Mephis

Joined

• started 3 topics
• posted 956 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Mephis

• 
  3

  for those still interested in bible discussion check out this website

  by nowwhat? in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  http://www.discussthetruth.com/.

  it's an objective forum in association with beroean pickets.

  for those like me who are fed up with the organization but still believe in gods word.. snarky comments to follow!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  No snark here. Good luck with it and hope it helps people with the leaving process.
• 
  14

  Conversation with a Biblical scholar - Richard Dawkins

  by CookieMonster in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  quite interesting when you look at the bible objectively and the historical records.

  it highlights the problems of using the bible as authoritative and validation of history.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxcutg0lvr0.

  spoiler: didn't know that the immanuel prophecy attributed to jesus as being born from a virgin is actually a mistranslation.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  Is there an explanation for Judah's existence that completely sidesteps Solomon and David? How about that Temple attributed supposedly to the clan?

  There's a fair bit of theory to explain the archaeological evidence without needing biblical David. Lot of stuff published in 80s and early 90s comes from that angle. A King Arthur type figure for later scribes, or you could even do the links to Horsa and Hengist who similarly stand on that boundary between being plausibly based on historical figures and full on mythological founding fathers. I can't think of anything current which totally dismisses the bible stories, especially not with the House of David evidence now. Something seems to have happened in the hills which could plausibly be explained by a centralised power arising. 'If not the biblical David, another man of the same name' kind of thing.

  With the temple, the evidence is for numerous smaller 'shrines' around Israel even until, say, Josiah's time. eg references to Yahweh of X (not Jerusalem) have been found which kind of hints towards a less centralised religion than the picture painted by the bible stories So I would wonder about how far a single 'temple' even in Jerusalem really was the main focus for Israelite worship and how much is actually later creative interpretation of history by writers. Against that, if there were a new centralised state arising in the hills then an attempt to centralise a religion/cult would also make sense as something which would happen around the same time. Or at least an attempt to have a major new cult site act as a focus. Herding cats one suspects.
• 
  9

  Biblical clues to what God the Jews worshipped

  by Crazyguy in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  recently there is a royal bulla that was found in jerusalem, that of the judean king hezekiah on it was two egyptian ankhs and a wings sun disk.

  there have been other artifacts found with that of the egyptian scarab beatle which relates to sun worship.

  so does the bible give any clues to the god of the jews?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  Thing with Hezekiah is that though he's a 'good king', it's Josiah who goes full Yahweh on the worship of other gods. There's room to drive a pantheon of gods through the holes left around Hezekiah clearing out the temple.

  The problem with the Egyptian link is that Palestine was, on and off, Egypt's playground. That there was a significant cultural presence is already known. But it doesn't seem to have played a direct role in the development of Yahweh. There's no evidence to support the Egypt > Yahweh idea. The scripture from 2 Chron. isn't really persuasive to me at all. Hezekiah may not even have been a Yahweh worshipper, and the seal itself doesn't make the link. The origins of Yahweh, to my mind, seem to follow the route all the way back to the Canaanite pantheon. (Frank Moore Cross' work still stands up.) I think there's ample evidence for Egyptian gods being worshipped in Canaan, Solomon's wife is the biblical reflection of it I guess. Maybe there were periods when they were the main culty thing to do.
• 
  32

  was Darwin an atheist?

  by Ruby456 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  asking this q because my own feeling about this is that he probably believed in god but his evolutionary thesis is used to support atheism.

  how come?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  Just one from Einstein. A little girl wrote to him asking him whether scientists pray. His response to her:

  January 24, 1936
  
  Dear Phyllis,
  
  I will attempt to reply to your question as simply as I can. Here is my answer:
  
  Scientists believe that every occurrence, including the affairs of human beings, is due to the laws of nature. Therefore a scientist cannot be inclined to believe that the course of events can be influenced by prayer, that is, by a supernaturally manifested wish.
  
  However, we must concede that our actual knowledge of these forces is imperfect, so that in the end the belief in the existence of a final, ultimate spirit rests on a kind of faith. Such belief remains widespread even with the current achievements in science.
  
  But also, everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that some spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe, one that is vastly superior to that of man. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a special sort, which is surely quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive.
  
