Is it possible that you were raised in a false religion? (page 2)

Magnum

SimonSays, now you're employing the strawman fallacy. I didn't say you were attacking anyone's character (even though what you said could be related to an attack of character).

I specifically took issue with this:

To represent people's thoughts like you people have with the WTS publishing without really reading it through but take snippets to distort what the literature actually is intending? I can understand the anger, bitterness, and hate ex-witnesses have toward an organization that kicked them out for whatever biblical infraction they did.

And I refuted it. You did not answer/address my refutation.

I’m... simply stating the obvious

What you're stating is not in any way obvious. I give you another chance to address what I said. We don't take snippets and distort them; the org does. I can give examples of the org's doing such (I've already mentioned the Creator book and the Trinity brochure). Can you give examples of our doing such?

Also, we're not, as you seem to indicate, just a bunch of people who want to be JWs, but who were kicked out and are now retaliating. There are a number of people on this site who are serving as elders.

Since you have the influence to ban people from this forum...

I have no such influence.

I will simply say, I disagree with your assessment.

Now, you're generalizing again; you simply say "I disagree with your assessment". People like you speak in generalities and can't back up their arguments. Do you realize what would happen if you went into a courtroom and made general accusations against an opponent? Do you know what would be the first thing the judge would ask for? Specifics.

You came on this thread and made general accusations. I think you now realize you can't back them up. If so, please just go ahead and admit it. If you do, I will commend you for it.

SimonSays

Come on Magnum, I've seen threads where you tell Simon to delete a person, be honest with yourself.

Are you Awake SimonSays ???

Here's a little theological history of what was happening in the East Coast of the United States in the 19th century where William Miller and many other Christian preachers predominantly preached and the second advent or dispositional era leading up to the return of Christ ,

Nelson Barbour was another who C T Russell a had a close relationship with who were both involved in this diversely unique theology.

In examining these numerous preachers and their doctrinal teachings, one can see that the possibility of the return of Christ was an engaging theology at the time and fostered the development of many religions that still exist today such as the Second Day Adventists, the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons.

Hey! I’m glad you know how to use Wiki. Just because it’s written doesn’t make it factual. If you really want the truth, I suggest you read all of Russell’s publicans. Don’t just look at the dates, but understand the parallels. Just maybe you’ll learn something, especially The differences in understanding he had with Barbour, a business acquaintance not a real good friend as you state, and that’s why they had that big fallout in 1878 because Russell l’s refused to accept Barbour’s Ideology. I’d tell the history but it seems redundant.

SimonSays

Ah yes...Eisenhower. The WTS sure tried to get mileage out of that man. I think of "Ike" as the WTS' Michael Jackson of the 50s - celebrity status with a JW connection.

The WTS did not view Ike as an apostate - not by any stretch of the imagination - apostates don't get favourable articles written about them in WT literature.

So what does the Awake imply? That is was giving people reading it NEWS of that time. There was not political agenda. The only political agenda is in the mindset of ignorant people that try to make one or their ignorant enough NOT to know how to read a Watchtower magazine.

SimonSays

Since you introduced the LUCA hypothesis that is cumbersome in its self, then you would have to go beyond your understanding to view all relevancy to it. The miller experiment is one, however just like everything scientific, it can be disproved by your own science, as in this case.

Previously my own, now this is Copy/Past so, not to have your audience think that my hypothesis is one sided as it has become the norm in this thread. What has this to do with the original question posted? Nothing, this goes beyond simple intellect and the posted question.

One textbook, edited by Soper (“Biological Science 1 and 2”; 3rd edition; Cambridge University Press) summarizes the situation well (p. 883):

Despite the simplified account given above, the problem of the origin(s) of life remains. All that has been outlined is speculation and, despite tremendous advances in biochemistry, answers to the problem remain hypothetical. … Details of the transition from complex non-living materials to simple living organisms remain a mystery.

This conclusion is echoed by those who have spent many years researching in this field of biochemistry. Dr D E Hull wrote,

The conclusion from these arguments presents the most serious obstacle, if indeed it is not fatal, to the theory of spontaneous generation.

Prof Francis Crick, who was a great believer in the accidental origin of life on Earth, said, “The origin of life appears to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions that had to be satisfied to get it going.” Prof. Crick goes on to argue that this might be overcome in long periods of time. However, there is no justification for believing that time can overcome basic chemical laws.

Dr H P Yockey (in the Journal of Theoretical Biology, 1981, 91, 26-29) wrote,

You must conclude that no valid scientific explanation of life exists at present… Since science has not the vaguest idea how life originated on earth, it would be honest to admit this to students, the agencies funding research and the public.

SimonSays

I have no such influence.

Then who is this that this person is writing about. Is there another Magnum in this forum?

Example:Magnum, for all you pompous and arrogant comments, do you really think I care if I get kicked out of this forum? Please get a life. The only idiot here just commented. By the way, what happened to the right and freedom to speak? Isn’t that what all you people are saying, or is it censored so only you can speak?

You came on this thread and made general accusations. I think you now realize you can't back them up. If so, please just go ahead and admit it. If you do, I will commend you for it.

So please, don’t attempt to use reverse physiology. If there are elders in this forum, may god have mercy on their souls?

snare&racket

So yeah, I wrote this OP with the hope of the JW non members to sit and mull it over.

But please do carry on bickering on a different issue....

i assume you guys don't have loved ones that you hope come here every now and then.

Village Idiot

SimonSays,

"If you really want the truth, I suggest you read all of Russell’s publicans. Don’t just look at the dates, but understand the parallels."

All several thousand pages of his 6 part volume and Watchtowers from 1878-1916? Parallels? If the dates were consistently wrong how right would the "parallels' be?

Giordano

Yes snare&racket he's responding to 4 different threads on your thread. Kind of ridiculous, definitely rude also extremely bad form. If it happens again he will need to be flagged.

Vanderhoven7

SimonSays,

Ultimately your faith is not in God or the Bible. Your faith is in men and their word.

Imagine the followers of Harold Camping coming to my door and explaining that Christ actually did come on May 21, 2011, albeit invisibly and in 2015 appointed them at their headquarters in Oakland, California to rule over mankind...and that if I didn't believe this nonsense I would be destroyed at Armageddon by 2025

Would my faith be in men and their word or God and his word if I swallowed their preaching? You tell me.

Is it possible that you were raised in a false religion?

Share this