B Knott Wildered

In particular, due to some discoveries I have made over the last months I have been taking a careful second look at the Jehovah's Witness beliefs. I am feeling the need, the inspiration to do so even more deeply so if in the future you may have a specific question you want me personally to answer, I may have to say "Sorry." Ask if you want, but I may have to say no.

As far as the advice I am seeking, what suggestions would you make? What areas should I most carefully consider? What cautions on one hand or encouragement on the other do you have to offer?

As I have oft stated before, I am keeping an open mind. I seek only the truth, and will follow it wherever it may lead.

And for those who have been my recent inspiration, thank you for being there for me. You know who you are.

Peace

By chance I ran across a reference to a Jehovah's Witness who at one time in the past served in a political office. That indicates that at some point there was an adjustment made from allowing political involvement to not allowing it. When was that adjustment made? If possible, provide details such as publication and date of that publication.

Thanks!

Even perhaps an obligation to ask for help when we need it?

I ask this because just within the last day or so I had what I believe is an epiphany. I believe the following details and explanation is all pertinent to my question but your option if you would like to read it or not.

When I was a child although I did not realize it until I was well into adulthood I not only grew up in a very dysfunctional family, I was a victim of sometimes pretty severe emotional abuse coming primarily but not exclusively at the hands of my father. It was I believe primarily due to that emotional abuse that I very early developed a severely strong independent streak in which I would insist on doing things for myself even when help was offered. The beginning of my of epiphany was when I remembered the time a very good friend of mine, Jim H. in Ohio stunned me one day some years ago when he told me that I was one of the most selfish people that he knew. That stunned me because I had always viewed myself as a very giving person, was always ready to help just about anyone and everyone regardless of whether they deserved it or not, and many times had made sometimes significant personal sacrifices to help others.

(More details to come shortly.)

As of January 28, 2015.

Someone asked me to answer a question and I over a year ago already have written something that is a good answer for that question, if it will fit. I want to see if I need to cut the length and if so how much.

Bonus question: Can you give me the name of the publication, and the specific issue of that publication if appropriate that was the first one to state that celebrating Christmas was wrong? And even better, is there perhaps available online a PDF version of that publication, and can you share a link to it please?

to the other. Is this a default position for Gmail? How can one get around it?

First, please share how physically attractive you consider yourself. As for myself, I typically simply state that I do not think I'm too hard on the eyes. You can judge for yourself, that picture is actually myself taken a couple of years ago.

Here are your choices. There are three women who are all equal in every aspect except physical attractiveness. All of them have the type of qualities you are looking for in a potential lifelong partner. But one of them is dropdead gorgeous, the second one is more or less a plain Jane, and the last one has been scarred and disfigured from being in a terrible accident, perhaps being badly burned by spilled gasoline. Which one of the three are you most likely to pick to take out on a date, which one number two and would you simply reject any one of them? Finally, explain your choices please.

I will start it out by saying what my choices would be, but if you want to find out why, you will have to come back later, probably in three or four days.

I am vacillating at the moment between asking plain Jane and the one who has been scarred and disfigured. But I assure you, if you think that is because I would be afraid to even approach an attractive woman, you would quickly put that thought aside were you to see some of the women I have dated. Drop dead gorgeous very much fits more than one of them. But I also have dated some women who most men would leave standing at the door if it was a blind date.

Your response?

Bonus question: Can you cite the specific scripture?

Thanks!

I asked a question earlier and someone who is a member of your group claimed you have preached in every country except two. Which two are they, and do you have any plans regarding them? If so, can you share what your plans are and when you expect to accomplish them?

Thanks!

What modern-day organization or organizations were the first ones formed for the purpose of reaching the entire world with the message of Christ? In what year or what years were they formed, and in what year was it claimed they had succeeded in their goal? I will give you a hint. It was not Catholicism, it was not any Protestant denomination in Christianity and it was before you were born. I believe there are two that qualify. I am asking to see if someone can add to my knowledge and/or correct me if I am wrong. If no one else gets what I believe to be the correct answer, then I will share the answer myself when I pick Best Answer.

In his lifetime (the lifetime of the apostle that is) that Jesus and the Gospel message had been preached to the entire Earth, to every soul?

10 points to first correct answer.

Exactly how is your absolute certainty that you follow the “Only True Religion” different from everyone else from every other group who also is absolutely certain that they follow the only true religion? If you have not studied at least the seven major revealed world religions, how can you be so certain that you have the only true religion? I have been to services in Mormon churches as well as Jehovah’s Witnesses Kingdom Halls. Although it has not happened in every service nor even indeed every building, but I have listened to Jehovah’s Witness children and adolescents get up in front of everyone and loudly and boldly proclaim they KNOW their religion is the only true one. I doubt if some of them are even aware there are other religions. I have been in Mormon services and again children and adolescents have gotten up in front of the congregation boldly proclaiming that they KNOW that they follow the only true religion. I managed to speak to one of those youths after the service and asked him if he knew anything about any of three or four religious groups that I mentioned. He said that he did not know anything about them and did not need to know anything about them because obviously they were false religions, that he followed the only true religion.

