Posts by OnTheWayOut

67

All Christians Should Accept EVOLUTION

by FusionTheism in

it is time for christians to accept evolution, in my opinion.. there are many reasons why i think it is long overdue for all christians to finally accept what science says about evolution.

below i will show these reasons.. .

the bible tells people to pay attention to nature to see the glory of god (psalm 19; romans 1:19-20).

OnTheWayOut

#1. The Bible tells people to...

Don't rely on the writings of sheep and goat herders from thousands of years ago when it comes to science. But also don't just assume that you are "defer[ing] to the experts on nature." It seems that there are always people with an agenda, so weigh out what they say and use your brain. Someone will say that the globe is not warming and that the earth is only 6 to 10 thousand years old. Be careful.

#2. There is no contradiction between...

Jonathan Drake covered that well. There is contradiction there.

#3. Christians are commanded by the New Testament...

See my thoughts on #1. Similarly, do not follow blindly. But even if you did, I know that in the United States, the government is loaded with people who claim they believe that God wrote the book by goat/sheep herders. They are not insisting that people embrace evolution.

#4. There is no contradiction between...

Stop, you make me laugh. The whole premise of the Bible is original sin and a redeemer. Without Adam and Eve and original sin, no need for a redeemer. I mean, did a neanderthal "sin" or was he just an animal? Don't let the book by goat/sheep herders of thousands of years ago define what is right and wrong for you and don't consider violating the rules from the goat/sheep herders to be a sin requiring sacrifice to the god of the sheep/goat herders. There are plenty of wrong things to do that hurt others. Develop a good set of morals without the book that treats women as a lower class and says it's okay to beat your slave just short of death. The law and your own conscience do a better job helping you here.

#5. Publicly opposing or condemning....

I kind of agree. But scoffing at the "miracles" of other beliefs and accepting the "miracles" of Christianity are doing that also- making Christians look ignorant.

#6. I wholeheartedly agree with this point from the opening post. I would add that knowledge and education solves all problems and children need to grow up to add to that knowledge to further dismiss the idea of following the book from the ancient goat/sheep herders.

182

The Case for Theism

by FusionTheism in

"theism" here means "belief in a god" or "the worldview that an intelligent designer created the universe and life.

" ("god" here means a being with a mind who initiated and/or wound-up the universe, and designed life on earth)the most common claim that i see atheists making on twitter, is that "no evidence" exists in support of belief in a god.this post will remove any excuse atheists have for claiming "no evidence exists" in support of an initiator.

atheists can still reject this evidence as "weak," but they cannot truthfully say it does not exist.now, it is true that we do not have "observable, repeatable, falsifiable, empirical, scientific" evidence conclusively proving that an initiator exists, but we do have many lines of philisophical, experiential, and logical evidence.and... here... we... go:1:) many leading scientists, including stephen hawking, say that the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the singularity/big bang.

OnTheWayOut

This thread is on the 17th page, so my answer is probably already covered but I will trudge on just in case I make a point to you, Fusion.

You take the single simplified statement that "the space-time-matter universe had a beginning at the Singularity/Big Bang." The lecture that Hawking gave, where you derive this statement from, was simplified. It doesn't show the algebra on several chalkboards (maybe they use dry-erase boards now or tablets) to arrive at such a conclusion. Anyway, you just take the conclusion and run wild with it.

Time itself did not exist, and then it came into existence. Things can only naturally happen by cause-and-effect within time. So the very event of time itself coming into existence, is a "supernatural" event (something beyond or outside of the natural course of cause-and-effect).
Everything we know in science requires time. There is cause-and-effect in nature and in the universe because things happen in time. Nothing we have ever seen has happened without time. Thus, in order to be a natural event, time must exist.
So, any event occurring without time would be a "miracle," and especially the event of time itself coming into existence, without time existing previously, would be miraculous by anyone's definition. Either time created itself from nothing, before it existed, or something else outside of time created time.

I am sure you see it as an unavoidable set of logic to jump from that conclusion in a simplified lecture to "It's a miracle." But you cannot use the idea that it takes time to observe something happening to jump to "Time is supernatural." You cannot use that same idea compounded with your interjection to make such wild conclusions and then state that they are some kind of proof that some genius scientist demonstrated (unknowingly or knowingly).

And when someone objects, you cannot say that Hawking said the things you interject from what he actually did say.

You have to watch out for tricky ideas. You stated: "Either time created itself from nothing, before it existed, or something else outside of time created time."

You screwed up big time there and simplified further from simplified conclusions. Sure, you can say in a lecture, "before [time] existed" but we are not dealing with a simple concept, so to make grand conclusions beyond the simplified idea from a simplified conclusion is dangerous and leads to inaccuracy. There is no "before" time existed if time doesn't exist. Before you can jump to "It's a miracle," you would have to drag out those chalkboards (or tablets).

Time is not a "thing" like a baseball is a thing. You cannot simply arrive at conclusions by saying so. Put a baseball into what you say and it works: Before the big bang, baseballs did not exist. Baseballs would have had to create themselves from nothing or something outside of baseballs created baseballs.

That works great. Nobody would believe that baseballs were just "there" beyond the big bang. But time is completely different and you just cannot sum it all up in a couple of simplified statements made from simplified ideas given at a simplified lecture.

The rest of your ideas seem to build upon that, so I will not bother to comment on them.

24

Barings Bank & the JWs

by Doltologist in

in the early 1990s, i was in a meeting.

we were making some major changes to the main it system of the company i worked for.

during the meeting i said, 'what would happen if one of our major customers went belly up and shouldn't we build something into the system to cope with this?'.

OnTheWayOut

I wondered occasionally if there were a coup in the works in the style of Joseph Rutherford.

The GB is so visible now, so whacky with their tight pants and "OBEY" speeches. If a coup were behind the shadows, it would have to be about seizing assets more than seizing everyone's attention. There's really no way we could know.

I think if that happened, these guys on the GB would try to maintain control and start grabbing new assets. So they would have to take their jw . tv away, but then they would travel to all the regional conventions to make their presence known.

Now, if the coup were at the C.O. level and was for the hearts and minds of the members, there would be chaos for awhile as different things were said at different locations. That would be rather exciting.

31

Why do you still give talks?

by 1tMakesNoSence in

assuming you are still sitting there because of circumstances.

why do you still give/don't give talks?i ask this because i have to give talk no.

3: love and obedience bring happinessnwt p. 26 4-6 (5 min.

OnTheWayOut

It's an all-volunteer organization. You do not have to be enrolled in the Theocratic Ministry School. I did a hard, rather quick fade, and one of the very first things I did as I resigned as an elder was to say I was not enrolled in the school. Sure, the elders knew, but I doubt a single other member noticed I wasn't giving talks.

To fade out, you have to make occasional noticeable moves. Blow off a few talks and then say you won't be able to give talks.

42

I need help with this one. What do you think I should do?

by Quarterback in

jw
friends

my wife is pleasant and easy to get along with.

she is also helpful to many.

lately, however, there is a jw sister who some are curious about has befreinded my wife.

OnTheWayOut

Pardon me for asking.

If you don't want to say what happened, go take a long walk on a short pier.

35

Ignorant Atheist Talk Show Host Destroyed by Agnostic Dr. Bart Erhman! Topic "Did Jesus and Paul exist?"

by MagicMItchJensen in

i want you to see how fake people are who pretend their open-minded, dr. erhman try's to reason with someone whose mind is totally made up.

the topic is whether there was a man named jesus and paul, the infidel atheist get's owned because he shows his true colors!.

1. when would you tell this fool he stupid or willfully ignoring the facts?.

OnTheWayOut

Notice that he starts with "I've written an entire book on what he [Jesus] said and did, ....(laughter) and for him to say and do anything, he had to exist."

So Bart starts from a biased point of view with some credibility to lose. That's similar to priests and JW's not being willing to entertain the idea that they could be wrong in their world view because they are invested in it.

He then dismisses anyone who writes a book suggesting that Jesus doesn't exist as not a serious scholar, but just someone who wants to make money writing a sensationalist story. Doesn't that sound familiar too?

There are good debaters and Bart is one of them. This host is not bad, but is not up at all on the subject, he is just a guy who hears what people say. If a financial expert disagrees with Steve Harvey about the financial stability of the dollar and an expert on botany disagrees with Ellen Degeneres about how to water cactuses, does that prove that the experts are correct? NO, it proves that they know much more about the subject than the talk show hosts they talk with.

Evidence for Jesus outside of the doctrinal writings is very slim. He may or may not have existed. It is highly possible that he is a composite of others.

Bart admits he has no personal investment in "Paul." That seems to indicate that he admits to his personal investment in Jesus. On the subject of Paul, it is highly more established that he did exist and wrote some of what is credited to him. But reading what experts are sure of, Paul's Jesus is a very mythical figure and Paul does not help to establish a real person in a real timeline. Even if Paul's existence is established, using anything he did or wrote to help establish Jesus would be like using the writings of the miraculous events surrounding Siddhartha Gautama to prove these things happened in the establishing of the Buddha.

35

My Story of Waking Up - in retrospect

by cappytan in

so, many of y'all know bits and pieces of my story of waking up, but i thought it might be nice to have it all in one place.. i was baptized at 11, auxiliary pioneered every summer, regular pioneer at 17, ministerial servant by 19, then went to bethel for a year.. i always had minor doubts from time to time, but nothing serious.

always dismissed doubts and decided to "just have faith.".

after leaving bethel, i was never really firing on all cylinders "spiritually speaking.

OnTheWayOut

Thanks for your story. As far as 607BCE goes, Watchtower concocted a theory and 607 is necessary for their theory to work. I know people could say their theory is wrong, but they pile on to their theory to say that "the Bible indicates" that so many things that are part of their theory are givens. They further belittle any evidence that Watchtower's theory is wrong with quick dismissals, yet they never look at their own theory with a thought of dismissing it. Their way of asserting things makes the average member walk away saying "The Bible must be true" instead of "Watchtower must be true."

JWfacts is awesome. I am glad Tony steered you to real research.

42

I need help with this one. What do you think I should do?

by Quarterback in

jw
friends

my wife is pleasant and easy to get along with.

she is also helpful to many.

lately, however, there is a jw sister who some are curious about has befreinded my wife.

OnTheWayOut

Well......

You got our attention.

What did you do?

Really, we would appreciate knowing what happened.

51

Best Argument for Atheism - In your view.

by LAWHFol in

if crisis of conscience is one of the top watchtower doctrine killers, what is the coc of theism?.

i'd like to read a book, or other material that does the best job logically arguing for atheism.. i've not read any darwin, however it is my assumption that his focus is primarily on evolution, is this correct?

if you were to recommend one book or a few pieces of reading material, which do the best job of defending atheism, what would they be?.

OnTheWayOut

Don't take this the wrong way. There's not a single book that just wins people over to atheism. JW's might believe that Satan inspires some books. It's a path of (for lack of a better term) enlightenment as one observes the comparison between belief and skepticism. For me, being soured by the God I thought I knew was the biggest help toward enlightenment. The Bible is the best book to read to learn about God and how such a maniacal overlord just cannot exist. But some others that help:

"The God Delusion" http://www.amazon.com/The-God-Delusion-Richard-Dawkins/dp/0618918248

Also by Dawkins: "The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True" http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1451675046/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_dp_ss_3?pf_rd_p=1944687562&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0618918248&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0HV1Z9YQ97KJ1KSRYGD6

Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon http://www.amazon.com/Breaking-Spell-Religion-Natural-Phenomenon/dp/0143038338/ref=pd_sim_14_16?ie=UTF8&refRID=0HV1Z9YQ97KJ1KSRYGD6

Really, a great place to start is to follow the links at the bottom of each page of those links for "Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought" and enjoy your own path of enlightenment and choose what you want to read.

42

I need help with this one. What do you think I should do?

by Quarterback in

jw
friends

my wife is pleasant and easy to get along with.

she is also helpful to many.

lately, however, there is a jw sister who some are curious about has befreinded my wife.

OnTheWayOut

You start with your title, "What do you think I should do?" You make a strange statement: "...looks like a Lesbian, sounds like a Lesbian, and lately is starting to feel like a Lesbian."

Then, some give a serious answer in the same kind of tone, and you blast them:

Ignorance: When a fly walks on your shoulders, do you just leave it there and make it feel like home?

James: We are not worried about catching anything, and we are not prudish. We don't want a reason to worry about it.

I know you are seriously asking for help, but YOU DID ASK and you started out with the goofy tone about lesbians, so lighten up.

And seriously, the suggestion to cock block her by sitting in the second seat from the end where your wife will sit on the end is a very good one.