Only Two Religions

by barry 44 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Phantom Stranger
    Phantom Stranger

    "There were so many responses siding with the first demon's message that I had to counter with..."

    Victim looks good on you, Eugene. That's a great defense of Einstein's beliefs in determinism (which I don't share...)

    I find that the belief systems which quantum mechanics best supports are Eastern in origin.

    Sure, you can take quantum discontinuities and use them as mechanisms for biblical miracles. But only one weak in their faith would require such a base means of explaining miracles - God is omnipotent, right? What else do you need when you've got that card in your back pocket?

    Seems more like a parlor trick to make Christianity seem progressive for the Gen-X crowd than anything else. If someone just can't convince themselves in a monotheistic Judeo-Christian deity, why would anyone think that this would be the argument that pushes them over the edge?

  • Eugene Shubert
    Eugene Shubert

    Phantom Stranger,

    Please read Oracroth's post of 20-Nov-03 07:46 and see his reliance on the outdated physics of a hopeless, deterministic philosophy. Consider my reply (20-Nov-03 08:34). Forgive me for trying to help a lost soul by mentioning that there isn't a shred of credible evidence for his belief.

  • Phantom Stranger
    Phantom Stranger

    I would forgive that, if that's what I saw - but not the righteous lecturing I do see.

    Oracroth seems from his posts to be searching for something that works. You seem to be preaching the rightness of your position. I am more forgiving of the former than the latter.

  • Eugene Shubert
    Eugene Shubert
    I find that the belief systems which quantum mechanics best supports are Eastern in origin.

    Books proclaiming a connection between quantum mechanics and Eastern philosophy, such as The Dancing Wu Li Masters: An Overview of the New Physics, have been thoroughly discredited by professional physicists.

    There is nothing deceptive about righteous lecturing but your erroneous statements are improper.

    Eugene Shubert

  • Phantom Stranger
    Phantom Stranger

    We are now offically off topic. Dive, dive, dive.

  • Eugene Shubert
    Eugene Shubert

    Why not consider my direct answer and challenge to Barry?s endorsement of Des Ford?s theology (19-Nov-03 11:13, 19-Nov-03 13:20, 20-Nov-03 08:01) ?without a single comeback or anyone even pretending to answer me?an official declaration that the original topic is dead, or perhaps, at best, a vaporous non sequitur?

  • Oracroth
    Oracroth

    I just wanted to know, one way or the other, if the human thinking we have was deterministic. If it is not, I am happy.

  • greatteacher
    greatteacher

    Eugene, I'm back to work and at my computer! Again, just to emphasize and conclude this debate, you are constantly leaving science and entering belief and again I stress the use of the scientific method in understanding and applying the difference of the two. I attempted to make statements that are scientific whereas you kept referring to the bible and one scientific theory with your belief inserted to make the belief sound scientific. Above all you avoided answering three important points. 1. Obviously you understand the connotation of the word theory when used in science. Well, I asked you to tell me what scientific theories you don't view as scientific truth, and you never answered me. The example I used was evolution, a theory that is scientifically "true", but certainly contradicts the god of the bible and it seems that that is the god you BELIEVE in. 2. You continually made statements that sound or read like facts, but are clearly not factual, but your opinion. Here are some examples: a. Did you know that quantum theory validates the biblical view of physics? b. all respected physicists today agree...that god exists. c. the only insight i'm adding to the debate is based on an obvious interpretation of biblical revelation. d. the point is quantum theory refutes determinism and vindicates the clear revelation of scripture. All of these statements are opinion, but you state them with such authority that gullible people will believe you, that sounds like an organization I know of. 3. Finally, you quoted Stephen Hawkin out of context with his statement, "the big bang smacks of divine intervention." This reminds me of when the WTBTS quoted Noam Chomsky in the creator book. In other words you used a tiny quote from a professor to support your beliefs, but the quote is taken from a professor who, based on his writings, would disagree with you. I consider this discussion over because you're like the DUBs in that you will not leave the realm of personal opinion and belief to debate. And by the way when you insert god into quantum physics you are making what scientists call a leap of faith. Also, one final important question is this: even if all your opinions of physics are true how do you explain the personal god of the bible?

  • A Paduan
    A Paduan

    Hi Eugene

    Why not consider my direct answer and challenge to Barry?s endorsement of Des Ford?s theology
    If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me" (Luke 9:23).

    The propondents of the first religion that Barry was exemplifying inevitably have a tendency or imbalance that favours preconcieved ideas. This imbalance is manifested in such things as (what could be seen by some as) a grammatical type dyslexia.

    "If anyone would come after me" ie.

    If it were to be then that anyone wished to willfully engage in this, then ...... - "If you would be willful about what I am talking about, then ......" - "If anyone would be a teacher, or teach you after my time,........"

    What the statement does not say is "I'm saying that you must come after me, and you've got Buckley's if you don't actively do it, and you must do this".

    This latter choice of understanding (hearing) is simply another example of the effect displayed by those of Religion 1.

    "take heed then how you hear, for to him who has more will be given"

  • Oracroth
    Oracroth

    I do not consider that dyslexia. In fact I consider that if statement logical in format. Consider programming syntax of C.

    if( <expression> ) { <resulting action based on expression> }

    "If you would call yourself strong, you must first understand what strength is." English language is considered backwards to many other languages as many other languages are considered backwards to us. The only language I feel is logical to me is that of logic. Than again, I have dyslexia, or do I?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit