“The time left is reduced” - to book a Chelmsford tour, that is. That’s just making fun, is it not? Armageddon didn’t come, but never mind, come tour the new shiny branch we built in the meantime.
slimboyfat
JoinedPosts by slimboyfat
-
26
2019-New Files Just Arrived!
by Atlantis in2019 application for prison minister.
https://docdro.id/dxusjmu.
2019 brd visitor center newsletter.
-
-
-
88
For any that still believe in God and Jesus, what is your reasoning on this matter?
by BourneIdentity inin the old testament, god was always full of anger and jealousy resulting in the murder of millions of people.
we’re told jesus perfectly reflects his fathers qualities.
why in the new testament does jesus show no hint of anger and jealousy and wanting to kill people?
-
-
slimboyfat
It's always fascinating to watch Christians take refuge in dogma, platitudes and personal abuse.
I remember a time when I also had to hide from reality in order to protect faith.Materialism is a dogma just as sure as any religion is. Just because it is the dominant ideology of the age we live in doesn’t make it any less dogmatic. In fact, probably more so, because people become complacent and assume that, because it’s the received orthodoxy of the day, it therefore stands above other beliefs as more respectable or reliable. The fact that materialism is the current accepted wisdom should make us more rigorous in challenging its claims, not less so.
There are serious problems at the core of a purely materialist account of reality that cannot easily be dismissed. Such as, if everything that is real can be explained in terms of material causes and effects, then what is consciousness? Since we experience consciouness directly, and the material world only indirectly, would we not be more rigorous empiricists if we affirm the reality of consciousness as primary, and remain more sceptical about the nature of the material world? And if we are to use empiricism as a bedrock for understanding, how do we cope with its shaky foundation? In that, what evidence can be produced to support the statement itself: “we should only believe statements on the basis of evidence”? And then, why do we suppose the human mind is capable of posing and answering fundamental questions about reality in the first place. Is this anything more than just wishful thinking?
It’s not just those who believe in God who have difficult questions to answer. If you eliminate God as an explanation then you are also left with a formidable set of difficulties. At least many theists acknowledge the difficulties associated with their beliefs. Some atheists seem to cope with the difficulties of their worldview by pretending they don’t exist. Or maybe they genuinely don’t understand the problems their view of reality throws up.
-
30
Are Witnesses advised not to get into discussion’s about evolution with HH?
by Diogenesister injust before the last memorial, i finally had a witness call with an invite ( i say finally because i haven’t seen anyone in the d 2 d preaching work for going on 5 years!)..
i wasn’t particularly prepared ( it being early and me still in my nightie!
) but i managed to collect myself and said i didn’t think i wanted to go since i discovered the scandal around the un.....and i outlined the facts.. jw: oh no i don’t think so, where on earth did you read that?.
-
-
slimboyfat
All JWs are not the same, but when I was young in the 1980s I reckon about 90% of JWs liked a good discussion. Now I think it’s flipped the other way, and about 90% of JWs avoid serious discussions like the plague. In some cases it’s the same JWs who once liked a good discussion, but now can’t face it. I think changes like the “overlapping” generation has knocked their confidence. Many JWs know the game is up, at least on some level, so they don’t have the stomach for serious discussion, because they don’t have confidence they can hold their ground.
I think JWs could certainly accept evolution at least with respect to animals, plants and other life, and insist that humans alone were a direct creation by God. This is apparently what Russell taught, so it is compatible with their view of the ransom and salvation.
-
30
Are Witnesses advised not to get into discussion’s about evolution with HH?
by Diogenesister injust before the last memorial, i finally had a witness call with an invite ( i say finally because i haven’t seen anyone in the d 2 d preaching work for going on 5 years!)..
i wasn’t particularly prepared ( it being early and me still in my nightie!
) but i managed to collect myself and said i didn’t think i wanted to go since i discovered the scandal around the un.....and i outlined the facts.. jw: oh no i don’t think so, where on earth did you read that?.
-
-
slimboyfat
JWs don’t want to discuss things in general but especially evolution. I tried to discuss evolution with an elder once and he wasn’t having it at all. He shut that conversation right down. He just said he believes in God and that’s good enough for him, end of story. He’s the sort of elder who regularly makes comments about Jehovah’s “loving” and “wonderful” organisation. You get the sense with some JWs that belief in the organisation comes first and is more important than anything else. More important than defending belief in God even, as illogical as that seems.
