Posts by hooberus

70

WHERE DID ALL THAT WATER GO?

by MYOHNSEPH in

as i recall, "the society" at one time taught the flood waters of noah's day came from an immense canopy of water, which formed sometime during creation and hovered above the earth until it all broke loose in the flood.

o.k., cool.

but does anyone know of an explanation of where it all went afterwards?

hooberus

"The geological column can not very well be based on evolutionary assumptions if it was developed before the theory of evolution, now could it?"

I never said that the geologic column was constructed based on evolutionary assumptions. My comments refered to the fact that most historical geology is interpreted based on evolutionary assumptions as the text books will admit. but while we are on the subject here is some information from Steven Austin Phd on the origin of the column:

Misconception No. 1. The geologic column was constructed by geologists who, because of the weight of the evidence that they had found, were convinced of the truth of uniformitarian theory and organic evolution.

It may sound surprising, but the standard geologic column was devised before 1860 by catastrophists who were creationists. 1 Adam Sedgewick, Roderick Murchison, William Coneybeare, and others affirmed that the earth was formed largely by catastrophic processes, and that the earth and life were created. These men stood for careful empirical science and were not compelled to believe evolutionary speculation or side with uniformitarian theory. Although most would be called "progressive creationists" in today's terminology, they would not be pleased to see all the evolutionary baggage that has been loaded onto their classification of strata.

Misconception No. 2. Geologists composed the geologic column by assembling the "periods" and "eras" which they had recognized.

The geologic column was not composed by assembling a chronology of "periods," "eras" or other supposed measures of time, but by superposition of objectively defined sequences of sedimentary strata called "systems." The "periods" and "eras" were later appended to the system nomenclature of the "geologic Column" transforming it into a "geologic time scale."

Edited by - hooberus on 27 January 2003 23:0:6

70

WHERE DID ALL THAT WATER GO?

by MYOHNSEPH in

as i recall, "the society" at one time taught the flood waters of noah's day came from an immense canopy of water, which formed sometime during creation and hovered above the earth until it all broke loose in the flood.

o.k., cool.

but does anyone know of an explanation of where it all went afterwards?

hooberus

People who base their interpretations of geology on the Bible are accused here of basing their beleifs on myths and not on facts. Yet I would contend that those who base their interpretations of geology on the assumption of organic macro-evolution are themselves basing their beliefs on myth.

70

WHERE DID ALL THAT WATER GO?

by MYOHNSEPH in

as i recall, "the society" at one time taught the flood waters of noah's day came from an immense canopy of water, which formed sometime during creation and hovered above the earth until it all broke loose in the flood.

o.k., cool.

but does anyone know of an explanation of where it all went afterwards?

hooberus

Do you base your interpretations of historical geology on a theory that teaches:

parcticles were transformed into self-replicating living cells with all their enzymes, proteins, coded DNA, and RNA.
And then these became multi-cell creatures, then invertebrates
then the invertebrates turnes into fish
which turned into amphibians,
then the amphibians turned into reptiles,
Then the reptiles turned into mammals
some of these little mammals like opossums later through a long process turned into people
but some of them went back out into the sea and turned into whales

Do you then point fingers at those who don't believe this and say that they believe in myths?????

70

WHERE DID ALL THAT WATER GO?

by MYOHNSEPH in

as i recall, "the society" at one time taught the flood waters of noah's day came from an immense canopy of water, which formed sometime during creation and hovered above the earth until it all broke loose in the flood.

o.k., cool.

but does anyone know of an explanation of where it all went afterwards?

hooberus

Alan F said:

"Hooberus, as usual your comments well illustrate the great divide between thinking human beings and Fundamentalists, particularly Fundies of the YEC persuasion. We were discussing the lack of evidence for Noah's Flood, and when challenged with some of this evidence all you could manage was the standard fallback -- beating up on "evolution" -- a concept you don't even understand. All you know is what Fundie "lights" have told you, which is about as representative of the facts as are descriptions of "evolution" by "lights" such members of the Watchtower Writing Department. You people conflate everything you don't like into the One Big Nasty -- EVOLUTION. One way or another your moronic leaders can find a way to shoehorn it in. Your last post shows how easy it is to do."

