Posts by funkyderek

155

Evolution or creation?

by haujobbz in

jw
friends

.

if i had to answer this i suppose i would say im not sure which one i believe, i have always wondered why the universe is so huge and always wondered what its role is and how it affects us.. im always fascinated when i look up at the sky and think to myself i feel so small in such a huge universe a sought of cold isolated feeling is what i experience and then i think, i wonder why this planet came to support life after all it was supposedly all happened by chance.. dont get me wrong im no scientist but i think i need more convincing regarding evolution.. can anyone help regarding these questions

funkyderek

There's probably no point in this, but what the hell...

If we evolved from apes, then why are there so many UNFIT TO SURVIVE apes still surviving if we are the species that was supposedly the fittest?

It is a common misconception that evolutionists teach that we are descended from modern apes. Nobody believes that, it was never part of Darwinism or any related theory. The idea is obviously ridiculous. By definition, modern apes are just as far removed from our common ancestor as humans are. They are not "unfit to survive". They are very well adapted for their own environment and very good at surviving. Humans are much better at surviving in other environments. If the two species were competing for the same resources in the same environment, then only one would survive, the "fitter" one (e.g. the introduction of the grey squirrel in the UK and Ireland has made native red squirrels an endangered species). A change of environment appears to be a strong driving force for speciation, and this seems to be what happened in the case of humans. Apes are far better at surviving in a forest/jungle environment than humans. This does not make them "fitter" than humans. Remove them from their favoured environment and they will struggle to survive. The species will either adapt or become extinct.

It is only through ignorance (deliberate or otherwise) that people can live in Western society in the 21st century and not acknowledge the fact of evolution. The statements made by some in this post reveal an almost total ignorance of the facts and the theories of evolution. At least learn what your opponents believe before dismissing it.

27

The Truth About Life Is Stranger Than Fiction

by Zechariah in

jw
friends

- my years of deep meditations on life and its many mysteries have revealed to me that the strangest concepts about life are the truest.. - nothing in life is totally coincidental.

- history repeats itself.

- all things physical are the hardware.

funkyderek

You don't know how good I feel you and Funkyderek are giving me this break.

I'm not going to give you a break, Zechariah. While you continue to post nonsense, I'm going to continue telling you it's nonsense.

27

The Truth About Life Is Stranger Than Fiction

by Zechariah in

jw
friends

- my years of deep meditations on life and its many mysteries have revealed to me that the strangest concepts about life are the truest.. - nothing in life is totally coincidental.

- history repeats itself.

- all things physical are the hardware.

funkyderek

It shows that a large part of your reason for believing in the bible god is fear.

Interestingly, Zechariah projects this fear on to unbelievers, asserting that the reason they don't believe in his god is fear of punishment or disappointment. In actual fact, it seems to be his own fear of "hopelessness" that gives him his "willingness to believe" which is apparently all he needs.

You are distorting what I said. Never did I say I believe it was Gods intent or responsibilty to prevent the destruction at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That is obvous as he allowed it to happen. I said God did then as he most always does limits the scope of disasters. This is never an obligation but is always a act of love.

This is a rather unusual attempt at a rebuttal to the argument from evil. Rather than speculating on God's reasons for allowing atrocities, Zechariah claims that they're not God's responsibility, and that in actual fact, God did do something. The disaster, apparently, would have been much worse had God not intervened, albeit in a limited way. Of course, this is completely unprovable and a rather pointless claim, making his god appear to be either severely limited or largely unconcerned with human affairs. But we're supposed to be grateful for such arbitrary tinkering. Holding this belief allows Zechariah to see his god in action at times when most people's faith is severely tested. This, coupled with his disdain for hard evidence, allows Zechariah to never have to face the possibility that his belief system is wrong. We can see the results of that from his posts.

17

Bash pomegranate here...

by pomegranate in

jw
friends

go ahead, have some fun!!

edited by - pomegranate on 8 october 2002 7:32:46.

funkyderek

Go ahead, have some fun!!

It's more fun to bash your shoddy arguments. Try not to take it personally

18

Ye of Little Faith

by Zechariah in

jw
friends

i am pained by the lack of faith by people on the board recently both in god and in general.. it is obvious that unbelievers in god would have such lack of faith.

but it is not confined to them alone but to others that though believers in god have little trust and confidence in him.. these of little faith constantly cry for proof and evidence both of god existence or in the case of bill bowens letter to the wts proof of govering body members guilt as child molesters.

they haven't the ability to believe or have faith without physical evidence.. one of my main mentors is tv minister fred price which i watch every sunday morning.

funkyderek

Zechariah said:

May God open your eyes so you can see there is more with us than there is with them. (angelic hoards).

pomegranate said:

One cannot have faith unless God gives it out.