So again, how is your “knowledge” that you follow the only true religion different from the follower of any other religion who is just as certain that they follow the one true one?

Or was it so long ago that today we have no idea of when? Can you cite the first evidence that indicates that relationship?

Thanks!

Just wondering. It is almost inconceivable that no one before was using it, what with the Internet being so large and widespread.

Peace

And Yahoo! Answers in general as a type of social media? Something someone recently said to me got me wondering. Personally, I would say that my primary use is to get people to think followed by a source of answers with only a trace of "social media" tossed in. So, for myself:

95% challenging others to think.

4 plus % to get information.

Less than 1% as a social outlet/social media.

More than 20 years ago a misunderstanding arose between another member of my family and myself. I have on several occasions tried going to that person in order to resolve it and put an end to escalating and what I feel are totally unnecessary conflicts[1]. Conflicts in which I refuse to participate but the other person insists on both instigating and continuing. My question is, how many times should I make an attempt to resolve it before I should just call it quits and walk away? As I see it, the Bible in Matthew 5:22-25 calls for once only, and I have gone far above that already.

[1] I know what a conflict is and if you knew the details, you would see how it is a conflict, even though only one person is "conflicting."

I am not ready to give up yet, but I can see that possibility in the near future. Your thoughts?

When you have been nothing but honest? I tend to trust people and give everyone a chance, only when they start demonstrating dishonesty do I start doubting. I think that the more honest you are the more you tend to trust others. So when someone accuses me of lying for no reason at all that I can see, do I have good cause to wonder if that person cannot themselves be trusted? Is refusing to share personal details with you when you have shared some of yours with them a good reason to suspect they are being dishonest?

Please note, I am a member of the Baha'i Faith. I mention that because I'm going to use Christianity as an example. A member of the Baha'i Faith is no more Christian than a Muslim is, no more a Christian than a Christian is a member of the Jewish faith.

There are innumerable facts that someone can use to make a logical statement regarding the existence of God. For example, there are approximately 2.1 billion Christians in the world today. I can use that fact as part of a logical argument claiming that God exists. I can turn right around and use that same fact as part of an equally logical argument claiming that God does not exist. Therefore, that fact fully qualifies as evidence both for and against the existence of God. And that is only one fact out of many that could be used either way. Therefore, I just proved that there is evidence for the existence of God. So how is it that numerous Atheists continue to claim there is no evidence for God? I submit that it is conclusive evidence if not indeed proof that a considerable number if not the majority of Atheists live on a very blind faith. They repeat the same catchphrase over and over even though the evidence clearly contradicts their statements.

The concept of Progressive Revelation states that as mankind progresses, ready to embark upon the next stage of our collective development, God will renew religion, giving us what we need at that stage of development. That process has gone on as long as people have existed and will continue as long as people exist. Just a few of the past Messengers of God have been Abraham, Krishna, Moses, Zoroaster, Buddha, Christ, Muhammad and most recently Baha'u'llah (1817-1892).

Among many Scriptures I could cite, in John 10:16 Jesus said that He had followers who were not of the Christian fold. Could Jesus have been speaking of the Zoroastrians, the Hindus, the Buddhists, Zoroastrians and others? In Revelation 3:12 Jesus said that when Christ returns that He will have a new name and will give His followers a new name. Does that not indicate that by then Christianity will be outdated? In 2000 years Christianity has not come close to bringing world peace and unity and is no closer to it now than it ever has been. The Baha'i Faith (founded in 1844) states that is purpose is to bring world peace and unity, but that it also in the future will bring replaced by yet another religion when again man has need of Divine Guidance.

Within the Baha'i Faith you will find principles that if followed can only end with the world finally at peace and all of our social, economic, political and other problems solved. I maintain that without God peace is impossible but with God peace is inevitable. From where I am sitting, it is obvious we are well on our way to achieving world peace and unity. That process began with the beginning of the Baha'i Faith and is rapidly progressing. Christians may well claim otherwise, both what do our current conditions indicate when considered alongside of the growth of the Baha'i Faith? Again I ask, is Christianity an example of planned obsolescence?

Comments are welcome. Sources and references are appreciated.

Thank you in advance for your answers.

Peace

I am writing an article about changing religious demographics and recently but still well before I started writing the article came across some materials claiming that while the raw numbers of sceptics and unbelievers is rising, the rate of growth of those numbers is rapidly declining. But I do not remember when or where I saw those materials. I want to write a balanced article and appreciate any links or references you can suggest, but at the moment I am more in need of materials showing or claiming to show that atheism is on the decline overall.

Thanks for your help.

Peace to you and yours