Creationism is Stupid, Stupid, STOOOOPID!

by Farkel 71 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  nvrgnbk

  It is always nice to hear from one of our resident Christians. ;)

  Here are some musings from one of his brothers in the faith...

  NVRGNBACK says:..."To simply say that it's ok to believe whatever we want to and then put lives and quality of life in jeopardy because of those beliefs is not acceptable. Is it ok for Jehovah's Witnesses to sacrifice their children because of their interpretation of Scripture regarding use of blood? Total tolerance would say it's their business. Is it ok for Sharia Law to prosecute victims of rape and stone adulterers? Total tolerance would say that's ok too."
  
  
  **** This here is one SORRY attempt to maintain the JWD-atheist status quo, NVR.
  
  
  Attacking, challenging, ridiculing and continuously mocking those that believe in a Supreme Being, who just happen to visit an (((EX-Jehovah's Witness))) Recovery site, is a FAR CRY from somebody killing, sacrificing, raping, stoning or whatever else you laugably try to come up with here.
  
  
  WHAT A JOKE!
  
  
  POOR NVR IS IN LALA-LAND HERE.
  
  
  NVRGNBK IS GRASPING AT STRAWS FOLKS!
  
  
  AND WHY DOES IS DESPERATELY TRY TO JUSTIFY THE "ANTI-GOD, ATHEIST BRIGADE MOVEMENT" ON THE JWD?
  
  
  Because he cannot deal with showing a little (((TOLERANCE))) for views different than his own. So he and many other atheists here continue to do their little anti-God posting and ranting again and again and again.
  
  
  A prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own is defined as a BIGOT.
  
  
  IF THE ATHEISTS HERE TREATED GAYS, BLACKS, JEWS (OR ANY OTHER CLASS OF PEOPLE), THE VERY SAME WAY THEY TREAT BELIEVERS IN GOD (IN MANY CASES), THERE WOULD BE NO DOUBT THESE FOLKS ARE FLAT OUT PREJUDICED AND BIGOTED AND HAVE NO PLACE ON A JW RECOVERY SITE LIKE THIS OR REALLY ANYWHERE IN SOCIETY.
  
  
  And this is what is happening to the JWD!
  
  
  There is little tolerance for theistic views on this site today. Just read the threads. I can show you THOUSANDS.
  
  
  And this has been brought up by many people again and again and again.
  
  
  And atheists like NVRGNBK want to instead try to justify their intolerance with laughable, embarrassing nonsense like above.
  
  
  Sorry NVR, but that is one sorry, big fat WHIFF!
• 

  MegaDude

  I've listened to the opinions of scientists and doctors and physicists speak of why they believe in God so I don't equate believing in God as stupid or unscientific. I rather attribute the title of this thread to a bipolar narcissist going off his lithium for too long again and not having children to scream at to inflate a badly tattered ego. But I have no doubts myself that evolution is real. Seeing eyeless, albino fish in underground caves personally convinced me of that. Evolution and a belief in a god can go together quite easily IMHO. It's too bad believers and atheists bring so much historical and emotional baggage to the issue it becomes a contest of wills instead of looking at the evidence both sides bring to the table.
• 

  Farkel

  Megadude,

  : Evolution and a belief in a god can go together quite easily IMHO

  Yeah. That's what I intended when I stated my belief in God in my initial post in this thread. Unfortunately, it somehow morphed into athests vs. believers, yet the topic was Creationism vs. Evolution. It's amazing how some people can read things out of something that's not even there.

  "You don't believe God directly created all creatures and plant life, so therefore you are an atheist."

  "Yes, I don't believe that and I'm not an atheist."

  "Yes you are!"

  "No I'm not."

  "Liar!"

  Sigh.

  Farkel
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Hey Farkel, when you start a thread calling someones cherished belief "Stupid, stupid, STOOOOPID!" you are inviting a flamewar.
  
  "It's amazing how some people can read things out of something that's not even there."
  Half the people probably did not even read the body of the topic because of that title.
  
