sir82, yes, this is a hypothetical conversation in the event that such a doctrinal change DOES happen. Whether it will happen, is more the topic of the other thread. For this thread, its: what would we, as faders, say to our friends and family?
daniel-p
JoinedPosts by daniel-p
-
35
Possible Blood Doctrine Change: A Hypothetical Conversation with all JWs
by daniel-p injw>"but you lived anyway!".
jw>"...".
jw>"well, they'll be ressurected.".
-
-
-
35
Possible Blood Doctrine Change: A Hypothetical Conversation with all JWs
by daniel-p injw>"but you lived anyway!".
jw>"...".
jw>"well, they'll be ressurected.".
-
-
daniel-p
If they do, indeed, change it to being a conscience matter, than their previous interpretation of scripture was wrong. If it is just a "refinement", well, I touch on that above.
-
35
Possible Blood Doctrine Change: A Hypothetical Conversation with all JWs
by daniel-p injw>"but you lived anyway!".
jw>"...".
jw>"well, they'll be ressurected.".
-
-
daniel-p
I don't know about you all, but I'm seriously thinking of making this blood doctrine change (if it happens) the catalyst for "coming out" against the Watchtower publicly.
The following is a hypothetical conversation:
ME>"If the organization really is under God's direction, why would he allow the propigation of a death-dealing doctrine, where his worshipers needlessly died based on misinterpretation of scripture? This has direct application to my own life, where I nearly died of complications related to hemorrhaging (see my profile) from a vascular tumor at the age of 21, only a year after I left Bethel. Why did I need to go through that? My prognosis would have been much better if they could have stabalized me with blood transfusions."
JW>"But you lived anyway!"
ME>"Yes, I did, but I could just as easily have died. I was there, and in those moments I accepted my impending death, fully believing I was making the right choice. Are you telling me that Jehovah made the decision to spare my life because I was faithful to him by not accepting blood?
JW>"..."
ME>"Because if so, why would he reward me for holding to false doctrine? And what about all those who were also faithful to this doctrine, but died?"
JW>"Well, they'll be ressurected."
ME>"Why? Because they were found righteous holding on to a false doctrine? No. You and I both know that Jehovah does not directly intervene to spare the lives of individuals. The Society has said so."
JW>"In any case, the brothers are refining the organization... this is just one more refinement, and we must obey the change and be humble and accept it."
ME>"You call this a refinement? No! Thousands of people--even children--DIED because of this doctrine! You're going to tell me that none of that matters since they'll all be resurrected? Well, then, if that is the case, if Jehovah really sees it that way, then our lives today aren't worth anything."
JW>"I don't understand."
ME>"If Jehovah was perfectly complicit with the needless death of his worshipers, then he must not value the life we have NOW. Our lives, NOW, are worth nothing."
JW>"..."
ME>"However, if he was not complicit with the needless death of his worshipers, then the Society acted against him, and they are a false prophet, misleading millions of people. Their fruit is rotten, and they are, in effect, saying "behold, he is out in the wilderness!" or "behold, he is in the inner rooms!" leading us here and there, straight into ruination (Matt 24:24). They must bear the guilt of the people who died following their false doctrines. As for "me and my household," we will serve God, not these wolves in sheep's clothing."
So, any thoughts?
-
74
Why are we repulsed at the though to consuming human milk?
by Elsewhere ini saw a story this morning about a guy who is making cheese using his wife's breast milk.. i checked a poll and 80% of people think this is gross.
i must admit there is a part of me that is repulsed too.
my scientific "geek" and curious side is intrigued and would want to try it... but then the repulsion kicks in again.
-
-
daniel-p
I think it has more to do with viewing humans as a food product. Most people are fine with seeing certain animals as food products (depending on cultures, of course), but the only culture that views humans themselves as food products or producing a product are cannibals.
