In my personal experience drugs would only be recreational, and alcohol I love to drink and enjoy far more as and EXJW but don't get drunk or overdo it like I did as a witness.
When I have voices in my head, I eat... thats my emotion crutch lol
im new here, so go easy with me!
just wanted to know if any one has any idea's or personal experience in regard to drug and alcohol abuse in former jw's.
all the one's i know have just lost the plot when it comes drugs and alcohol, especially drug use.
In my personal experience drugs would only be recreational, and alcohol I love to drink and enjoy far more as and EXJW but don't get drunk or overdo it like I did as a witness.
When I have voices in my head, I eat... thats my emotion crutch lol
i've seen it mentioned by a few on the forum that at some point there was a realization that had they not been born a jw, they never would've converted no matter how many times the jws tried to study with them.
this was my experience too, and i'm wondering how universal it is for those that were born-in but eventually left.
i think i started having this thought (more specifically that if i were not born a jw, i would surely have become an atheist by now) in my late teens.
For me, I think it depends on whether or not I was born into a religious household. Like if I were born Baptist and really believed, I might listen to the JW's when the came knocking and perhaps would have converted.
Very true statement, its hard to say (because of the butterfly effect) what path your life would have taken in any other situation.
Still this was a huge light bulb moment for me waking up when I realized that if witnesses came to my door, I'd slam it in their face. And if felt amazing to say that to my wife, a relief in fact "if I wasn't a witness and they came to my door, I'd never so much as speak to them, so why am I witness now???" it was a big moment of clarity.
For me even before I woke up fully I began to have a deep resentment for the damage religion obviously cause mankind (something the witnesses even acknowledge). But!! and that's a big but... I happened to be born into the one true religion that had the answer to the problems cause by every other religion that was under satan's control. Once that cult vale started lifting, the witnesses were becoming more and more just another religion, which is what they are.
So I really believe I would not have been a religious person, not saying I wouldn't have any spiritual, metaphysics type ideals or curiosities, but institutional religion would be repellent to me. Even as an in witness I found the bible repellent! I just assumed I had weak faith.
so, i know there are some from my congregation or from bethel who monitor my posts..... maybe you're looking for something to catch me out?.
just a question: rather than trying to find fault with me, have you stopped and looked into the issues or facts about the organisation that caused me to come to a place like this forum??.
facts are there for anyone to find nowadays....one just has to be willing to pull their head out of the sand.....
the scientific method begins with a faith statement called a hypothesis, and then goes on to look for evidence, for or against support of the faith statement.. secular materialists often change their ideas on exactly how things have made themselves, but never whether they did.. the manifesto for this self imposed mental ban seems to be summed up by geneticist richard lewontin:.
‘our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural.
we take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.. it is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.
Hey perry.
Hypothesis is not equal to belief. It may be a suggestion that is tested but in science belief should come after facts and in religion belief comes without facts.
Hypothesis and beliefs don't change facts, but if you are rational facts should change beliefs and hypothesis.
is it just me?
Beliefs don't change facts. If you are rational facts should change your beliefs.
This is not just about religion but everything in life. Believe what you like. Facts are facts. That's not porselityzing
is it just me?
People need to remember this is a discussion forum.
If someone posts anything (even non religious) its fair to expect debate and discussion.
That continues to perplex me about everyone that feels "attacked"
nope sorry i got nothing.. wouldn't it be really interesting though if somewhere there was a theist who could challenge unbelievers with facts and evidence?.
nope sorry i got nothing.. wouldn't it be really interesting though if somewhere there was a theist who could challenge unbelievers with facts and evidence?.
nope sorry i got nothing.. wouldn't it be really interesting though if somewhere there was a theist who could challenge unbelievers with facts and evidence?.
Some charismatic fellow thumping a bible and telling me about reward and punishment said so.
So my fear of dying by divine punishment and not getting the reward for the righteous is proof of god.
Fact 1!
Praise dionysus
is it just me?
No amount of copy and paste about our DNA or common ancestor and whatever which change the fact in a relatively short period of time or milli-second in evolutionary terms can explain who one species went from cave paintings to putting a man on the moon.
You need to think deeper about time, you seem to be disconnected. Human technology advancement was pretty much a flat line until the last 200 years, and shot up incredibly in the last 70 years. We didn't go from cave painting to the moon so quickly. Also contrary to popular theist belief humans have been around much longer than 6000 years. Homo sapiens are about what? 100,000 years old? Can you even grasp the changes that go on over 100,000 years of homo sapiens much less the staggering 4.5 billion years of earth itself????
you have made my head hurt...