ctrwtf: I like the link you posted, but doesn't it indicate that the genus Homo is about 1.66 million years old? Unless you're being ironic...
Cadellin
JoinedPosts by Cadellin
-
61
How the house of cards comes crashing down, in the WTS' own words.
by poopsiecakes in"rejecting or trivializing the genesis account about adam and eve creates a domino effect that undermines nearly every major teaching in the bible!
such a way of thinking leads to a host of unanswered questions and a faith with nothing to stand on.".
footnote: "these include teachings about gods sovereignty, human integrity, good and evil, free will, the condition of the dead, marriage, the promised messiah, a paradise earth, gods kingdom, and many others.".
-
-
-
61
How the house of cards comes crashing down, in the WTS' own words.
by poopsiecakes in"rejecting or trivializing the genesis account about adam and eve creates a domino effect that undermines nearly every major teaching in the bible!
such a way of thinking leads to a host of unanswered questions and a faith with nothing to stand on.".
footnote: "these include teachings about gods sovereignty, human integrity, good and evil, free will, the condition of the dead, marriage, the promised messiah, a paradise earth, gods kingdom, and many others.".
-
-
Cadellin
While the Adam and Eve account may not agree with the theory of evolution, it matches what is known to science.
This little nugget of epistemological double-think comes a little further along. It rests on the fallacy that evolution is not "known to science." That's right, folks, "true science" (as coined by the WTBS) is still not sure whether all presently known species have been shaped by billions of years of natural selection so that they can be grouped taxonomically according to degrees of relatedness, based on the convergence of both DNA and fossil evidence, or whether they all sprang into being some fifty thousand years ago, thus bearing no inherent relatedness to each other, or any meaningful indication of environmental adaptation.
Oh, wait! I forgot--no, no, I've got it wrong. All the species we see today actually evolved from a few pairs on the ark only 4,000 years ago! Yes, yes, that's what's "known to science!"
-
41
Tomorrow is a big day for me
by coffee_black ini will be 60 tomorrow.
on the one hand, it's just a number.
on the other hand, it's a big number.... .
-
-
Cadellin
You look great! Happy birthday!
-
10
Take advantage of today's text in "Examing the Scriptures Daily" with your JW loved ones
by wannabefree inthursday, march 1. .
do not become ashamed of the witness about our lord.-2 tim.
to handle peer pressure, you first have to be convinced that your beliefs and standards are right.
-
-
Cadellin
The purpose of that question is not to arouse skepticism but to strengthen your faith.
Well, there it is. That's the REAL intent between what the WT is asking you to do. It's not an authentic proof test--which necessarily involves putting beliefs at risk--but rather ratification of what is already taken to be true. By staying within the magic circle of WT publications, the answer to any questions such as why I belive God exists or why I believe we're in the last days is inevitably, "Because the Society says so."
Still, most JWs haven't the critical (read: independent) thinking skills to distinguish between these two endeavors. Most will (naively) believe that the Society really is encouraging an "honest-hearted" examination. So you might be able to do something with that...
-
29
evolution
by inbetween insince my awakening from the mind control of the wts, it has been an exciting also frigthening journey of exploration and free thinking.. i would say, today i try to be open to anything, i ll go whatever direction facts show.
while i`m no scientist, i think i have a glue about the scientific method.
i also agree with the statemant, that some extraordinary claim needs extraordinary proof.. so far, it is a difficult question whether god exists or not, and probably in my lifetime i will not get a conclusive answer.. however, my concerns are about evolution, since even a confirmation of evolution does not necessarily exclude the existence of a god, it just proivdes an alternative explanation, in case there is no god.. even though i did not really read a book yet about evolution, i read other books of people, whose reasoning i can agree to, and they believe in evolution.. .
-
-
Cadellin
When I started exploring ideas beyond the realm of the WT, evolution was one of the first. What struck me--and I suspect you, too, inbetween--is how grossly misinformed I'd been from basing my beliefs on what the WT wrote, such as little gems like the Creation book.
