The memorial talks are an incoherent, cold, prosaic shambles because the JW's doctrine on the subject is an incoherent shambles.
A company shareholders meeting with the Board is more exciting and emotionally satisfying than the Memorial talk.
perhaps i'm just getting older and crankier, but it really seems to me that the jw faith is deteriorating at an accelerated rate.. case in point: this year's memorial talk.
it was one of the most incoherent messes i've ever heard.
(and i've heard a lot of memorial talks over the last 50 years....).
The memorial talks are an incoherent, cold, prosaic shambles because the JW's doctrine on the subject is an incoherent shambles.
A company shareholders meeting with the Board is more exciting and emotionally satisfying than the Memorial talk.
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
Wrong, EdenOne. You've just done it again: presupposed the existence of a 'something'.
In your example, there was 'a bit' that just hadn't been found yet. It was missing but you found it, as you said. To say the "bit that was missing...had never been there before", is absurd.
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
Agnosticism has different meanings but the 'formal' one you've given is not at all the popular understanding most people mean who describe themselves as agnostic.
This is an excellent thread to demonstrate a form of fallacious reasoning known as 'persuasive definitions' or the 'Definist' fallacy.
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
You've presupposed the existence of 'something' in your definition EdenOne. Contradicting yourself.
You're arguing for agnosticism but going about it the wrong way. Agnosticism in its simple modern sense just says there is not enough evidence to know either way.
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
Try agreeing on the definition of 'absent' first.
All standard dictionary definitions of 'absent' presuppose there is something that first exists to be absent.
... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.
it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.
they take pride in obedience.
"Additionally, the entire discussion of blood takes place in the context of killing, either animals or humans. This is an important point because a blood transfusion does not involve killing."
BINGO. This is a knock-down argument against the JW blood policy. The whole point of the scriptural prohibition is that the blood is merely a symbol of the soul that is lost. By observing the prohibition, the taker of the life is giving recognition that only YHWH is the source of life.
there seem to be many prerequisites for life as we know it.. to name a few: order, function, compatibility, availability, sustainability, intelligence, consciousness, intuition and so on.. focusing on only one, namely order.. what are the chances of order arising spontaneously, by chance, with no creator/designer?.
i have often pondered this and recently came across a mathematical summary of the big picture:.
if every particle in the known physical universe (10^80 particles), participated in one trillion interactions (10^12 interactions) per second, for the entire 30 billion years of the universe's existence (10^18 seconds), then we would by now have covered only 10^110 permutations.. if you had only 100 components in a container, what are the chances that a blindfolded person could lay them out in order on a table?.
Define ORDER.
Do you see order in these images?
Spiral galaxy:
snowflake:
Kaleidoscope image:
it was a year ago we visited the kh at last.
yesterday evening when went to the memorial for family reasons.. the memorial talk was very slick.. there was no mention about the early christian times, no mention about the apostles and disciples.. it was a present day talk only.. the ties to the foundation of christianity were totally absent.
.
My last ever memorial, a few years ago now, felt exactly the same as Data-Dog describes above. Cold, corporate, lacking any real warmth or spirituality. It felt perfunctory, ceremonial.
Even on the most important night in the Christian calendar, the anniversary of Christ's death, the Watchtower simply cannot bear to give Jesus any real honor or glory. Most of the memorial talk is a brief and clumsy apology to their queer 144k doctrine rather than a stirring message about the meaning of Christ's death.
jehovah god commanded the angels to worship the son, but he himself did not bow down to his son.
jan 1, 1953 wt, page 23. when did this change (the nwt was already published).
Interestingly, this article on the carm website says the 1970 edition of the NWT still used 'worship' instead of 'obeisance' at Hebrews 1:6