Alan , since one of the basic interpretive principals of historical geology is the assumption of organic evolution over long geologic ages, evolution is very relevant to a discussion of geology. If organic macro-evolution (which I do understand) is shown to be suspect, then interpretations of geology based on it are also suspect.

Edited by - hooberus on 27 January 2003 22:21:59

15

HELP!!! HELP!!! PLEASE!!!!

by Utopian_Raindrops in

jw
friends

ok......i have access to wt literature dating all the way back to 1919!

this is not a permanent access but a temporary one.

so please tell me what books, mags, brochures, etc.

hooberus

"The wild beast that you saw was, but is not, and yet is about to ascend out of the abyss, and it is to go off into destruction. And when they see how the wild beast was, but is not, and yet will be present, those who dwell on the earth will wonder admiringly, but their names have not been written upon the scroll of life from the foundation of the world." Revelation 17:8 NWT

"We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the proposed League of Nations, formulated undoubtedly by those who have no knowledge of the great plan of God. This fact makes all the more wonderful the ideals which they express. For instance, it has been made plain by President Wilson and the advocates of his ideas that the proposed League of Nations is more than merely a league to enforce peace. They would not have us consider it to exclusively from the standpoint of politics or of military relations. It should be considered as fully from the economic and social points of view. The President's idea seems to be that the League of Nations which he proposes would stand for world service rather than mere world regulation in the military sense, and that the very smallest of nations shall be participants in its every arrangement. In other words, his idea undoubtedly is that the league shall not be established merely for the purpose of promoting peace by threat or coercion; but that its purpose, when put into operation, will be to make all nations of earth one great family, working together for the common benefit in all the avenues of national life. Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble." Watch Tower February 15, 1919 p.51 reprints page 6389

70

WHERE DID ALL THAT WATER GO?

by MYOHNSEPH in

as i recall, "the society" at one time taught the flood waters of noah's day came from an immense canopy of water, which formed sometime during creation and hovered above the earth until it all broke loose in the flood.

o.k., cool.

but does anyone know of an explanation of where it all went afterwards?

hooberus

really Alan, I believe it!! The whole story. After all the evidence is overwhelming that parcticles (over millions of years of course) were transformed into self-replicating living cells with all their enzymes, proteins, coded DNA, and RNA. And then these became multi-cell creatures then fish, which turned into amphibians, then the amphibians turned into reptiles, then the cold-blooded reptiles turned into warm-blooded hot fashion models like Cindy Crawford (more millions of years). I think that evolutionary theory is ~~A GREAT~~ THE ONLY way to interpret historical geology, after all when one is looking at different strata which rests on each other conformally the only way to see the millions of years inbetween is to KNOW that evolution is true. I can't wait to go to the ocean to see some ~~former cows~~ whales.

11

How to get someone out of the JW's

by Help123 in

jw
friends

im writing because i have two sister in-laws that are faithful jw .

any kind of talk becomes to involved in that.

i guess from reading some of your comments.

hooberus

The freeminds website referred to earlier also contains an excellent arcticle called "opening the closed mind" it can be accessed by clicking on the "Psychology" subheading of the freeminds site.

11

How to get someone out of the JW's

by Help123 in

jw
friends

im writing because i have two sister in-laws that are faithful jw .

any kind of talk becomes to involved in that.

i guess from reading some of your comments.

hooberus

Help, it is important to realize that the Witness is trained to place his/her faith in the Watchtower Organization as much as in God. Therefore before you "attack" the WT Organization it is often necessary to separate the Witness faith in God from their faith in the Organization. A fully indoctrinated witness cannot separate their faith in God from their faith in "God's Organization." The below WT arcticle can help you do this.

The January 15, 1970 Watchtower p. 37-40 contains arcticle titled:

"Which Comes First- Your Church or God?"

