result of the invention of ‘mechanical leeches."
• In general and without regard to theistic predilection:
  • Clinical applications of therapeutic phlebotomy
    • "Phlebotomy is the removal of blood from the body, and therapeutic phlebotomy is the preferred treatment for blood disorders in which the removal of red blood cells or serum iron is the most efficient method for managing the symptoms and complications. Therapeutic phlebotomy is currently indicated for the treatment of hemochromatosis, polycythemia vera, porphyria cutanea tarda, sickle cell disease, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease with hyperferritinemia."

From the preceding, one observes that pagans and non-pagans practiced and/or condoned bloodletting.


Blue/Off-Topic:
How would you know? We know God at least once changed his mind, which at the very least means he could do so again. How do you know that's not something about which God changed his mind? Did Jehovah God send you an email or text message? Maybe sent a carrier pigeon?

I deem pagan anything taught/practiced outside of God's Word...is that clear enough for you?

 

[Xelor]

So it's is the quality, not the quality that registers with you...got it...

I don't think you do. Not by a longshot.

If you must not, it's the quality, the quantity and the proportion.

 

[Xelor]

Red:
That phlebotomy was a pagan practice has no bearing on whether non-pagans practiced it too; moreover, the nature and extent to which faith-based belief systems that accord validity to one or more Biblical texts is demonstrated by looking not what groups didn't practice bloodletting, but rather by identifying what groups did/do apply that practice.

• If Judaism is among the belief systems you deem pagan:
  • Encyclopedia Judaica: Bloodletting
  • A Qualitative Study of Cultural Bloodletting -- Apparently "Yahweh God" didn't mind phlebotomy as practiced by Ethiopian Jews.
• Among Christendom, bloodletting was practiced abundantly:
  • History of Bloodletting
  • Bloodletting
    • "The use of leeches in Europe peaked between 1830 and 1850, then fell into decline. This was firstly a result of the invention of ‘mechanical leeches."
• In general and without regard to theistic predilection:
  • Clinical applications of therapeutic phlebotomy
    • "Phlebotomy is the removal of blood from the body, and therapeutic phlebotomy is the preferred treatment for blood disorders in which the removal of red blood cells or serum iron is the most efficient method for managing the symptoms and complications. Therapeutic phlebotomy is currently indicated for the treatment of hemochromatosis, polycythemia vera, porphyria cutanea tarda, sickle cell disease, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease with hyperferritinemia."

From the preceding, one observes that pagans and non-pagans practiced and/or condoned bloodletting.


Blue/Off-Topic:
How would you know? We know God at least once changed his mind, which at the very least means he could do so again. How do you know that's not something about which God changed his mind? Did Jehovah God send you an email or text message? Maybe sent a carrier pigeon?

I deem pagan anything taught/practiced outside of God's Word...is that clear enough for you?

Red:
No...

 

[Daisy]

I don't think you do. Not by a longshot.

If you must not, it's the quality, the quantity and the proportion.

Perhaps refreshing your memory on Jesus' words will clear matters up for you...but I doubt it since you seem to have a rather dense attitude when it comes to understanding God's Word...

“Go in through the narrow gate, because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are going in through it; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are finding it." matthew 7:13,14

 

[Daisy]

Red:
No...

Not surprised...:roll:

 

[devildavid]

Perhaps refreshing your memory on Jesus' words will clear matters up for you...but I doubt it since you seem to have a rather dense attitude when it comes to understanding God's Word...

“Go in through the narrow gate, because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction, and many are going in through it; whereas narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading off into life, and few are finding it." matthew 7:13,14

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. First you point out the vast numbers of JW's as some sort of evidence in their favor. Then you quote scripture to point out how few are taking the right road. Maybe any number over the magic 144,000 is too many.

 

[Daisy]

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. First you point out the vast numbers of JW's as some sort of evidence in their favor. Then you quote scripture to point out how few are taking the right road. Maybe any number over the magic 144,000 is too many.

You really have a serious comprehension problem, don't you?:roll:

As of 2018, Jehovah's Witnesses reported a monthly average membership of approximately 8.36 million actively involved in preaching, with a peak of 8.58 million. Jehovah's Witnesses have an active presence in most countries, though they do not form a large part of the population of any country.

ratio of jehovah's witnesses to world population - Google Search

 

[devildavid]

You really have a serious comprehension problem, don't you?:roll:



ratio of jehovah's witnesses to world population - Google Search

You have a serious ego problem. It causes you to be very insulting to people.

 

[zyzygy]

You have a serious ego problem. It causes you to be very insulting to people.

That's because she has no cogent arguments.

 

[Daisy]

You have a serious ego problem. It causes you to be very insulting to people.

And you have a serious comprehension problem...it causes you to not understand anything you read...:roll:

 

[devildavid]

And you have a serious comprehension problem...it causes you to not understand anything you read...:roll:

And you once again exhibit your ego problem. When someone disagrees with you your ego tells you that the other person must have a comprehension problem. So you resort to insult. It is a bad habit of yours.

 

[Daisy]

And you once again exhibit your ego problem. When someone disagrees with you your ego tells you that the other person must have a comprehension problem. So you resort to insult. It is a bad habit of yours.

lol...truth hurts, huh...

 

[devildavid]

lol...truth hurts, huh...

Does it hurt you?

 

[zyzygy]

And you once again exhibit your ego problem. When someone disagrees with you your ego tells you that the other person must have a comprehension problem. So you resort to insult. It is a bad habit of yours.

She is not a good advert for her religion. I have known many JW and they could discuss without insulting.