I suggest the problem you may find is in defining a characteristic of your god that is essential.
Creator, eternal, spirit... shown and known through Christ, and also love.
Peace,
tammy
The Great Debate: "Has Science Refuted Religion?
by dark angle 239 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
tec
-
Qcmbr
Whoa hold on Tec. One at a time. Let's start with creator. What did your god create specifically?
-
tec
life
-
Qcmbr
1 - Does your god still create life or was it a one off event - how do you know?
2 - Is your god responsible for creating all life everywhere - based upon what?
3 - Please define life. What does non life look like?
4 - Did your god also create all non- life?
Damn - most important question
5 - What would life that was not created by your god look like?
-
Qcmbr
Will have to respond tomorrow. Wife has hinted that if I don't get my 'lazy ass' upstairs and in bed I may have to sleep on the sofa. For the next week. Hehe. Night.
-
sizemik
"Hey, Heather, you're acting like a JW there."
Nobody ever frames the accusation all friendly like that . . . it's usually, if not always, delivered as a barb fired to supposedly strengthen a point of view . . . go and re-read Oldsomethings post where he ends up quacking like a duck . . . sorry, but that's classic P/A behaviour.
The JW comparison is not as valid as some seem to think. Vehemence in discussion or debate is not a JW thing . . . it's human-wide. The comparison is 99% illusory.
I would suggest PA behaviour is a far greater legacy to JW think. P/A's speak using suggestive generalisations, innuendo, snide analogies etc., always leaving wriggle-room for deniability. It's much more common than a strong opinion, and seldom recognised by the user.
-
tec
May I ask how any of those questions are proofs against anything?
Even if I did not know the answer, would that be proof against God, or simply proof of my lack of knowledge?
1 - don't know
2 - as far as I understand - based on Him being the 'creator' of life
3 - life is the living... what is non-life?
4 - what is non-life?
5 - lol, how would I know?
Peace,
tammy
-
FlyingHighNow
Vehemence in discussion or debate is not a JW thing
Size, Old Generation makes some very good observations about the JW approach and when I brought up the JW approach being used in these debates, it is what I was talking about. He was more wordy and eloquent than me, but said what I mean. It's not a barb. It's not an insult. It's a true thing that is happening by some on the atheist threads. The approach isn't a successful approach, nor is it a helpful approach in these discussions. When it is happening, if it is pointed out, people throw up the Cofty thing. The problem is, sometimes people truly are using the JW approach and attitude. Throwing out "you're using Cofty's Law!" just encourages the person not to be introspective and improve their approach to one that is respectful and taken seriously. Looking at the amount of time, effort and passion that goes into these threads, by atheists, I'm thinking that you want for theists, diests, believers on any level and lurkers to take your posts on the subject seriously. It's very hard to do that when terms like fairy sky god, flying spaghetti monster, magical thinking, jokes about dragons/flashlights and the suggestion that religion should be banned are being lobbed at those with the opposing views. I'll have to hunt back and find my definition of the WT approach. It is definitely a problem on this forum: that we can sink back into the witness habit of being so sure we are right and feeling like we have to spread the word, convince everyone to adopt our views and not care how we speak to them.
-
FlyingHighNow
Read his remarks on page 2.
-
botchtowersociety
life
Way after midnight, when old man Death come a-creepin' in your room
You're gonna need somebody on your bond.