God does not have a beginning nor an end; hence God did not come into being. The universe and all life within it came into being.
Peace,
tammy
Please someone, explain scientifically how an omnipotent,omniscience,omnipresent,almighty GOD came from nothing
by smiddy 107 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
botchtowersociety
I think this bears repeating. Oldgenerationdude expresses these concepts so much better than I can:
Part of the reason I mentioned that one is acting like a JW had nothing to do with debating or asking questions. It was in demanding definitive answers to questions that neither science nor religion claim to have, and simplifying either or both approaches to life as if to say: “If one doesn’t have the answer then, logically speaking the other must.”
The original question to begin with presupposes a concept of God with attributes that aren’t easily defined theologically, let alone in scientific terms. Neither a dogmatic nor scientific definition was attached to any of the terms, and as pointed out by others, created the paradox of not being able to be answered on this very ground.
One of the reasons many of us may have ended up as Jehovah’s Witnesses involved the fact that it is quite empowering to believe that one has the answers to questions most others admit they do not have. The philosophy of the JW views not having a definitive answer to an important question as a failing and in some cases an evil. Their ideology abhors the vacuum of mystery. Therefore the Watchtower approach comes across very vacant and dry in comparison to other traditions in Christianity because it offers study in place of spiritual experience.
In reality, it is illogical to believe that complex questions support either one approach or the other, as if there were only two options. There are a myriad of options and ways of viewing questions like these. It is not just limited to science and religion. Neither are panaceas. But the ideology of the JW and people who are attracted to such a religious structure often oversimplify the problems in limiting what would qualify as a answer or solution. The “either prove God via science or God does not exist” is to say that only the scientific method can provide valid answers to anything and everything. Such a philosophy in itself is not the result of the scientific method.
Religion is about embracing the fact of mystery, not about finding answers to life’s questions (like the religion of the Watchtower is concerned with). Non-JW religion is about transcendence, not mere academic exercise. Self-discipline, meditation, contemplation, and mysticism are also fundamental facets of religious life, Christianity included. One doesn’t come to believe in God because of faith or mere belief. One comes to believe in God because of theophany.
Religion is not about self-fulfillment, it’s about letting go of a self-centered way of thinking and living. It is isn’t supposed to be about judging the non-believer or the believer of another faith. It’s about becoming part of the mystery of life. It’s about reaching and learning that which cannot be reached or learned by mere reason.
This is not to imply that any religious approach is true at the cost of the views of the atheist. On the contrary, the point I am concerning myself with is that Watchtower “brain-washing,” if you prefer that term, goes far beyond mere indoctrination. It goes to the point of limiting how one reasons, teaching people that one must have conclusive and exhaustive answers, and that adopting one approach requires the total rejection and demonizing of the other (not to mention that possibilities are simplified to “truth” and “un-truth,” right or wrong, black or white, with nothing in between and nothing beyond two choices possible). That mindset needs to be “cured” before one attempts at “finding answers” or getting involved in debates—these things DO have their place. But until one sees that the personality can be infected to this point, the questions and debates will be faulty, even moot, because they are based on a demand taught and inculcated by the Watchtower.
-
botchtowersociety
AllTimeJeff's excellent post on spiritual growth.
As usual, and should be expected, this forum is going to be a catch all for a variety of different opinions on religion., faith, god, and spirituality. How can it not be? And of course, this can tick certain people off.
I have had help on the way to my journey. To me, that word really is the key to understanding:
Journey.
A friend once referred me to this essay, which I will share here, The Four Stages of Spiritual Growth I have shared it here in this forum before, and I share it again as a statement that I think accurately describes most people and their journey.
The debates on JWN are really intersections without stop signs or traffic signals. We crash bump into each other on our journey, sometimes taking great pains and joy to back up and try to run each over repeatedly. Other times, some of us see the intersection, realize that others are crossing.... Then we leave here, on our spiritual journey (usually) on our path away from Jehovahs Witnesses to where ever we think we are going.
Some of us argue for our positions. Other's discovering they have none (or can't see a position they agree with) are happy to simply argue against another's position. But I digress....