I wonder if Watchtower will ever accept evolution? About the same time they accept homosexual people, I suppose. It might take another ten or twenty years.
-
25
I Am Now Officially an O.B.E member
by smiddy3 inhi friends ,.
i just thought i should share with you my entry into the o.b.e.
club on this 5th of july.not everybody makes it and to tell you the truth ,i never thought i would.
-
-
slimboyfat
Can you say, how does the citation read?
-
7
The site that shall not be named ...
by Afterburn ini know people are concerned about adding positively to jw stats on the site that shall not be named, but i don't think the argument is a valid one, because they are going to see cause to brag on themselves whether the stats rise, stagnate, or fall.
it's built into their self-conceits.
here's the menu you get when you create a user account on that site.. .
-
-
slimboyfat
That is true. But it does otherwise seem to be addressing a particular usual scenario. I am not sure what the intent of the Wathtower writer was because it seems ambiguous, and I’ve not read the original QFR. It is certainly possible the writer really meant to say that all DFed people are an “unwanted intrusion”, but I’m not 100% sure.
-
10
Who made it that way?
by nicolaou init's infuriating because it's so childish.
you can explain how a rainbow appears because sunlight is refracted under the right conditions but you'll get asked;.
"so who made those conditions that way?".
-
-
slimboyfat
It seems like a reasonable question to me! Although I would pose the question at a more fundamental level than, why a rainbow, or why currents in the sea. I would ask why the world is set up in such a way, and with intrinsic rules and patterns, that allow all such phenomena to even develop and exist. Or why there is anything at all, that can be subject to these sorts of patterns and formations. But ultimately maybe it is the same question. Because it’s not that awareness of the possibility of God means that every dumb thing that happens must has a superfluous “reason” attached to it. (“I must have dropped my toast for a reason”) It’s rather the fact that the world exists at all permeates all that we encounter with such intrinsic meaning that everything makes sense at fundamental level, even if all the parts only make sense, either in relation to one another, or apparently not at all.
-
7
The site that shall not be named ...
by Afterburn ini know people are concerned about adding positively to jw stats on the site that shall not be named, but i don't think the argument is a valid one, because they are going to see cause to brag on themselves whether the stats rise, stagnate, or fall.
it's built into their self-conceits.
here's the menu you get when you create a user account on that site.. .
-
-
slimboyfat
I’m a bit unclear, but the 1953 WT seems to be talking about a specific situation where someone turns apostate, joins another religion, but for some reason still wants to attend the KH with a spouse. Which seems a strange scenario, but might explain the “unwanted intrusion” comment. It may not be a blanket statement that all DFed people are unwelcome, but there is enough Watchtower imprecision and ambiguity that it’s not entirely clear. Ironic since this QFR was apparently prompted by yet more imprecise language in an earlier QFR.
I do find it interesting that the 1953 article disallows the DFed person from sitting with family, because more recently Watchtower has claimed that they place no formal restrictions on where DFed people can sit in the KH.
When I was young it was traditional for DFed people to sit at the back in shame, sometimes quite a few. These days there are no DFed people at the back any more, just sick and nervous people who prefer to sit at the back for one reason or another.
-
30
NBA Player Retires to Serve as Jehovah's Witness
by 720Reddog inhttps://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27078092/collison-retires-nba-31-focus-faith .
-
-
slimboyfat
Who was the footballer who gave up football because of 1975? Has anyone got any clippings?
-
14
No longer Hidden
by HiddenPimo ini wrote a letter some time ago and to my surprise and despite the elders manual saying that a letter is sufficient for establishing 'wrongdoing' they would not announce me as no longer a jw until i met with 2 elders to verbally acknowledge that the letter was written by me.. .
well yesterday i met with them and the meeting lasted 2 minutes.
"did you write the letter?
-
-
slimboyfat
Firstly congratulations on a step that you are ready to make.
Personally I’m pleased that they take care to verify a letter. What sort of chaos could ensue if any letter purporting to be from anyone was believed? The elders book probably means a letter that is handed over personally. But as is often the case the elders book is terribly imprecise and open to many interpretations.