by Amazing 83 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
V V
>>putting words in my mouth and twisting what I'm saying<<
Far from putting words into your mouth, I'm actually quoting and speaking directly to your thoughts. And if I have misunderstood you I've made sure to offer my apologies and to ask you to expatiate on what you mean. I can't do better than that, Quietly leaving.
yes you can do better than that - you can
Hi Quietly Leaving,
>>yes you can do better than that - you can >>
That's the end of this conversation seeing that you don't engage arguments but express monologues. Your cast of mind makes dialogue impossible. It's precisely what I encountered in many on the Channel C forum. An intellectual vestige of the Watchtower mentality, no doubt.
Peace be with you,
James:)
V V
It's precisely what I encountered in many on the Channel C forum.
I'll take as a compliment
Peace be with you,
and you
ql
Hi Quietly Leaving,
Since you're engaging my thoughts, I deem it worth continuing our exchange in a spirit of mutual respect.
>>Ros' board, as I previously said, and as you very well know, is not an open discussion board>
Correct. It's by invitation only. And I was invited.
The debate turns on what that means in terms of what is deemed licit or illicit to discuss on an invitation-only discussion board. My gripe with Ros's charter is that there are no actual criteria to be met or content parameters in which one must remain. Hence, my discussing the validity of apostolic succession is viewed as "preaching" whereas Jim Penton's endless fulminations against the atrocities of Christendom is viewed as a perfectly neutral stance.
http://studiositas.blogspot.com/2007/02/international-forum-on-square-circles.html
>>If you are a scholar and defending your own particular beliefs then obviously your position is biased >>
It does not *necessarily* follow that the position of a scholar (who defends what he believes to be true) is "obviously" biased. It could mean that he just believes the evidence points in the direction of that particular position.
premise # 1 - Joe Sixpack is a Scholar
premise # - 2 - Joe Sixpack holds to position x
Conclusion - Position x is Obviously biased because Joe Sickpack is a Scholar who holds to it
The conclusion does not follow from the premises.
Peace,
James P. Caputo
Uzzah:
In other words Jim, Jim. Ros, Frank and everyone else inserting themselves, check your egos and agendas at the door and then see where the conversation goes.
Where were Ros' and Penton's egos/agendas in this thread?
Just curious.
~Bin
Hi Alan Marais
>>As for Ros, she also started and has Christian Quest. It has pretended since 1999 to provide an alternative to the Watchtower Society.<<
And I share your gripe. Besides the fact that the group's anti-Trinitarian position more or less distances people (or freezes them in their tracks) from *actual* Churches (be them Catholic or Protestant), it doesn't actually offer any flesh and blood alternative. Put simply, it's a cyber board wherein everything and its opposite is argued to be the truth - and many times in less than a spirit of fraternal charity.
The searching JW or ex-JW is thus left scratching his head and feeling as if the entire task of truth discernment is futile given that the putative intellectual giants of the Watchtower World can't much agree on anything save the fact that Christendom is to be treated like a dirty harlot.
It's for that reason that I have referred to the forum time and again as a halfway house to solipsism, indifferentism and atheism.
Enjoyed your post very much!
James P. Caputo
Hi Binadub,
>>Where were Ros' and Penton's egos/agendas in this thread?<<
They are hiding and stonewalling as they did even while I was on Channel C. Penton never went more than two rounds with me. Same with Perrson. And the most Ros and I ever interacted is in private email, which can be read in the first post of this thread by clicking on the links.
By the way, are you Ros?
James P. Caputo
James Caputo - nice to meet you
premise # 1 - Joe Sixpack is a Scholar
premise # - 2 - Joe Sixpack holds to position x
Conclusion - Position x is Obviously biased because Joe Sickpack is a Scholar who holds to it
The conclusion does not follow from the premises.
as far as I can see you have set it out as a valid argument so why do you say that the conclusion does not follow from the premises
On a different note I think Thomas Merton (a catholic) has lots of insightful stuff to say that imo is very useful for exiting JWs. Also If Catholicism is headed in that direction then that is a very good thing and I am prepared to go and pray in front of the virgin Mary and beg that she inspires the pope to change his views on contraception.
Hi Quietly Leaving,
The argument is not valid. I simply scetched it out to highlight that the conclusion did not follow from the premises.
If the positions of scholars were *necessarily* biased, then there would be no utility in repairing to scholars to deepen our knowledge of a given field. A scholar's position can be conditioned by his biases, no doubt. But it isn't *necessarily* conditioned by them to the point that it is *necessarily* biased.
And I adore Thomas Merton!! Reading his books has helped me grow immensely. I'm happy to meet you too
With affection,
James P. Caputo
James
If the positions of scholars were *necessarily* biased, then there would be no utility in repairing to scholars to deepen our knowledge of a given field. A scholar's position can be conditioned by his biases, no doubt. But it isn't *necessarily* conditioned by them to the point that it is *necessarily* biased.
I have to disagree with you - all scholarly works must be approached with skepticism and doubt and their works taken with a pinch of salt. Bias and assumptions creeps in unintentionally and sometimes intentionally. Religion more so than other fields because of the emotions involved.
Scholars can verify one another but still all scholarly fields have their controversies. There is no one universal truth regarding the past. We can deepen our knowledge of a given field but we would need to consider what those who disagree have to say about the topic too. That would be the honest thing to do.