  With cordial greetings,
  
  your A. Einstein

  
  

  http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/05/dear-einstein-do-scientists-pray.html
  
  
• 
  32

  was Darwin an atheist?

  by Ruby456 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  asking this q because my own feeling about this is that he probably believed in god but his evolutionary thesis is used to support atheism.

  how come?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  I agree there's no inherent conflict between belief and knowledge, but I suppose ultimately it's how those beliefs are framed. A deist conception of a 'starter' god can happily sit alongside things which cause issues for other ways to imagine god. Deist god triggered the big bang and then walked away. The absent parent par excellence. But sure. It only becomes a problem should we ever demonstrate that there is no need for that initial ignition. And of course, 'god' as the answer does have the problem of just moving the question to 'so how did god begin?'.
• 
  32

  was Darwin an atheist?

  by Ruby456 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  asking this q because my own feeling about this is that he probably believed in god but his evolutionary thesis is used to support atheism.

  how come?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  I'm agnostic in the general sense because I can entertain the idea of a being somewhere in the universe of such vast power that humans would label it 'god'. If there were such a being, I've seen no evidence for it playing a role in human development or society so one may as well deal with that absence and crack on with things. If there's a belief system which comes closest to mine, it's probably something like humanism. Agnosticism stresses the knowledge element, so proof and evidence over belief. There is a point where it becomes de facto atheism. They're not the same terms, but they're not exclusive either.
• 
  32

  was Darwin an atheist?

  by Ruby456 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  asking this q because my own feeling about this is that he probably believed in god but his evolutionary thesis is used to support atheism.

  how come?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  does agnostic mean that one can be a believer in God sometimes and not believe in God at other times?

  More the final position he reached, with a long personal journey to get there. Most biographies trace the change over time until eventually he's willing to go public with his agnosticism.
• 
  24

  'Worldly' man looking for a little more understanding...

  by Verecocha in

  1. social
  2. relationships

  saw similar title in a google search so thought i'd read more and now simply have to share my experience if anything to hear that i'm not insane and it is that simple.. met and fell madly in love with a witness, and her with me.

  what began as love at first sight turned into a 6 year relatiomship which simply ended very bluntly.

  there were many painful twists and turns along the way, first from her inability to leave her husband, then my mistake in finding someone else as i simply couldn't take the pain of her coming and going with such simplicity, but in the end she got a divorce and suffered many consequences within 'the truth', and i sorted my issues which were many and admittedly dug with my own hands and stupidity in trying to protect a young girl who had done no wrong in this long affair.. eventually we found ourself on what i believed to be the home straight.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  I can't speak to the marriage stuff. But the relationship aspect is familiar to me. Some of us come out of it pretty raw and pretty maladapted to things. If the sudden end and silence is a shock, then see it as a really unhealthy continuation of what happens to us when we leave and our whole lives are suddenly cut away from us. Both coping mechanism and behaviour drilled into us as perfectly normal. If we're trying to stay in and have something outside, that puts a horrific strain on things. But that's how it is.

  Some stuff sounds not really JW specific, I know from friends who've never been JWs that they've gone through divorces/breakups with someone who they then realised they didn't want to be with once the situation had changed. But I don't personally have experience from either side of that.

  Good luck for the future. You're right that some ex-JWs carry stuff which needs working through, but others don't. Even with culty background stuffs, we're still individuals ;)
• 
  26

  Evidence of Human Activity in Northern Siberia 45,000 years ago.

  by fulltimestudent in

  1. social
  2. current

  this information makes the biblical dating of human origins a sad joke.

  quote: " when they dated the remains, the researchers got another surprise: the mammoth died 45,000 years ago.

  that means that humans lived in the arctic more than 10,000 years earlier than scientists believed, according to a new study.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  All this information really does is deepen the mystery about the self awareness of mankind and how in such little progression there was over such a long period of time.

  Still the same problem as it ever was. Information transmission within pre-literate hunter/gatherer clans isn't really all that good if you're hoping to join the space race any time soon. I still want to thank the person who figured out that those leaves thrown in hot water tasted good. That's some long term trial and error testing going on, and not a trial I'd want to take part in.
• 
  40

  WT Study 1/10/16 Encouraging Child Baptism And More Nonsense

  by JW_Rogue in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i've noticed that each wt lesson really only has one or two points they want remembered.

  normally they build up to these by about the third subheading.

  this week's lesson though was different, the main point was insidiously made through an experience in the first paragraph:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Mephis

  The process is engineered to make it seem meaningful, to load it with consequences and obligations. It gives what they do the veneer of a religious rationale. It's still a load of hooey though when you take a step back from it all. Did you really sign a contract with invisible bearded guy in the sky? Really, really sign one? You didn't even sign one with the WBTS that has any meaning outside of JWland. No-one gets to dictate your life to you on that level unless you decide you want them to. Or you live in a repressive totalitarian dictatorship. That's the decision which is hidden behind it all and which they desperately mask behind words. It's always 'Jehovah' and 'the bible', never 'us guys in Brooklyn had a vote and 4 of us decided that...'.