-
74
Why are we repulsed at the though to consuming human milk?
by Elsewhere ini saw a story this morning about a guy who is making cheese using his wife's breast milk.. i checked a poll and 80% of people think this is gross.
i must admit there is a part of me that is repulsed too.
my scientific "geek" and curious side is intrigued and would want to try it... but then the repulsion kicks in again.
-
-
daniel-p
The thought of drinking breast milk from my own mother at this point is disgusting enough, but from an unrelated woman? I'm sure there is a lot of psychology going on here, but the fact is, its disgusting and I think society will always see it that way... except for the freaks who eat placentas and stuff like that.
-
32
Camels werent domesticated during Abraham's time?
by cyberjesus inone of the many factors that made me loose faith in the bible was the fact that camels were not domesticated during abrahams era.
i read this on the book "the bible unearthead".
do you know of any other evidence that shows camels were domesticated after 1000 bce.
-
-
daniel-p
Of all the things that could make you lose faith in the Bible as God's Word.... wow.
-
44
Liberals, Atheists Just Plain Smarter - Religious Conservatives Really Just Paranoid Cavemen
by daniel-p inlet the flame wars begin!
liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to iq.
by elizabeth landau, cnnfebruary 26, 2010 5:03 p.m. est(cnn) -- political, religious and sexual behaviors may be reflections of intelligence, a new study finds.. evolutionary psychologist satoshi kanazawa at the the london school of economics and political science correlated data on these behaviors with iq from a large national u.s. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher iqs.
-
-
daniel-p
Its too bad Daniel p that you don't respect the forum guidelines, I'm glad most here do
I didn't go against any forum guidelines, at least not the ones posted below (Posting Guidelines). Besides, I've seen your comments to others regarding this obsession of yours, and you told another guy that his thread should be in politics when it was most clearly not political. So you are not only obsessed with something nearly everyone does, you do not know what the heck youre talking about
Besides, there are so many miscategorized threads all over this site, any attempt you make here at harrassing is completely pointless. Get a life.
-
44
Liberals, Atheists Just Plain Smarter - Religious Conservatives Really Just Paranoid Cavemen
by daniel-p inlet the flame wars begin!
liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to iq.
by elizabeth landau, cnnfebruary 26, 2010 5:03 p.m. est(cnn) -- political, religious and sexual behaviors may be reflections of intelligence, a new study finds.. evolutionary psychologist satoshi kanazawa at the the london school of economics and political science correlated data on these behaviors with iq from a large national u.s. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher iqs.
-
-
daniel-p
It's politics religion and sex! Wow!
lol, yep. Sometimes I think CNN commissions these studies JUST so they can have something that will incite a reaction.
-
44
Liberals, Atheists Just Plain Smarter - Religious Conservatives Really Just Paranoid Cavemen
by daniel-p inlet the flame wars begin!
liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to iq.
by elizabeth landau, cnnfebruary 26, 2010 5:03 p.m. est(cnn) -- political, religious and sexual behaviors may be reflections of intelligence, a new study finds.. evolutionary psychologist satoshi kanazawa at the the london school of economics and political science correlated data on these behaviors with iq from a large national u.s. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher iqs.
-
-
daniel-p
Politics on the 'friends section' will run many off the site, no?
Lol, I long ago abandoned any meaningful categorization on this site. Politcs threads are posted ALL THE TIME on the friends board. If a mod wants to move it, feel free. But Im not losing any sleep over it. Besides, its not really politics, but social commentary.
-
44
Liberals, Atheists Just Plain Smarter - Religious Conservatives Really Just Paranoid Cavemen
by daniel-p inlet the flame wars begin!
liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to iq.
by elizabeth landau, cnnfebruary 26, 2010 5:03 p.m. est(cnn) -- political, religious and sexual behaviors may be reflections of intelligence, a new study finds.. evolutionary psychologist satoshi kanazawa at the the london school of economics and political science correlated data on these behaviors with iq from a large national u.s. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher iqs.
-
-
daniel-p
Let the flame wars begin!