The fact is, we all need to have and feel purpose in life. Leaving JW's is about the only thing many of us have in common.
Which is why this post isn't about my thought's about Spirituallity, Faith, God, and Religion. I am on a journey. Some days I don't give a crap. There are other time's where I aim and fire at the intersection, just daring someone for a fight. Those aren't great days for me, to be honest. Thankfully, I don't think I do that too much anymore.
Well ok, just a couple of thoughts.
Much respect to the atheists and agnostics for your honesty.
Much respect to people of faith and those who endeavor to be "spiritual", no matter how you define that for yourself, and show your spirituality by loving others (not necesarrily agreeing, just accepting and loving)
Very little respect to those solidly stuck in 'Stage 2' (see the link above) who insist on throwing their immature religous tantrums. You don't tell on god, nor do you or can you represent god. All you are representing is where you are, and you are in a very immature, intolerant, judgemental place.
Nevertheless, we all can (and very likely will) change. So regardless of where you are, if you insist on throwing yourself headlong into an intersection hoping to hit someone heading in a different direction, or are careful, or just want to sit on the sideline, I wish you success on your journey. Consider loving a little more, judging a little less, and acknowledge that you do not live in a bubble, but on a planet filled with over 7 BILLION people who think and believe way differently then you do, but would still for the most part really like to be chill with you anyway.
Now back to your regularly scheduled demolition derby.
-
OldGenerationDude
I'm very much against personal attacks or labeling either atheistic ideology or religious beliefs as non-sense, especially with regards to my ex-JW brothers and sisters.
I appreciate that some are able to see this in my words. And to clarify for others, the reason I chimed in with my old-broken-record on JW traits is because this thread was going off course--which is it is now--and people were resulting to insulting religious belief and others were insulting secular ideology. It was degrading into name-calling, and that isn't a debate, that demonizing anyone or anything that one doesn't agree with.
It's not a character flaw I am pointing out. I am pointing out damage that the Witness system has caused to you and me and everyone else who enters their organization. It's abuse, abuse of the mind, abuse of free will, and yes, even abuse of religion.
It is great to debate and to share new understandings of things, even to let things get a bit heated, so to speak. That's invigorating and exciting.
But when we find ourselves insulting a belief or ideology, that means we are not only hurting the other persons who have adopted those convictions as part of their healing from the Watchtower, it means we ourselves are still hurting also. We need healing more than debate and discussion in such a case. But like a close friend of mine who was abused as a child, it is hard to convince a person who is angry due to abuse that every voice not perfectly aligned with their own is automatically the voice of an enemy. My friend was often angry with a lot of people, everyone in fact instead of who he should have been angry with—his parents. The same thing can happen when we leave the Watchtower. If we are name calling or labeling as negative any other view that isn’t our own, religious or secular, then it may be possible we are like my friend was, angry at the wrong target.
All I’m trying to do is keep the thread on the subject and out of the demonizing many instantly go into due to being abused by the Watchtower. The Watchtower is the culprit I am trying to highlight when I do this.
Lastly, Joey, my reference to religious faith being based on theophany was not written to be taken as a personal view or invention. I was speaking of the contrasts between Watchtower religion and mainstream views in general. While the statement should be read taking this into account, it does indeed require far more information to “backup” if one were discussing that as the subject of this thread. Since it isn’t the subject of this thread, I only spoke in generalities. I based those words on a formal education in religious studies—new ideas to me, to be sure—and from a generalized statement made in passing at the conclusion of a discussion on human response to the Judeo-Christian concept of God.
I do not necessarily write what I believe in my statements. I can’t do this because ethnically I’m Hebrew, and I returned to my religious roots after leaving the Watchtower. Much of Judaism has no common factor with the views of Christianity in general, and many of the debates between atheists and those who believe in God such as discussed here never touch on any of the views of Judaism and its concepts. So I am left to do my best by being careful to comment on Christian views from a very formal academic slant, recognizing this may not be applicable to all individuals and their religious concepts—for example the beliefs of my people, the Jews.