"The "first man" represents the believers who remain faithful to their church out of loyalty to the religion they were brought to believe in. Thier attitude is: Right or wrong, it is my religion! Is that the way you feel? If so, you are certainly a loyal person. But to whom do you owe the greater loyalty-to your church, or to God? With so much disbelief rife throughout the earth, you are to be commended for maintaining your faith, but where should your faith be placed-in a religious organization, or in God?" p.37

"The "second man" mentioned in the Nouvel Observateur represents those Catholics and Protestants who stay with their church because they do not know where else to go. They havebeen taught that their church represents God, and they do not want to turn away from him. They disapprove of many church practices or doctrines, but they hope to reform their church from within. Typical of these are the 744 French Catholics who, in November 1968, sent a long open letter to the pope. In it they stated: "Today the Christian needs to live in a 'true' Church . . . Therefore all that is false, contrary to the Gospel and scandalous within the Church today wounds the Christian." Then followed a long list of grievances against the Catholic Church and it current teachings and practices. Yet, toward the end, these catholics expressed their unconditional adherence to their church by alluding to John 6:68 and stating: "Who could we go to? In her [the Roman Catholic Church] we find the One who has words of eternal life." p.39

I beileve that this Watchtower arcticle can with a few simple questions be used effectively to separate the witnesses "Loyalty to God" from "Loyalty to the Organization". The Issue of faith in a religious organization being separte from faith in God is addressed nicely. Also issues of "where else to go" and the misappication of John 6:68 from Christ to a "church" or "organization" can be very effectively brought up using this arcticle.

In an earlier post the follwing was given by a former witness as some of the reasons for staying in the Watchtower Organization.

"Obstacles/hinderances: Loyalty. Thinking that there was no where else to go. Fear of the unknown. Believing God and the Watchtower were inseperable. Believing we would lose Gods protective barrier and bring death on our family (Like Job) if we left."

I believe that the above article can be used effectively and non-offensively to deal with these common issues.

70

WHERE DID ALL THAT WATER GO?

by MYOHNSEPH in

as i recall, "the society" at one time taught the flood waters of noah's day came from an immense canopy of water, which formed sometime during creation and hovered above the earth until it all broke loose in the flood.

o.k., cool.

but does anyone know of an explanation of where it all went afterwards?

hooberus

AlanF your posts have convinced me that evolutionary interpretations of historical geology are absolutely right and that our great-great grandparents really, really, really, were fish who lived millions of years ago. Thanks, hooberus

5

Where Else? -- Greg Stafford

by cyberguy in

i don't know if this has been mentioned here already, but greg stafford posted something very interesting on "channelc" recently: .

" http://www.channelc.org/cgi-bin/eboard30/index.cgi.

copy & paste from "channelc" --.

hooberus

The January 15, 1970 Watchtower p. 37-40 contains arcticle titled:

"Which Comes First- Your Church or God?"

"The "first man" represents the believers who remain faithful to their church out of loyalty to the religion they were brought to believe in. Thier attitude is: Right or wrong, it is my religion! Is that the way you feel? If so, you are certainly a loyal person. But to whom do you owe the greater loyalty-to your church, or to God? With so much disbelief rife throughout the earth, you are to be commended for maintaining your faith, but where should your faith be placed-in a religious organization, or in God?" p.37

"The "second man" mentioned in the Nouvel Observateur represents those Catholics and Protestants who stay with their church because they do not know where else to go. They havebeen taught that their church represents God, and they do not want to turn away from him. They disapprove of many church practices or doctrines, but they hope to reform their church from within. Typical of these are the 744 French Catholics who, in November 1968, sent a long open letter to the pope. In it they stated: "Today the Christian needs to live in a 'true' Church . . . Therefore all that is false, contrary to the Gospel and scandalous within the Church today wounds the Christian." Then followed a long list of grievances against the Catholic Church and it current teachings and practices. Yet, toward the end, these catholics expressed their unconditional adherence to their church by alluding to John 6:68 and stating: "Who could we go to? In her [the Roman Catholic Church] we find the One who has words of eternal life." p.39

I beileve that this Watchtower arcticle can with a few simple questions be used effectively to separate the witnesses "Loyalty to God" from "Loyalty to the Organization". The Issue of faith in a religious organization being separte from faith in God is addressed nicely. Also issues of "where else to go" and the misappication of John 6:68 from Christ to a "church" or "organization" can be very effectively brought up using this arcticle.

In an earlier post the follwing was given by a former witness as some of the reasons for staying in the Watchtower Organization.

"Obstacles/hinderances: Loyalty. Thinking that there was no where else to go. Fear of the unknown. Believing God and the Watchtower were inseperable. Believing we would lose Gods protective barrier and bring death on our family (Like Job) if we left."

I believe that the above article can be used effectively and non-offensively to deal with these common issues.