The destruction of Babylon the Great preceded by the disgusting thing is a prerequisite -or no gt.
Fisherman
JoinedPosts by Fisherman
-
100
Is it Time to Declare that The Great Tribulation Has Started ?
by OnTheWayOut ini don't really engage in doctrinal discussions about jw's anymore.
they seem to say some pretty crazy stuff.
but i have read some threads discussing doctrinal changes and how watchtower is really out of ideas and money at the same time.
-
-
-
71
Confusing Opinions with Facts
by cofty inin a discussion about the best flavour of ice cream everybody's opinion is equally valid.. in a discussion about the shape of the earth or the origin of species everybody's opinion is equally irrelevant.
only objective facts and evidence matter.. confusing these two categories is a common feature of conversations in this forum.
people deserve respect, errors do not..
-
-
Fisherman
SBF: I cannot say that I (always) agree with you opinions but I must confess that not only do I enjoy your posts but it is my opinion that your posts on each thread always enrich the discussion by adding substance, dimension, perspective and depth to it. It is also my opinion that the information that you post is worth reading and contributes to the educational value of this Forum.Thank you.-Fisherman
-
71
Confusing Opinions with Facts
by cofty inin a discussion about the best flavour of ice cream everybody's opinion is equally valid.. in a discussion about the shape of the earth or the origin of species everybody's opinion is equally irrelevant.
only objective facts and evidence matter.. confusing these two categories is a common feature of conversations in this forum.
people deserve respect, errors do not..
-
-
Fisherman
As for the possible (non)existence of any gods: we'll presume innocence until proven guilty. Thus, until any gods' existence is proven at least somewhat beyond reasonable doubt, we must assume there are none.
I believe that I have shown. that truth does change because it cannot be proven. It continues to exist as truth believe it or not and free from any evidence.
-
45
The Ray Franz Saga
by snugglebunny ini'm just curious as to how it all happened.. to explain.
many years back, before ex-jw websites, i called on a local lady in order to design an extension to her already enormous house.
she was a young, voluptuous gal, married to a much older local business man who spared little expense in order to give his young wife whatever her heart desired.. we chatted for ages.
-
-
Fisherman
There were all sorts of rumors and lies that were being spread around about him.
How do you know?
The Watchtower should have published the truth about the situation rather than let lies be spread.
Why? Who says so?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Fisherman TMS, It would not be fair to RF to publish anything more about his case than what is publicly known without him being around to defend any claims and I am not saying that there is anything more because even implying it would not be fair to the man'
What I meant in the statement above that you quoted, simply put: The man is dead and cannot defend himself of any additional allegations against him even if they were true. It is unfair to defame the man with any more accusations against him other than discussing the publicly known allegations about his case -but all of the facts about his case are not known by the public.
RF went public and by doing that he broke the rules that he subscribed to when he joined jw.
-
71
Confusing Opinions with Facts
by cofty inin a discussion about the best flavour of ice cream everybody's opinion is equally valid.. in a discussion about the shape of the earth or the origin of species everybody's opinion is equally irrelevant.
only objective facts and evidence matter.. confusing these two categories is a common feature of conversations in this forum.
people deserve respect, errors do not..
-
-
Fisherman
In my story, try proving with evidence to the man eating a hot dog in a Chinese restaurant that he committed the crime
-
45
The Ray Franz Saga
by snugglebunny ini'm just curious as to how it all happened.. to explain.
many years back, before ex-jw websites, i called on a local lady in order to design an extension to her already enormous house.
she was a young, voluptuous gal, married to a much older local business man who spared little expense in order to give his young wife whatever her heart desired.. we chatted for ages.
-
-
Fisherman
TMS, It would not be fair to RF to publish anything more about his case than what is publicly known without him being around to defend any claims and I am not saying that there is anything more because even implying it would not be fair to the man. He published his version of what happened and of course he knew what actually happened as well as others that also knew.
IT is true though what you are saying about these groups in Bethel and besides that, teachings were being published through in the wt that were not agreed upon and sometimes subtly, and that is a brazen thing to do (not that RF had anything to do with it but someone did.) I GUESS: I will say this that he did not agree with more powerful GB and he firmly believed in going in a certain direction and he was sternly opposed and he held his position and his view and acted upon it probably figuring it was his duty and I aslo guess that he figured that God would back him up (I already posted something like this previoualy) .
