Posts by gumby

27

God could NEVER convince me he exists. Weird...

by AlmostAtheist in

jw
friends

it just dawned on me, and i'm really a little put out over it.

i was reading alanf's comments about vinny and his willingness to sacrifice children if god told him to.

alan suggested any fundamentalist christian should agree he would, and vinny did in fact agree.

gumby

Dave, your logical conclusion as to how you would react explains why many of the bible stories are ...well.....stories.

How do you think Baalam would have REALLY reacted if his damn donkey started verbally arguing with him? He woulda ran like a scared bastard....that's what.

And, how do you suppose Eve would have responded when a damn snake started talking to her? Hell, just the sight of the damn snake woulda made her pee her ~~pants~~....uh....uh....I mean pee all over her skin.

People in Noah's day would have also acted as you would if god spoke to you. Imagine you lived in Noah's day and your out mowing your lawn and some gray bearded man approaches you from out of the bushes and tells you god is going to make it rain and drown everyone who don't listen to him. First, you ask him what rain means since it never did that before. Then when he tells you it's when water falls out of the sky. How do you suppose you'd act? Do you think you'd say......"hey...no shit!!!?..... it's really gonna rain? Where do I sign up to worship this crazy ass god before he drowns me to death"?

The point is, your feelings on this reflects how most people would act had they never had any experience with an unseen diety/creature,etc. People in the bible who were contacted by god acted as if it was an everyday occurence. Not one person was scared as hell.....cept for Adam and that was only because he was in deep doo doo for disobeying god and he knew his arse was grass. So.....don't feel bad if yer ascared of meeting god someday. I get a rapid heartbeat when by dog lets wind.

Gumcoward

63

Predestination?

by Zico in

predestination is something ive been thinking a bit about of late, mainly due to a wt article on the subject printed in the may awake, which i read after skimming through the magazine at the weekend.

i believe the wt reasoning on the subject is that god has the ability to see into the future, but that he chooses not to look into the future, as it would negate our free will, although the recent may article was more a criticism of predestination, and although they didnt assert their own position, what struck me from reading the article, and contemplating the wt article in general is that they seem to focus on time a lot, and its this part where the wt idea of predestination seems to fall down to me.

if god created the universe and everything in it, as a jw would assert, this would also mean he would have had to have created time (which is a product of our universe) and so before god created time, it, obviously, wouldnt have existed, and without time, there cant be a past, present and future.

gumby

Zico,

DD:

'What if that baby wants nothing to do with God?'

Surely the baby has no concept of God? How can something with no concept of God want nothing to do with it?

If I'm not mistaken, I think DD means the choice the baby would make once it got to the age of responsibility....and supposedly god knows that choice while the baby is in the womb. Dawn, The society explains "the founding of the world" to mean AFTER Adam was born......however, I have never really known the proper meaning of this term. Nark? Btw.....who the heck is Dawn? It ain't Sirona is it? Gumby

54

My Spiritual Awakening has turned to........

by AK - Jeff in

general apathy about religion.. i don't know precisely when it happened.

but at some point i began to stop needing anything 'organized' in my life religiously.

not too long ago - as attested to by multiple threads i started here - i was still wishing to replace the ritual of religion at the kingdom hall with some other church.

gumby

Jeff, if you knew just how common your position you have taken is amoung ex-dubs, it would scare you. The journey out of dubdom and into other religions usually comes to a dead end.......if the person is honest with themselves and has researched to a fair degree just what religion is all about. You don't have to lose your spirituality if you lose your religion

Gumby

63

Predestination?

by Zico in

predestination is something ive been thinking a bit about of late, mainly due to a wt article on the subject printed in the may awake, which i read after skimming through the magazine at the weekend.

i believe the wt reasoning on the subject is that god has the ability to see into the future, but that he chooses not to look into the future, as it would negate our free will, although the recent may article was more a criticism of predestination, and although they didnt assert their own position, what struck me from reading the article, and contemplating the wt article in general is that they seem to focus on time a lot, and its this part where the wt idea of predestination seems to fall down to me.

if god created the universe and everything in it, as a jw would assert, this would also mean he would have had to have created time (which is a product of our universe) and so before god created time, it, obviously, wouldnt have existed, and without time, there cant be a past, present and future.

gumby

Ross , even if you DID share your cookies with me....I'd still be able to funtion while you just sat there and babbled on about nuthin.