  Hoping for a more civil discourse,
  Respectfully,
  Burn
• 

  Superfine Apostate

  > I don't equate believing in God as stupid or unscientific
  
  of course believing in god is unscientific. science is not about faith. that some scientists do believe in something they call "god" is another story.
• 

  hillary_step

  Hi Megadude,

  Might I ask a couple of questions?

  Evolution and a belief in a god can go together quite easily IMHO.

  If this is the case, and I am not suggesting otherwise, what does the fact that every living thing has to feed on every other living thing to survive tell us about "God" and moral foundations? Cancer cells are after all just trying to survive when they feeds on our bodies.

  It's too bad believers and atheists bring so much historical and emotional baggage to the issue it becomes a contest of wills instead of looking at the evidence both sides bring to the table.

  What is their evidence for God's existence? "design" does not answer the moral questions raised in the first part of this post, as if it were so, it would paint a picture of a "God" who firmly believes in the survival of the fittest. If this is so, we would need to conclude that God is amoral, as is evolution.

  Let me state that I note this as a reluctant disbeliever. There is nothing I would like more than to believe in a God, so I really have no axe to grind or emotional baggage strapped to me.

  Cheers - HS
• 

  MegaDude

  If this is the case, and I am not suggesting otherwise, what does the fact that every living thing has to feed on every other living thing to survive tell us about "God" and moral foundations? Cancer cells are after all just trying to survive when they feeds on our bodies.

  Do you find cancer eating a child's body or lions feeding on gazelles incompatible with the concept of a Creator?
• 

  hillary_step

  Megadude,

  Do you find cancer eating a child's body or lions feeding on gazelles incompatible with the concept of a Creator?

  This is exactly my point.

  If such a "creator" exists, he/she /it is like evolution either amoral, or has a consciouness immune to the suffering of his "creation". The word "creator" after all has imbued within it the idea of thought and personality.

  Either way, if this is the case, then there is little point in caring whether it exists or not as it would make not one scrap of difference to how and why we live.

  It is impossible to accept that a "creator" exists without suggesting that "it" has some sort of purpose in creating everything. With creation, whether it be art, music, society or a universe comes a moral responsibility toward the "created". Unless of course the "creator" is sociopathic in inclination.

  HS
• 

  Farkel

  Burn the Ships,

  :Hey Farkel, when you start a thread calling someones cherished belief "Stupid, stupid, STOOOOPID!" you are inviting a flamewar.

  Flamewars are usually started when a troll pops in or people have no refuting evidence and resort to name calling. I haven't seen any trolls in this thread, or really much name calling, so I don't think we have had any flamewars here. What it DO see is that no one has come forward with any evidence, and those who have tried, have had it demolished.

  :"It's amazing how some people can read things out of something that's not even there."
  :Half the people probably did not even read the body of the topic because of that title.

  You might be right. On the other hand, someone with REAL evidence to disprove evolution and prove special creation would have considered that a challenge, I think. I haven't seen that.

  People who are too afraid to defend their beliefs when they are attacked are not following the Bible counsel to be ready and willing to defend the faith that's within them. Isn't it ironic that the WTS members have been taught to call all other religions whores, harlots, Satan's spawn, evil and liars with glee, but then run like cowards and cry like babies when their precious beliefs are challenged? I'm sure Jesus is very proud of them for their abject hypocrisy.

  True, one poster said that evidence using microorganism is only microevolution and macroevolution is needed for one species to evolve into another. It was pointed out by Hillary Step (I think) that macroevolution is the result of eons of microevolution and cannot be observed directly. It can, however, be observed with fossils and other data. Several posters provided even more evidence with very good links for people interested in facts to study.

  I have often mentioned to my friends that I wished more people would at least read the entire initial argument, and better yet, the whole thread before responding. People who don't do that end up being embarrassed by assuming something was or wasn't said when they only read portions and then jump in with their opinions.

  : Hoping for a more civil discourse,
  

  Considering the topic (and title!) of this thread cuts deeply into cherished notions of some people, with very few exceptions, I think the discourse has been quite civil.

  Cheers!

  Farkel
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Considering the topic (and title!) of this thread cuts deeply into cherished notions of some people, with very few exceptions, I think the discourse has been quite civil.
  
  The title is not IMHO.
  
  Burn