-
71
Confusing Opinions with Facts
by cofty inin a discussion about the best flavour of ice cream everybody's opinion is equally valid.. in a discussion about the shape of the earth or the origin of species everybody's opinion is equally irrelevant.
only objective facts and evidence matter.. confusing these two categories is a common feature of conversations in this forum.
people deserve respect, errors do not..
-
-
Fisherman
Anders Andersen Than you for your kind rsepsonse to my post.
It's well established that eyewitnesses in court rooms are highly unreliable. Without evidence to back up their claims, I would hesitate to just accept the testimony of an eyewitness, especially in a confusing case with high stakes. (There is no verifiable or measurable evidence Jehovah or any other gods exist)
The point that I was trying to show is that a knower of a fact knows the fact and such known fact to him does not change from being a fact because he cannot prove it to others or because others do not believe him or because he does not know the difference between fact and belief or because he does not know the difference between believing something is a fact or he actually struck a rock with hammer. A person can know facts that others do not ( "You do not know all of the facts,"-for example)
"A fact is something that truly exists or happens or something that has actual existence." It is not contingent upon being believed or proven.
Case in point: It is a fact that a man was eating hot dog in a Chinese restaurant in the US at the exact time a crime was committed at another location, fact is he did not do it but only he knows this fact and he cannot prove it..The man is accused of the crime and no one believes his story, the evidence proves him guilty inspite of the fact that he was not even at the location where the crime took place at the time the crime was taking place. The truth is that the man is innocent but everyone is convinced from the evidence that the man is guilty. Anyway, the man knows he dd not do it, also, if you want proof of God's existence, order a hot dog. (Just kidding.)
-
50
Does the governing body know what they are doing?
by Gefangene inwhat do you guys think?.
are they only some uber religious zealots or do they pursue hidden agendas beyond religiosity?.
-
-
Fisherman
Are they only some uber religious zealots or do they pursue hidden agendas beyond religiosity?
No.
-
45
The Ray Franz Saga
by snugglebunny ini'm just curious as to how it all happened.. to explain.
many years back, before ex-jw websites, i called on a local lady in order to design an extension to her already enormous house.
she was a young, voluptuous gal, married to a much older local business man who spared little expense in order to give his young wife whatever her heart desired.. we chatted for ages.
-
-
Fisherman
If you haven't realized by now that the WTS -vid
It ain't about the wt, there is something more that validates the wt, HS. But that is another subject matter. My previous response to your post meant that you can only invalidate wt Bible translations and doctrines with those you knew were correct.
-
71
Confusing Opinions with Facts
by cofty inin a discussion about the best flavour of ice cream everybody's opinion is equally valid.. in a discussion about the shape of the earth or the origin of species everybody's opinion is equally irrelevant.
only objective facts and evidence matter.. confusing these two categories is a common feature of conversations in this forum.
people deserve respect, errors do not..
-
-
Fisherman
So, in a discussion where the subject matter is science, for example:the topic of gravity in the field of physics, scientific facts, and interpretations (opinions) of facts ( for example Einsteins theory of gravity) should be considered as the only variables in the discussion such as in solving for one of the variables in the posted equation. But when God is invoked in any discussion, the realm of evidence is not limited to scientific fact and scientific realism and that is because there exists a difference between science and truth.
Also, there exists a difference between scientific fact (to be distinguished from pseudo science such as Krausses philosophy of science) and plain old fact which need not be qualified by scientific, for example, an event in history, or if a person witnesses something that happened and is asked to testify in Court about what that person knows is a true or fact-which is not an opinion, the existence of Jehovah for instance.
But, in a scientific Court room sort of speak, only scientific facts and interpretations matter and such continue scientifically valid until falsified only with verifiable and objective evidence (which is the definition of scientific fact)
I will point out this flaw: While there exists an inherent mechanism in living organisms that is observable, and predictable causing physiological change, such process is not evidence that humans evolved from simpler life forms although such scientific opinion considers it to be fact by a majority,
THis thread is not about discussing evolution, that is what cofty's other related posts are all about. This thread is about the confusion between scientific fact (verifiable objective evidence) and opinion (not scientific interpretations- or "explanations" as sheepless puts it- such as evolution)
Scientific laws, Newton's law of Universal gravitation for example are indisputable while scientific explanations such as evolution is. My question to those that equate the theory of gravity with the theory of evolution is how and why are they equal in terms of probability?
Sorry for any error, trying to be open minded, sometimes it is late here 3 am or jsut mentally exxausted, It is evident that I do not cut and paste and I do not emulate the ideas of others. Sometimes by views correspond with existing facts and sometimes I need to be "enlightened" with facts but I try to be opened minded.