It's interesting that both these apologists berate people for refusing to believe in anything without good reason, yet say that God is responsible for whether people believe or not. If God wanted me to believe, then apparently he would "open my eyes" and give me faith. The fact that he has not done so suggests that either he wants me not to believe (and who am I to argue with the Almighty?) or that he doesn't exist. Either way, I'm quite happy to align myself with Thomas.

64

The "rocks" are not "crying out&...

by gumby in

hey folks!

in another thread i was chatting with dave (sevenof 6) and he brought out an awesome point.

i said my problem with the bible was if it contains life for people.....then all those without the word and christ are doomed.

funkyderek

True, but that is a point. It is a system. It isnt something that just happened all by itself. Otherwise we would not have had the Salem witch-hunts. Our founding forefathers were around then were they not?

I agree, but I think it's a system that had to be discovered rather than invented. I believe that the use of reason leads inevitably to such a system.

As we type there is a woman awaiting death by being buried up to her neck in sand and then stoned to death for having sex out of wedlock. The sentence it set to take place upon the weaning of her child.

And that is wrong, regardless of what any human government or god may think. Her right to life is being violated, and she's very unfortunate to live in a country where that isn't recognised. The system is ultimately unworkable because it forces people to live a miserable, subhuman existence.

64

The "rocks" are not "crying out&...

by gumby in

hey folks!

in another thread i was chatting with dave (sevenof 6) and he brought out an awesome point.

i said my problem with the bible was if it contains life for people.....then all those without the word and christ are doomed.

funkyderek

Ok funky, How the hell did rights get involved? Other then it's another thing "invented" by people

That's a damn good question, plmkrzy and philosophers have been musing over it for centuries? Are there "natural rights" or a rights an artificial and arbitrary concept? I tend to agree with the Founding Fathers of the USA that certain rights are "self-evident" and "unalienable".

The only way that humans can function as humans is if they have the ability to live free from oppression, with the ability to fulfill their potential as humans (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness). Otherwise, civilisation, progress, art and science - the things that make us what we are - become impossible.

I can understand how this view of rights is somewhat questionable, but I think it is the only workable system. I don't see how the existence of a god would alter that unless you believe that "might is right".

213

Governing Body Summoned For Jud Hearing

by silentlambs in

jw
friends

service committee .

25 columbia heights

brooklyn, ny 11201 .

funkyderek

To me, this letter appears petty and pointless. I'm not sure what it's supposed to achieve and it could very easily backfire. Publicly accusing five members of the GB of being child molesters without some evidence seems like a remarkably stupid and dangerous thing to do. It can only damage the cause of the abuse victims if Bill is seen to be making wild accusatiaons against Watchtower leaders. He could very easily appear to be obsessive, resentful and vindictive, or just another offbeat conspiracy theorist with his own agenda.

9

Maybe this is the TRUTH!?

by Mr Bean in

i've found the most important source of information about... afterlife.

http://www.victorzammit.com/index.html

http://www.victorzammit.com/articles/silverbirch.html

funkyderek

How is this different from any of a thousand other wacky cults? I know, I know, it's not a religion. A lot of them say that, though.

58

Amazon.com a Pedophile's Paradise ???

by Xandria in

jw
friends

this is what was found on amazon.com they sell this book freely and just read the ill reviews!!!!

this book openly invites pedophiles!

boycott amazon and make them take responsiblity for offering this book for sale.

funkyderek

Here's my 2 cents about Rem and FunkyDerek's replies. It's too bad it can't be discussed without the incendiary polemics you put in your posts. You seem to deliberately miss the point and ridicule and belittle any opposing viewpoints. I will ignore your provocations.

I don't think I missed the point at all. If I did it certainly wasn't deliberate. My point was that all bookstores stock some books which contain offensive ideas. I mentioned some that are well-known, widely available and are even required reading in many college courses. It would be absurd to ban the book in question without banning some or all of the ones I mentioned (and many more). I think Amazon is taking the correct course of action by not passing judgment on the quality of the books it sells. That's for the consumer to do.

Unfortunately, any mention of paedophilia seems to bring out angry poorly-informed mobs. The book may promote illegal activity but, from what I understand, argues that such activity should not be illegal. The argument may be flawed, and indeed offensive but attempting to silence it does nothing to disprove it.

Regarding the tone of my post, yes it was provocative, maybe even "incendiary". And yes, I was even ridiculing a viewpoint. Why? Because I find that viewpoint to be ridiculous. I attempted to demonstrate how ridiculous it was by following the argument to its conclusion and demonstrating the absurdity of that conclusion. I hoped to provoke a response other than a repitition of the claim that Amazon is promoting paedophilia. It doesn't seem to have worked.