There's not one single thing that would wake up most JWs. Different personality types will have different triggers. For some, things that can be proved factually wrong through analysis (such as 607 and 1914) will do it. For others, it's doctrinal things rooted entirely in emotionalism or tradition such as beliefs about heaven or the trinity, or doctrinal flipflopping. Still others will be more affected by scandals such as the UN-DPI association or covering up child abuse. Others may be more affected by local problems in their own congregations. Some are so deeply entrenched and dependent on the religion that they will forgive any doctrinal or social shortcoming in the organisation.
Posts by Jeffro
-
-
-
-
14
who signed your blood card?
by losingit intwo elders in my congregation signed mine bc hubby couldn't bear the repercussions of either 1- saving my life by allowing the blood transfusion, which would probably lead to him being df'd, and 2- me dying bc he did not allow the blood transfusion and having my parents call him a murderer.. isn't that so nice?
when i most wanted him to represent me, he didn't have the guts, even hypothetically.... so, who signed your blood card?.
-
-
Jeffro
In Australia they handed out Enduring Power of Attorney documents (a booklet) that were pre-formatted with JW 'rules' about blood transfusions. Never filled one out.
-
88
Changing the Goalposts
by braincleaned increationists are not consistant with their otherwise apparant logic:.
nothing comes from nothing check .
everything has a beginning check .
-
-
Jeffro
snare&racket:
Again, it is not elitism!
It (the scientific method) is the exact opposite of elitism. Scientists will proudly state, "we don't yet know". Whereas elitist theists claim they do 'just know' things that 1) they can't possibly know and 2) stifle progress toward ever knowing.
-
88
Changing the Goalposts
by braincleaned increationists are not consistant with their otherwise apparant logic:.
nothing comes from nothing check .
everything has a beginning check .
-
-
Jeffro
snare&racket:
Do people here know that the big bang (i.e, a singularity that resulted in the formstion of our universe) is not a theory?
It is a theory. But most people don't seem to understand what theory means in a scientific context.
-
88
Changing the Goalposts
by braincleaned increationists are not consistant with their otherwise apparant logic:.
nothing comes from nothing check .
everything has a beginning check .
-
-
Jeffro
snare&racket:
It is actually far more complex than that....
True. But getting into detail about legitimate theories about the beginning of the universe is far more than is deserved by those who posit the only alternative as being 'God'.
Theists seem to expect atheists to have very detailed ideas about how the universe could begin without God, but at the same time, theists imagine that 'an intelligent omnipotent God always existed' is somehow a satisfying explanation .
-
88
Changing the Goalposts
by braincleaned increationists are not consistant with their otherwise apparant logic:.
nothing comes from nothing check .
everything has a beginning check .
-
-
Jeffro
MadGiant's link (modified for standard webpage instead of mobile layout):
-
88
Changing the Goalposts
by braincleaned increationists are not consistant with their otherwise apparant logic:.
nothing comes from nothing check .
everything has a beginning check .
-
-
Jeffro
tec:
What came FROM God had a beginning. But God, Himself, always WAS.
You've moved the goalposts so much that the original goal is far over the horizon.
The claim that 'God' (and the redundantly capitalised 'Himself') 'always existed' relies on belief in stories written by primitive tribesmen, which have been subsequently retconned by modern believers. Belief in the god of the Bible - a complex vindictive magical alien who requires worship - isn't even a reasonable alternative to the universe arising from nothing.
Positing the God of the Bible as the only possible alternative to the universe arising from 'nothing' is also a pathetic false dichotomy that ignores other scenarios, such as that the universe always* existed (for example, multiple big bang - big crunch scenarios), or that our universe is one in a larger multiverse, or even that there was a 'creator' (sentient or not) that may or may not still exist and that doesn't care about selfish human desires for 'worship'.
*The more widely accepted theories about the beginning of the universe indicate that time didn't exist independently from the start of the universe, so there actually was no 'before'. -
30
1914 not Christ's Return anymore?
by pacloc inlooking at the public dec 2013 watchtower under bible questions answered it looks like they are saying that the invisible return of christ is completely in the future.
i thought that they always said it started in 1914?
am i reading this wrong?.
-
-
Jeffro
Me:
Since at least 2006, the future return also marks the beginning of 'separating the sheep and the goats'.
1995
-
30
1914 not Christ's Return anymore?
by pacloc inlooking at the public dec 2013 watchtower under bible questions answered it looks like they are saying that the invisible return of christ is completely in the future.
i thought that they always said it started in 1914?
am i reading this wrong?.
-
-
Jeffro
In weird JW theology, Jesus presence (since 1914) isn't the same as his return when he is "coming quickly" (a future 'judgement'). The future coming is intended to be the climax of his presence and marks the beginning of the 'Great Tribulation'.* Since at least 2006, the future return also marks the beginning of 'separating the sheep and the goats'.
* Note that this is quite different to what Charles Taze Russell taught. He believed that Christ had returned in 1874, and that the 'Great Tribulation' would begin in 1914.JW theology is a bit like quantum physics. If you're not confused, you don't really understand it.
-
236
Recent Global Cooling Controversy
by metatron inhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/global-cooling-arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html.
climate change is a legitimate concern - especially as it affects poor nations.
however, the subject has been twisted by greedy global elites resulting in disappointments (if you wish to call them that!
-
-
Jeffro
mP:
I prefer text because its easy to read and quote, videos are a bit harder and not quite as easy to quote.
Surely a wizard like yourself can type a paragraph. I wnt you to type the text here, so i can reply here in writing.
Who cares what you prefer?! You can barely go a sentence without showing yourself to be an insulting arrogant fool.