Gumby, of the I just can't seem to get a buzz class

63

Predestination?

by Zico in

predestination is something ive been thinking a bit about of late, mainly due to a wt article on the subject printed in the may awake, which i read after skimming through the magazine at the weekend.

i believe the wt reasoning on the subject is that god has the ability to see into the future, but that he chooses not to look into the future, as it would negate our free will, although the recent may article was more a criticism of predestination, and although they didnt assert their own position, what struck me from reading the article, and contemplating the wt article in general is that they seem to focus on time a lot, and its this part where the wt idea of predestination seems to fall down to me.

if god created the universe and everything in it, as a jw would assert, this would also mean he would have had to have created time (which is a product of our universe) and so before god created time, it, obviously, wouldnt have existed, and without time, there cant be a past, present and future.

gumby

Paul was of that opinion.

Is that loving?

Sure. We love whom we love, and don't love whom we don't love. Isn't that our choice to make? Would we therefore permit God less freedom than we allow ourselves?

I think the question should be more like......is it just and fair?

It all goes back to god picking out Abraham as his bestest buddy because he was so close to god. In return, god picks his seed to inherit the finest land around, to be called 'his people", to have his son bore through his line, to have his protection, to make a set of laws for them alone, to foreordain his offspring to be the first heavenly heirs. This all seems to be a handsome gift to give one man for walking with god. Even Enoch, Noah, Moses,Job, and the many other faithful men who walked with god didn't get the blessings Abraham got.

Regardless of how Abrahams seed turned out, they STILL got the blessing.

Rewards, it seems, should come to those who deserve them. Noah was spared, job was blessed with material things, Enoch was "taken", Moses had the privledge to free his people and lead them, but Abraham.......his SEED gets the blessing before they were born and then when they WERE born, the majority were losers. WTF?

Sounds like to me it was a clever way for a small ethnic group to pave the way for aspecial status amoung themselves to have above all others. Tricky bastards!

Gumby

63

Predestination?

by Zico in

predestination is something ive been thinking a bit about of late, mainly due to a wt article on the subject printed in the may awake, which i read after skimming through the magazine at the weekend.

i believe the wt reasoning on the subject is that god has the ability to see into the future, but that he chooses not to look into the future, as it would negate our free will, although the recent may article was more a criticism of predestination, and although they didnt assert their own position, what struck me from reading the article, and contemplating the wt article in general is that they seem to focus on time a lot, and its this part where the wt idea of predestination seems to fall down to me.

if god created the universe and everything in it, as a jw would assert, this would also mean he would have had to have created time (which is a product of our universe) and so before god created time, it, obviously, wouldnt have existed, and without time, there cant be a past, present and future.

gumby

Ross, your order is in for the chocolate wax you ordered for your next nutsack shine appointment with me.....oh crap, sorry....wrong thread.

Gumby:Are you sure you aren't again anthropomorphising God in your image of what a "father" should or shouldn't be?

Ross, my little skirt wearin buddy.....you know that my comments are usually based from a biblical perspective which is why I spoke of god in the sense that I did. Biblically speaking, god is supposed to be loving, just, wise,etc. A god such as this would be foolish to leave his plans and goals to chance rather than giving them some planned out thought so that these plans would be without error and difficulties.

Gumby

22

Scientific proofs of God

by MegaDude in

jw
friends

in light of the debate going on, i enjoyed this article in the dallas observer that talks about, among other things, why one of the world's foremost atheists, antony flew, came to believe in god.

believers and atheists alike will find it interesting.. teaser: .

for a quarter-century roy abraham varghese has been assembling god proofs.

gumby

My personal feeling ( which don't mean squat) is that anything material must come from a source.

OK, how do you define "material"? Does the source also have to be material? In this case, god would also have to be "material", which would completely contradict all religious concepts of a "spirit" being, with no end and no beginning

Kid-A,

First off, I'm agnostic and don't have a clue as to what the hell I believe in anymore......sadly.

My point is, the chance that a creator exists seems to be as possible as the chance that none exists, but moreso that one exists at least in my own personal understanding.

As for what "material" is, it would be anything seen or unseen that has substance. Especially in something that is seen such as things in the universe such as hard mass as in rock. As far as the human mind can comprehend.....everything comes from something doesn't it? Even electricity comes from various elements although it's unseen ( at least to humans).

My point is, why be dogmatic that no god/creator exists when there is at least some logical chance that one/many could possibly exist?

Therer is also the idea that we just don't have the answers.....such as how does god come from nothing? How can material mass(as seen by humans) come from nothing?

