Does your Theology Align with Reality?

by cofty 124 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • bohm
    bohm

    adamah: "Not really address"? Did you overlook where I mentioned "spatial dimensions" of 2D vs 3D?

    fact of nature, closing an eye does not remove one spatial dimension. a person could be born blind and reliably conclude the earth is round (do you dispute that? which shape do you think the earth has? are you sure?). i just dont see your point.

    Does even considering the POSSIBILITY of the fact that alternate perceptions of reality matter to you, or is it to be ignored as if it's less valid than yours?

    I dont understand the question. Other people can persieve reality differently, but i see no reason why that should change my conclusion the earth is round. do you?

    See, that's the problem with not understanding that perception of reality is NOT reality;

    I understand that full well, please do not put words into my mouth.

    you're assuming some absolute standardized perception of reality exists,

    I assume no such thing, please stop making these silly strawmen arguments.

    1) SBF thinks Cofty engages in an authoritarian style of an elder, due to his flawed over-confidence in what science claims to know, and his tendency to exclude other alternatives, and,

    okay so SBF think cofty is overconfident in what science claims to know. Do you?.

    I take it that roughly mean when cofty says the earth is 4.5billion years old and thats a fact, SBF (and you?) want cofty to say: "the earth is with all possiblity 4.5billion years old", and you feel that "with all possiblity" (something you dont bother to insert yourself in all other circumstances btw, for instance when subscribing views to me that you dont know i hold and in fact do not hold) is so important it must be waffled on about every time.

    Myself? I just think its pointless and silly. I have no problem inserting "with all probability" without making a big deal about it.

    2) Cofty says SBF is stalking him to make point #1 which Cofty doesn't want to admit to, because of his refusal to examine his own beliefs (which ironically is what he's asked OTHERS to do, in this thread).

    okay, so why exactly do you think cofty wont examine his own views when he has stated so repeatly? all i see is cofty is not being convinced by poor philosophy and being a bit tired of SBF following him around.

    Also, now you are making statements of certainty. Would it be insightful to me to insist you should prefix everything with a "perhaps", or would that just be beating a death horse after a while?

  • Comatose
    Comatose

    Sounds like the WT... Perhaps Noah asked his wife to gather food for the ark. In all likelihood, this man of god.... Evidently the earth had a water canopy.

  • Knowsnothing
    Knowsnothing

    I think now would be a perfect time to clarify why, even with our limitations, science offers the best look at reality that we have.

    http://vimeo.com/3531977

  • Comatose
    Comatose

    The link is great! I watched the first 2 minutes and am going to save it to watch with the wife tonight.

  • Hortensia
  • Hortensia
    Hortensia

    sorry, clicked the wrong button

  • Rose Mary
  • Phizzy
    Phizzy

    Thanks for the thread Cofty, and especially for the O.P, which should help any believer whose mind is open to reason, to look long and hard at his/her beliefs.

    To hang on to beliefs that fly in the face of facts and reason is to live in a state of delusion, as do JW's, not a good place to be !

    Once a Bible believer starts to acknowledge the truth of your O.P, they have to start making excuses for the Bible and its obvious faults, it is interesting to see them squirm, and yet they still try to hang on to some of it, usually by very dubious methods, "Oh the Bible is mainly the thoughts of men, Jesus is the Word of God".

    If they cannot see the many problems with that type of "reasoning" then there is probably no hope for them.

    Thanks again Cofty, I am sure this thead will help many to move on to a bettter place.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Well there are many routes out of the Watchtower Phizzy, but I can't help feeling that swapping one set of certainties for another is not the best among the choices. It has been argued that many are attracted to JWs because they provide a sense of certainty in a world losing its certainties. The insistence that science definitively answers the important questions is another animal of the same species.

    When we stop asking what is true, as a meaningless category that it is, and instead what is useful or productive, I feel we are making progress. This discussion has prompted me to revisit some of my favourite passages from Richard Rorty on truth, the correspondence theory of truth, and the reality/appearance distinction. I think these remarks he made in an essay on relativism express the situation well:

    On this view, to say that a belief is, as far as we know, true, is to say that no alternative belief is, as far as we know, a better habit of acting. When we say that our ancestors believed, falsely, that the sun went around the earth, and that we believe, truly, that the earth goes around the sun, we are saying that we have a better tool than our ancestors did. Our ancestors might rejoin that their tool enabled them to believe in the literal truth of the Christian Scriptures, whereas ours does not. Our reply has to be, I think, that the benefits of modern astronomy and of space travel outweigh the advantages of Chritsian fundamentalism. The argument between us and our medieval ancestors should not be about which of us has got the universe right. It should be about the point of holding views about the motion of heavenly bodies, the ends to be achieved by the use of certain tools. Confirming the truth of Scipture is one such aim, space travel is another.

  • cofty
    cofty
    swapping one set of certainties for another

    It's about swapping beliefs based on superstition for beliefs based on evidence.

    The argument between us and our medieval ancestors should not be about which of us has got the universe right.

    Utter nonsesne. Our ancestors were wrong and thanks to the scientific method we are right, and as time goes on we get even closer to understanding objective reality.

    Whether or not our beliefs are useful is a different topic.

    Confirming the truth of Scipture is one such aim

    This is circular. Superstitious beliefs allow us to believe in the veracity of the a superstitious book.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit