i am not the oldest but have 3 years here!
restrangled.. how about you?.
I think it's two years since I came here, but I won't know for sure until after I've posted this and seen it below my avatar(!).
I don't post anymore (except for this) and don't lurk either; just came by to see if there was anything new, and because of the assemblies they're having at the moment.
Hope you're all well. Good luck in your continued journeys, free from this... stuff.
this stuff just makes me laugh.
where are they getting this stuff from???
isaiah spoke to the lord, and the lord brought the shadow ten degrees backward!
"Thou shalt not bear false witness (lie)" ?
'Meh - not so important. Spread it to everyone you know!!'
References: Joshua 10:8 and 12,13 and 2 Kings 20:9-11.
LOL - 'references'.
I guess we didn't need the NASA references as long as we had the biblical ones.
as jws we were no doubt staunch creationists.
but how do you feel now??
do you still opt for creation or do you now feel evolution offers the right answer.
I used to be a creationist (obviously, as a JW), and used to sometimes argue the creationist side on internet forums.
I think religious people expect an all encompassing, dogmatically True answer from science - or, nothing at all. Because that's how it works in religion. Without the evidence. Just like some JWs who think about leaving try to find some other religion that have all the answers, because that's what they're used to. But science isn't complete, and will never be; there's always something new to discover. And that's not a bad thing. That said, there are quite a few things we can say with some confidence that we know about the universe. Like the universe not being somewhere between 6000 and 50.000 years old. Or that humans and animals have only existed within a similar time frame. The alternative is that we are deliberately deceived by some deity, but at least the biblical God supposedly "cannot lie".
It's important IMO not to make it an 'either or' question, because evolution theory simply ties together all the facts about life we see in nature. It's up to religious people to update their "map" to fit with the new information about the "terrain". Evolution theory is not "an atheist belief".
Evolution theory does not start with the beginning of life from lifeless matter, and definitely not with anything else not related to biology (like the big bang, planet formation etc.); it describes changes seen in the inherited traits of populations of living beings over (a huge amount of) time.
Evolution theory doesn't have all the answers (but more than many think), but overall it is what best describes what we find in nature. It is still under development as we find more facts, and DNA research and more fossil finds add to the stack of facts that point in evolution's direction.
I'm fresh out of reading Dawkins and Behe... and Behe makes some points that seem irrefutable about ID... while Dawkins just bashes everyone who doesn't agree with Darwinism...
Behe is a "poster child" for ID, and is also often used by other creationists, but he does in fact accept common descent; that we share a common ancestor with apes. As for his points (irreducible complexity for instance), I have seen most of them been refuted or at least explained by other scientists. Richard Dawkins has become more of a "poster child" for atheism, but to me he's more important as a biologist. I don't agree with everything he says in his books, but I do overall.
jws say they are clean and pure and undefiled and not like the world but in reality there are those that do very evil things and they either have fallen through the cracks, have gotten disciplined or disfellowshipped.. we realize that just because a person says they are a christian, it doesn't mean they will always act like one.. regarding pedophiles, do you believe that jws have a huge problem involving an infestation of pedos?
.
I never noticed or heard of anything of the sort while I was in (most of my life).
In general, I think it becomes a problem for groups like the JWs because sex is a big no-no issue in the first place (apart from a few embarrassing talks telling you what not to do), and 'spiritually strong' people aren't supposed to have sexual urges(!). So elders are viewed by many in a naive way as being asexual; someone you can turn to alone with no bad things possibly happening because of it. Same with clergy in other churches. They're supposed to be strong, solid, non-sexual guides into your spirituality. Now, pedophilia is different, because then we're talking kids being molested, but I think that atmosphere where sex in general is very hush-hush and elders and others are very respected and not thought capable of such acts makes it easier for the few who are molesters. That, plus what's been mentioned about the lack of reporting, and the fact that if people act 'repentant', you can't really do anything but reinstate them in the congregation. I think the thought process is that Jehovah will remove them from the congregation if they aren't actually, really repentant. Yeah, that's gonna happen...
I don't think they are any worse than others, but I think most Witnesses are a little incredulous about this whole thing, because "nothing like that can ever happen among us!", you know... At least that's how it used to be.
I remember being naive like that, at least. Luckily and thankfully, I never came across a molester. I think they are less naive now, and steps are (hopefully) being taken to deal with it. I don't think the GB are slobbering pedophiles wringing their hands with glee at every pedophile case... I do think they'd like to do something about it. If they're aware of it happening(!), but they should by now.
http://www.pbase.com/paulthedane/noahs_ark.
somebody build a replica of the ark...thought it was interesting sorta.... morph.
I don't really see the point if they're not going to build it to 1:1 scale and test it. Although by all means, it's good craftmansship etc.
The WBTS seem to think it was a box shape though; not sure who'd be more correct based on the text.
As for large wood boats, the largest recorded (according to Wikipedia) is the Wyoming, at approx. the same length (450 ft.) as the ark supposedly was. And the Wyoming "had a tendency to flex in heavy seas, causing the long planks to twist and buckle. [25] This allowed sea water into the hold, which had to be pumped out. [26] ".http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world's_largest_wooden_ships
That said, God could have secured the ark with his magic powers. But heck, then why build an ark at all? A force field around every creature that was supposed to live would do it. But heck, why then use water and drown everything in the first place? Direct eradication would be faster, more efficient, more accurate, and less gruesome to those killed.
If it were true history.
a friend of mine confronted me with this :.
adam : a perfect man - with a free-will - disobeyed god, was punished with .
death, no appeal, no attenuating circumstances and the sentence.
(sorry MacHislopp; this goes a little off-topic - my fault)
Then it was commented on that even if you made it though Armageddon, the thousand year rein, then the short time of test after the thousand years, you would still die if you disobeyed god. And it would be that time period when these further questions would be answered.
Well, the thousand year reign is supposed to be Jesus' Kingdom, isn't it? When He and the 144.000 rule the earth? So that whole period is out for this purpose. Secondly, if I remember my Revelation Climax book correctly, Jesus then gives it over to Jehovah, who rules from then on. Any period in between would have to be tiny compared to the - allegedly - ~6000 years we've had "under Satan".
/off topic
a friend of mine confronted me with this :.
adam : a perfect man - with a free-will - disobeyed god, was punished with .
death, no appeal, no attenuating circumstances and the sentence.
Yeah. I too brushed on this subject in a post not long ago, following a comment from someone who had similar thoughts: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/161360/2975302/post.ashx#2975302
But Adam after all lived to be over 900 years old. So in that sense, we are the ones who got the 'rawest deal', since all we did was to be born into this mess already created before us.
Other than that, I don't have an elaboration.
Wait, that's not entirely true; I remember I was able to stump a few Witnesses when I said that "We believe that Satan is the ruler of this world and is giving us hardships and making things difficult, together with his demons. At the same time, we believe that mankind was given a long period of time in order to prove if we could govern ourselves or not. But - with Satan and his demons always being there and negatively influencing matters, how can it be said that mankind really got the chance to show that they could govern themselves? Wouldn't mankind be able to say: 'If we were given a chance without all the hardship caused by Satan and his demons, we could have done it' ?".
-Mind you, I talk about this the same way I would talk about Greek or Norse mythology.
Or Harry Potter.
[edited] Sorry I went a little off-topic there for a minute. Allergy meds make.. brain.. work.. not good. [/edited]
why the hell does it matter, and why do people make an issue out of it?
Jesus seems to reflect the wishes of those who believe in him. He morphs into whatever they want him to be. Kinda like God in general, I guess.
part 1. http://youtube.com/watch?v=5ch9edugtjk.
part 2. http://youtube.com/watch?v=uu0br4yb400.
part 3. http://youtube.com/watch?v=odczzi0c5rw.
Sorry, I can't bring myself to watch it all.
Is this the first time they have a drama not based on the Bible? For the 'biblical times' part, I mean? This is the first time I've seen them do that. So not while I was in at least.
Wow - it's so see-thru. Why bother making up the part from biblical times? The only reason is to put more weight to the arguments with their target audience, but when the drama isn't from the bible, and just something taken out of thin air that might have happened back then as some elders see it, what's the point? Where's the added weight? Only in the minds of easily impressionable Witnesses. I mean, think people in the audience, think!
And the way they lay out the arguments too. "Ooh, someone back then were probably critical of their leaders and/or the preaching work and lack of humanitarian work etc. too, but they were wrong!"
Well, good thing about it is it must be a growing problem, otherwise they wouldn't address it.
where did early christians worship during nt times?.
was it only in homes?
or did they have dedicated buildings?
It was... what's the word... oh yes, a hyperbole. And a bit of fun.
Sorry, carry on.