Liberalism, atheism, male sexual exclusivity linked to IQ
By Elizabeth Landau, CNN February 26, 2010 5:03 p.m. EST
(CNN) -- Political, religious and sexual behaviors may be reflections of intelligence, a new study finds.
Evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa at the the London School of Economics and Political Science correlated data on these behaviors with IQ from a large national U.S. sample and found that, on average, people who identified as liberal and atheist had higher IQs. This applied also to sexual exclusivity in men, but not in women. The findings will be published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly.
The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop, and how some people's behaviors come to be.
The reasoning is that sexual exclusivity in men, liberalism and atheism all go against what would be expected given humans' evolutionary past. In other words, none of these traits would have benefited our early human ancestors, but higher intelligence may be associated with them.
"The adoption of some evolutionarily novel ideas makes some sense in terms of moving the species forward," said George Washington University leadership professor James Bailey, who was not involved in the study. "It also makes perfect sense that more intelligent people -- people with, sort of, more intellectual firepower -- are likely to be the ones to do that."
Bailey also said that these preferences may stem from a desire to show superiority or elitism, which also has to do with IQ. In fact, aligning oneself with "unconventional" philosophies such as liberalism or atheism may be "ways to communicate to everyone that you're pretty smart," he said.
The study looked at a large sample from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), which began with adolescents in grades 7-12 in the United States during the 1994-95 school year. The participants were interviewed as 18- to 28-year-olds from 2001 to 2002. The study also looked at the General Social Survey, another cross-national data collection source.
Kanazawa did not find that higher or lower intelligence predicted sexual exclusivity in women. This makes sense, because having one partner has always been advantageous to women, even thousands of years ago, meaning exclusivity is not a "new" preference.
For men, on the other hand, sexual exclusivity goes against the grain evolutionarily. With a goal of spreading genes, early men had multiple mates. Since women had to spend nine months being pregnant, and additional years caring for very young children, it made sense for them to want a steady mate to provide them resources.
Religion, the current theory goes, did not help people survive or reproduce necessarily, but goes along the lines of helping people to be paranoid, Kanazawa said. Assuming that, for example, a noise in the distance is a signal of a threat helped early humans to prepare in case of danger.
"It helps life to be paranoid, and because humans are paranoid, they become more religious, and they see the hands of God everywhere," Kanazawa said.
Participants who said they were atheists had an average IQ of 103 in adolescence, while adults who said they were religious averaged 97, the study found. Atheism "allows someone to move forward and speculate on life without any concern for the dogmatic structure of a religion," Bailey said.
"Historically, anything that's new and different can be seen as a threat in terms of the religious beliefs; almost all religious systems are about permanence," he noted.
The study takes the American view of liberal vs. conservative. It defines "liberal" in terms of concern for genetically nonrelated people and support for private resources that help those people. It does not look at other factors that play into American political beliefs, such as abortion, gun control and gay rights.
"Liberals are more likely to be concerned about total strangers; conservatives are likely to be concerned with people they associate with," he said.
Given that human ancestors had a keen interest in the survival of their offspring and nearest kin, the conservative approach -- looking out for the people around you first -- fits with the evolutionary picture more than liberalism, Kanazawa said. "It's unnatural for humans to be concerned about total strangers." he said.
The study found that young adults who said they were "very conservative" had an average adolescent IQ of 95, whereas those who said they were "very liberal" averaged 106.
It also makes sense that "conservatism" as a worldview of keeping things stable would be a safer approach than venturing toward the unfamiliar, Bailey said.
Neither Bailey nor Kanazawa identify themselves as liberal; Bailey is conservative and Kanazawa is "a strong libertarian."
Vegetarianism, while not strongly associated with IQ in this study, has been shown to be related to intelligence in previous research, Kanazawa said. This also fits into Bailey's idea that unconventional preferences appeal to people with higher intelligence, and can also be a means of showing superiority.
None of this means that the human species is evolving toward a future where these traits are the default, Kanazawa said.
"More intelligent people don't have more children, so moving away from the trajectory is not going to happen," he said.