If I only wrote about things that agreed with my personal convictions or opinions, then I would be like a JW again, only chiming in to defend things for my own advantage. I majored in forensics (debate), and one of the things we were taught to do was defend a fact that was personally disagreeable with our convictions. Facts are facts, and I may not like them at all, but if that’s what they are I try to be objective (and know I am far from doing so perfectly) when I discuss things here, leaving Jewish views on the table as much as possible. As you mention many may not share the view on theophany I wrote about. Your mistake is that you assumed it was my own.
-
sizemik
But when we find ourselves insulting a belief or ideology, that means we are not only hurting the other persons who have adopted those convictions as part of their healing from the Watchtower, it means we ourselves are still hurting also.
OldGguy . . . you'll get no argument on that score. The problem is that nobody here is qualified to make that judgement in respect to another individual or group. So when it is used in the course of debate, it itself is an insult which has the effect of invalidating the opinions of other contributors. For that reason, outside of a debate on that specific subject itself, it offers no benefit's at all. True or not, specific or general, it constitutes a personal attack and is best avoided IMO.
-
Joey Jo-Jo
tec wrote: No doubt. I have baggage too, and I'm sure that some is what I don't even think IS baggage. So did Paul at first, even though he heard Christ.
No, he saw Jesus I think in damascus (after Jesus death, it was a while since I read the passage so I dont recall if it was Jesus ghost or in the flesh), nowhere in the bible does it state that Paul heard.
OldGenerationDude: I'm very much against personal attacks or labeling either atheistic ideology or religious beliefs as non-sense, especially with regards to my ex-JW brothers and sisters.
I am not against labels (vegan, non-smoker, alcoholic, theist, pagan, etc), I am though against forms of generalisations and mis-labeling. ;). And I am not your brother but I could be your friend.
I do not necessarily write what I believe in my statements. I can’t do this because ethnically I’m Hebrew, and I returned to my religious roots after leaving the Watchtower. Much of Judaism has no common factor with the views of Christianity in general, and many of the debates between atheists and those who believe in God such as discussed here never touch on any of the views of Judaism and its concepts.
Hitchens spoke against Judaism many times, he has a debate with a rabbi on youtube, I am against male circumcision so I don't know where you are getting your sources from.
Lastly, Joey, my reference to religious faith being based on theophany was not written to be taken as a personal view or invention. I was speaking of the contrasts between Watchtower religion and mainstream views in general. While the statement should be read taking this into account, it does indeed require far more information to “backup” if one were discussing that as the subject of this thread. Since it isn’t the subject of this thread, I only spoke in generalities. I based those words on a formal education in religious studies—new ideas to me, to be sure—and from a generalized statement made in passing at the conclusion of a discussion on human response to the Judeo-Christian concept of God.
No problem, just dont take me too seriously or anyone for that matter, and if anyone proposes a contradictory view, you are after all in a public forum where ideas and beliefs are discussed and debated. As with everything we always fail to see our own mistakes untill someone points it out to us.
-
tec
No, he saw Jesus I think in damascus (after Jesus death, it was a while since I read the passage so I dont recall if it was Jesus ghost or in the flesh), nowhere in the bible does it state that Paul heard.
Acts 9: 4-6He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"
"Who are you, Lord?" Saul asked.
"I am Jesus, whom you are persecturing," he replied. "Now get up and go intot he city, and you will be told what you must do."
Hearing means more than an audible voice though. It means to hear in the spirit. Paul received revelations from the Spirit. He did not get his teaching from men.
Peace,
tammy
-
Joey Jo-Jo
Tec how could you lol, you left out Acts 9:3 Saul saw a light, oops is that jesus? lol
Agains in Acts 22:6-11, how about Acts 26:12-16, a light that spoke to him. Your right though I was wrong about the hearing
-
tec
But I never said he didn't see a light, lol. You said he never heard. Just pointing out that he did, indeed, hear.
Peace,
tammy
-
Joey Jo-Jo
Yep, I was editing my post, ta da, sorry.