A Psalm

[path_of_one]

Originally Posted by China Cat Sunflower

What I wanted to point out is that it's very hard, coming out of a bad religious experience, to get to the point where one isn't over reacting in the opposite direction. It's hard to let go of the bitterness and see the parts of religion and religious experience that are good because all of religion is colored by the bad experience. For those who have never experienced this struggle, I'm saying they have no way of empathizing with what it's like.

Chris

Hi, Chris-

Although I haven't experienced this with religion, I do feel I can empathize with this- it is similar to when one is abused by someone one is close to, I think.

Reading what you wrote reminded me of how people react when they are abused by someone they trusted. It isn't just a bad experience- it's betrayal, confusion, and all the rest. It's hard to rebound from betrayal and trust again, and feels safer to avoid it all together, unless a person is addicted to these negative relationships.

This is why there seems to be two responses to being abused by a significant other, for example. I've known women who leave only to immediately go back into an abusive relationship with some other guy. Other women accidentally get into an abusive relationship, and leave and never go back to that again. For women of the second type, trusting any guy in any relationship is very difficult.

Religion can be something so intimate, so deep, that like a parent or a lover we trust it-- we think we should be able to rely on it for comfort, for support. If the institution (and its people) betrays us, that trust is broken and it is very hard to recover. It is not just an issue of forgiveness. Forgiving an abusive person is much easier (in my experience) than trusting a new person. Because you've been really hurt and you just never know what is waiting for you underneath the shiny new exterior...

At any rate, just wanted to say I sympathize, if imperfectly...

Kim/Path

[path_of_one]

Thanks for the psalm, Luna- it is one of my favorites too. (And, FS, I also have heard the hymn version many times, and it is lovely. Brings me to tears too. It's one of my favorites and sometimes I sing it on my own while horseback riding.)

[mee]

"It is better to take refuge in Jehovah than to trust in earthling man."—Ps. 118:8.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Wow, it just occurred to me that this psalm is what Jesus was talking about with the woman at the well!

"And where are these waters, that I may drink?" But she also asked a bigger question..."who is this God that I may worship Him?" And Jesus said in as much, "Woman, you are looking at Him." Then she ran and told everyone "Come meet the man that told me my entire life!" (that knows everything about me, down to the second I was conceived)

No fear, no embarrasment. Simply awe, and excitement. Who but God could have stripped away the guilt of a woman with the past she had, so that she could spread the News? No human I'm aware of... (lol) Must have been God. Satan can't strip away guilt. He has a tough enough time trying to mask it from the human conscience...

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by mee

"It is better to take refuge in Jehovah than to trust in earthling man."—Ps. 118:8.

Translation, it is better to take refuge in God than to trust the Watch Tower and the "elders" that conceived of it. And God's name isn't Jehovah (lol). Just ask Bananna Brain, and Dauer. They are real Jewish faithful, not some symbolic virgins. And for every fault you find in trinitarian thought, 100 faults can be found in JW dogma. And you and yours ain't even been 'round the block yet! Less than 160 years old, four failed end of the earth declarations, Kingdom hall being Christ's seat since 1914 (the year the world exploded), insistance that Jesus is a superman, and not God, the Holy Spirit is a force, not an entity, and you are telling all of the rest of Christendom they are wrong and you are correct???? Mee, there is a passage in the Bible about fools thinking their way is right. Perhaps you aught to consider studying that entire paragraph, instead of just the phrase.

I do know this. Don't post another JW link. Protelytising is against CR rules.

Your deliberate breaking of said rules does not help your cause any.

v/r

Q

[mee]

[quote=Quahom1;143471

I do know this. Don't post another JW link. Protelytising is against CR rules.

Your deliberate breaking of said rules does not help your cause any.

v/r

Q[/quote]That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth. KJV the bible is good

[mee]

[quote=Quahom1;143471] And God's name isn't Jehovah (lol).

Q[/quote

but what does the bible tell us
psalm 83;18 KJV

[pattimax]

[quote=mee;143673]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

And God's name isn't Jehovah (lol).

Q[/quote

but what does the bible tell us
psalm 83;18 KJV

Mee, only your best interest is at heart.

Jehovah's Witnesses and the Name Jehovah

[Dream]

Acts 9:10 I am the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt: open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it.

I took a look at Dan Corner's article and it seems a little harsh, and actually goes a bit further than necessary. Dan Corner doesn't improve our knowledge of the Name at all, besides which neither verbal pronunciation is actually superior. The point is that we cannot read the translation out of any book anywhere, because its not like other names. If the JW's want to insist on using 'Jehovah' I don't see that there's any worse problem with that pronunciation than 'Yah'. According to Dan Corner, it translates directly to 'Jesus', which is an even more uneducated position to take! In the first place all those who believe and obey (including Jesus!) share in the Name.

Originally Posted by Ephesians 3:14-15

For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named,

Jeremiah 14:9 Why shouldst thou be like a man confused, like a mighty man who cannot save? Yet thou, O L!RD, art in the midst of us, and we are called by thy name; leave us not."

[pattimax]

Originally Posted by Dream

I took a look at Dan Corner's article and it seems a little harsh, and actually goes a bit further than necessary. Dan Corner doesn't improve our knowledge of the Name at all, besides which neither verbal pronunciation is actually superior. The point is that we cannot read the translation out of any book anywhere, because its not like other names. If the JW's want to insist on using 'Jehovah' I don't see that there's any worse problem with that pronunciation than 'Yah'. According to Dan Corner, it translates directly to 'Jesus', which is an even more uneducated position to take! In the first place all those who believe and obey (including Jesus!) share in the Name.

That is not the point. The point is Jehovah is of Catholic origin from 1270.

Harsh? Why?

Oompahs-Loompahs are cool.

[Dream]

Oh, ok. I just started skimming Mee's 'Do you know the name of God' thread just now and somebody did bring up the 1270 date in there. Ok I just looked at Dan Corner's page again. Maybe not so harsh.

Originally Posted by Corner

Quoting the WT -- "....Have you been taught to use God's name, Jehovah? If not, your salvation is in jeopardy..."

Definitely not an appropriate statement. Thanks Pattimax for catching me.

I'll send the Oompa Loompas over with some Tollhouse cookies.

[pattimax]

Originally Posted by Dream

I'll send the Oompa Loompas over with some Tollhouse cookies.

Is Willie Wonka part of Toll House?

[greymare]

i prefer gene wilder to the newer one. (willy wonka, that is )

[path_of_one]

Originally Posted by greymare

i prefer gene wilder to the newer one. (willy wonka, that is )

Me too. Despite loving Johnny Depp as an actor. I guess I can't get away from the Willy Wonka of my childhood. LOL

[greymare]

johnny depp is perfect as captain jack, but gene wilder, he is the master.