Posts by Gopher

30

Married my partner...

by writerpen in

jw
friends

we just got back from san francisco where we were married last week.

maybe some day gay couples won't have to travel 1,000 miles to get married, and their commitment of love will be recognized by society.

there will be no need to use code - my friend, my roommate - at the office, with neighbors, or with family when speaking about the person with whom you live your life.

Gopher

after the "I do" was said, it just felt right

Well, good for the two of you, and congratulations!

10

SUNDAY TIMES MAGAZINE ARTICLE ON EX-JW

by badboy in

jw
friends

it says her ather died in 1971,the hospital got a court order to give him a blood transusion,but he died any way.. she came from kent..

Gopher

Good for Lisa, how she's moved on and is actually helping others now.

Here's an enthusiastic BTTT !!

10

SUNDAY TIMES MAGAZINE ARTICLE ON EX-JW

by badboy in

jw
friends

it says her ather died in 1971,the hospital got a court order to give him a blood transusion,but he died any way.. she came from kent..

"NO EVIDENCE" for God, and creation? Maybe there is . .

by hooberus in

atheists (however one defines the term) frequently use the term "no evidence" in relation to the existence of god, any type of creation, (especially genesis creation and flood), or most any other theistic claim.

they almost always however claim that their beliefs are "backed by evidence" ; "overwhelming evidence" etc, etc, etc, etc, repeat, etc, repeat, etc.. (their beliefs generally tend to include whatever is necessary to believe in to intellectually "explain" the world without needing god).

is there really "no evidence" for god, and creation?

Gopher

Look around you, the incredibly complex material world is evidence.

Here is why this argument doesn't convince me (being the atheist that I am). If there were to be a Creator, it would seem logical that any such Creator is greater than his/her/its creation. i.e., they'd be more complex than what they created. I think it's reasonable to assume that you cannot create something more intricate than you yourself are.

So where did this infinitely complex creator come from? Did he/she/it just pop out of a vacuum?

The only answer that creationists seem to give is a dogmatic one -- that the creator was already there, so next question please.

Once anyone can explain how a creator appeared out of a vacuum, then we'll next address how evolutionists believe the less-complex universe developed.

9

Mr. & Mrs Kabong....26 years today!!!

by El Kabong in

jw
friends

today, mr & mrs kabong celebrate 26 years of marriage.

this is the marriage the elders in our congregation said that we wouldn't last 6 months.

thank god, we already knew they were full of sh*t. .

Gopher

Congrats to you & Mrs. Kabong. Glad you didn't listen to the heads-up-their-kiester elders!!

64

"NO EVIDENCE" for God, and creation? Maybe there is . .

by hooberus in

atheists (however one defines the term) frequently use the term "no evidence" in relation to the existence of god, any type of creation, (especially genesis creation and flood), or most any other theistic claim.

they almost always however claim that their beliefs are "backed by evidence" ; "overwhelming evidence" etc, etc, etc, etc, repeat, etc, repeat, etc.. (their beliefs generally tend to include whatever is necessary to believe in to intellectually "explain" the world without needing god).

is there really "no evidence" for god, and creation?

Gopher

But you said this:

They almost always however claim that their beliefs are "backed by evidence" ; "overwhelming evidence" etc, etc, etc, etc, repeat, etc, repeat, etc..

The italics for "their beliefs" were added by you. The word "atheism" is divided into "a-", meaning "without", and "theism" - meaning "belief in God". Atheism is not used to describe beliefs, but lack of a belief in any deity.

I would go on to further say that evolutionary science is not about 'beliefs', but rather about a scientific conclusion about how life developed, based on all available evidence.

You may argue this is a "belief", but I'm here to say that the main ones with beliefs here are the "believers", i.e., the creationists and the theists.

As an atheist, I will not simply believe anything until I see enough evidence that it is factual. At that point no 'faith' or 'belief' is necessary. It's a fact !!

However, If there's not enough evidence pro or con, I'll own up to the fact that I simply DO NOT KNOW.

I don't think this stance is dogmatic at all.

4

Trojans trounce the Buckeyes

by DanTheMan in

i've been in denial for a couple of years, but it's finally coming home to roost...ohio state is overrated and they can't compete with the elite college teams.

sucks.

Gopher

USC 35, OSU 3? On behalf of all Big Ten fans, "Ouch" !!!