I guess the bottom line is that nobody should adopt one solid belief when there is the possibility that there might be other alternative answers.

Now, on to the more important issue's in life Kid. Whens the last time you had your nutsack buffed to a high sheen?

Gumshinner

63

Predestination?

by Zico in

predestination is something ive been thinking a bit about of late, mainly due to a wt article on the subject printed in the may awake, which i read after skimming through the magazine at the weekend.

i believe the wt reasoning on the subject is that god has the ability to see into the future, but that he chooses not to look into the future, as it would negate our free will, although the recent may article was more a criticism of predestination, and although they didnt assert their own position, what struck me from reading the article, and contemplating the wt article in general is that they seem to focus on time a lot, and its this part where the wt idea of predestination seems to fall down to me.

if god created the universe and everything in it, as a jw would assert, this would also mean he would have had to have created time (which is a product of our universe) and so before god created time, it, obviously, wouldnt have existed, and without time, there cant be a past, present and future.

gumby

he would actually be at every point that’s ever happened, and will happen. If not, he’s being restricted by his own creation, and is therefore not all powerful.

I don't see how restricting yourself would take away from your power.

To me, the Watchtower stance on this is the only solution to not making god out to be a sadistic mad scientist. If god was to look into the future of his plans and was to see the outcome, then he was to proceed with his plans knowing full well the outcome would mean pain and suffering for his planned creation of man and beast, then he is a bad planner, unwise, unloving, and, well,........ pure idiot.

However, for him to "choose not to know" the outcome of his earthly plans is also pure idiocy. What creator or designer would come up with a plan and leave that plan to chance rather than inform themselves of any snags in their plan....if it was in their power to do so? If you were going to build say......a time machine, and you had the power to KNOW that perhaps people would vanish somewhere in time and you could not retrieve them back.....would you still build the machine?

A loving creator would not if it meant possible harm to any who would suffer and so, why would an all powerful loving god come up with a plan of an earthly paradise for a people made after his image to live forever in happiness praising their creator, when there was a chance that billions of them would suffer in any manner? Either way, god loses as a loving father it seems to me. I could be wrong

Gumby

25

Sexual Morality In The Old Testament Differs From That In The New Testament

by AlanF in

conservative christians like the jehovah's witnesses often claim that, like the new testament, the old testament forbids all sexual relations outside marriage, including relations between unmarried people.

that is not quite true.

to see that patriarchal and israelite culture adhered to a different standard, we must first understand just how the old testament treats marriage, sexuality and related items.. the old testament view of women as property.

gumby

Alan, another EXCELLENT essay to add to your list of the many awesone essays you have written on JW/biblical material. Thanks for your hard work as this was an interesting read and a read that helps explain many questions many have regarding WHY the bible is so sexist, why women are treated as less equal to men, why JW and christian women get so pissed off at the role they are given as christians, etc.

Zack,

The WTS always says that God "permitted" polygamy and other sexual practices inconsistent with today's sexual contexts because of his regard for the "customs of their times."

It's also because of Jesus's own words in saying Moses allowed a certificate for divorce...."because of your 'hardheartedness" when actually it was because of gods own law.

Perhaps this will explain to many just WHY Jehovah permitted "concubines". If a woman could be legally 'bought' under law, then "heardheartedness" was NOT the issue but rather the norm.

I have a question. Could a wife "seperate" from her husband under the law and if so, what were the requirements for one? If there wasn't a law permitting one, then did the new "law" permit one in view of Pauls words regarding a woman leaving her husband?

Gumby

22

Scientific proofs of God

by MegaDude in

jw
friends

in light of the debate going on, i enjoyed this article in the dallas observer that talks about, among other things, why one of the world's foremost atheists, antony flew, came to believe in god.

believers and atheists alike will find it interesting.. teaser: .

for a quarter-century roy abraham varghese has been assembling god proofs.

gumby

Kid-A

> This statement is just silly: "for anything to exist at all, something must have always existed"
>OK, PROVE IT. What does he base this assumption on? How does he know, with complete, unerring certainty that "something" cannot arise from what we consider "nothing"?

I agree that the statement sounds as if his idea is fact, but how do you know it isn't correct?

Does anyone have proof that something can exist WITHOUT something BEFORE it? If so, what....and can it be proved?

My personal feeling ( which don't mean squat) is that anything material must come from a source. To say the universe has always existed with all it's material matter and having absolutely NOTHING before it is proposterous. Hey, did I spell proposterous right?

Gumby