With Michigan and OSU both being humbled this weekend, it looks like the continuation of the demise of Big 10 football. Will Penn State or Wisconsin please step up and make the Big 10 at least look respectable?

I think the SEC, Pac-10 and Big 12 are where it's at in big-time college football now.

64

"NO EVIDENCE" for God, and creation? Maybe there is . .

by hooberus in

atheists (however one defines the term) frequently use the term "no evidence" in relation to the existence of god, any type of creation, (especially genesis creation and flood), or most any other theistic claim.

they almost always however claim that their beliefs are "backed by evidence" ; "overwhelming evidence" etc, etc, etc, etc, repeat, etc, repeat, etc.. (their beliefs generally tend to include whatever is necessary to believe in to intellectually "explain" the world without needing god).

is there really "no evidence" for god, and creation?

Gopher

Atheists (however one defines the term) frequently use the term "no evidence" in relation to the existence of God, any type of creation, (especially Genesis creation and flood), or most any other theistic claim. They almost always however claim that their beliefs are "backed by evidence" ; "overwhelming evidence" etc, etc, etc, etc, repeat, etc, repeat, etc.. (Their beliefs generally tend to include whatever is necessary to believe in to intellectually "explain" the world without needing God)

You need more clarity than this. I'll define the term atheist for you, since I am one -- I should know. An atheist is simply someone who, for whatever reason, doesn't see enough evidence to say that there certainly is a god. In other words, an atheist is a non-believer.

An atheist doesn't need "evidence" for the lack of a god. Do you need "evidence" for the lack of a Santa Claus, or for the lack of an almighty pink unicorn?

You don't look for "evidence" to prove the non-existence of something. The burden of proof is one the one asserting that an invisible being (deity, Santa Claus, almighty pink unicorn) exists.

You're confusing atheism with the acceptance of the role of evolution in earth's history. While sometimes both thoughts are held in the same mind, they are certainly not equal. I've already defined atheism. Evolution is basically the development of new forms of life over eons of time.

Now there does exist tons of proof for evolution - in the fossil record, for example. Those who accept evolution don't think it's a "belief", but rather the rational scientific conclusion about how life developed over time.

"Belief" is in things that have no proof or no scientific basis. "Accepting" evolution is not "belief", in fact anyone who's serious about the subject demands proof rather than just connecting the dots and filling in any gaps by insisting that one unproven idea or another is true.

3

Malawi Party Card?

by Marvin Shilmer in

jw
friends

has anyone here ever in their lives actually viewed one of the party cards jws in malawi were so harshly persecuted for refusing to purchase?

i am talking about the whole card, not just the images reproduced in the 1975 awake.. even better, does anyone here have access to one of these party cards or images of one that they can share?.

this could be crucial to some rather important research currently underway.

Gopher

I could not find any such images on the web. I even searched through the official website of the Malawi government: http://www.malawi.gov.mw/ and still had no luck.

Best wishes on your project.

15

Blondie's Comments You Will Not Hear at the 09-14-08 WT Study (CHALLENGES)

by blondie in

jw
friends

comments you will not hear at the 09-14-08 wt study (july 15, 2008, pages 7-11) (challenges).

review comments will be in red.

wt material from today's wt will be in black.

Gopher

Hi Blondie. So you've missed the field ministry now for what, 350 weekends in a row? That's time you got back for yourself from the WT Society.

Interesting that they start out the article with an Old Testament prophet, in order to try to prove that Christians must preach! Jeremiah was known for his complaining, harsh style. And THAT"s the example Witnesses are to follow? They're supposed to go out and irritate people like that? In that, they do quite well.

Jeremiah's style led to the creation of the word jeremiad, which is defined as a prolonged lamentation or complaint ; also: a cautionary or angry harangue.

I'm SOOO glad I don't have to go out and complain or harangue people in public any more!

Then....they talk about 'mustering up boldness'. The message in the WTS literature is so uninspiring, it makes it hard to go out with any enthusiasm and tell it. I mean, if they had a really positive message, it might be partway enjoyable to go spread it. It does take boldness to go out and tell people their religion is wrong.

If the 'witnessing work' that JW's do were more about really helping people and less about their own salvation as JW's, then maybe there'd be more enthusiasm for it.