As another poster has noted, it is absolutely necessary for you to start reading about the science of evolution. Coyne's book is absolutely fantastic. Another good one is Carl Zimmer's Evolution: the Triumph of an Idea, which is ideal for the lay person with little or no background in biology and might be easier for you, given that English is not your first language. Another good one is Prothero's Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why it Matters
Since you're interested in the idea of "missing links" (and be aware that the science community does not use that term since it is highly misleading; it's more favored by creationists and the popular media), you might read Carl Zimmer's At the Water's Edge, which is a detailed account of the evolution of whales. The number of so-called "missing links" or transitional species discovered in the cetacean family tree is startling and revealing about the general nature of how evolution works to produce morphological change.
Happy learning!!!
-
68
EX JW teen just signs with legendary producer!!!!!
by Lady Liberty indear friends,.
it has been a long time since i have posted.
time heals much pain, and finally, my family and i have been able to move on with our life outside of jw land.. many of you became our friends, our support system, and you know very well our exit story...we were labeled, slandered and disfellowshipped for having questions regarding the date 607. we sent out letters exposing the elders and circuit overseer to over 200 families.
-
-
Cadellin
That is amazing! Your daughter is a very special and lucky person to have her dreams rescued like that -- and you are clearly a great mom! What a wonderful story--and please keep us posted as her career progresses!
-
90
More anti-apostate rhetoric from the Watchtower - are they running scared?
by cedars inyes, the may 15th watchtower is now available for download from jw.org.. the final study article, on page 26, directs another salvo at apostates - and warns witnesses not to try arguing with them on the internet:.
indeed, we ought to move as far away from wrongdoing as possible and not see how close we can get to it without being overcome by sin.
for instance, we need to guard against succumbing to apostasy, a sin that would make us unfit to glorify god.
-
-
Cadellin
"Let us therefore have nothing to do with apostates or anyone who claims to be a brother but who is dishonoring God. This should be the case even if he is a family member."
This is the troubling part. What does "claim to be a brother" mean? It could easily be interpreted to mean someone who's not df'd--in fact, I would say that's the intent. So, even if a family member who's not df'd seems to be questioning the Society, we should "have nothing to do" w/him or her. This does appear to be a more entrenched position than has been the case up till recently. Someone started another thread about "unofficial" shunning and I have to say, I think that's becoming more the case. I have experienced that recently myself from a family member who is a Bethelite, someone I was very close to for most of my life but now is giving me the silent treatment, even though I've said nothing to that person overtly "apostate."
Yes, they're scared and as they become scared, they get more hard-line. Isn't that another feature of a cult?
-
97
Elder father sent me an email about Feb 2012 WT - my resposne
by TheStumbler ini'm not sure if any of you will remember but i posted on here six months ago about a correspondence i was having with my dad, an elder, about who would die in armageddon.
i was asking some tough questions about children being killed in armageddon and i could tell he uncomfortable with the answers he was giving.. i drafted an email in resposne to his email but in the end i decided not to send it in the interest of maintaining friendly relations.. .
last week, out of the blue, my dad sent an email link to the february 2012 watchtower article about armageddon and said it would answer some of my questions.. here is my response which is a critique of the feb 2012 wt article and some of the broader ethics concerning 'armageddon'.
-
-
Cadellin
I think your email to your father is a brilliant piece of logic, using the WT's own words--and not taken out of context either! (I hate when the WT claims that apostates twist words and take them out of context when the WT is the biggest culprit in the known universe for doing that.)
This business of God reading hearts and not merely saving JWs is how reasonable JWs try to get around the undeniable official teaching of the WT that only those marked on the forehead as per Ezekiel will be saved. The mark is baptism as a JW and not just that, but living up to your baptism. Many years ago, when I was still pioneering and uber-zealous, our CO said something from the platform that made me shudder. He had us read the prophecy in Ezekiel about the man with the secretary's inkhorn who went around marking those who where sighing and crying over the detestable things being done. What happened after that? The angels with "smashing instruments," ie big hammers, went around smashing in skulls of anyone w/o the mark. You see, the mark is on the forehead so it's really easy to see and the angels won't be mistaken.
Then he said that if we ever felt we were losing our sense of urgency, we should go stand outside an elementary school playground for a while and just watch all the happy little children playing. THen we were to imagine the angels coming down with big hammers and smashing all their little heads in.
I'm not kidding. That was part of his talk from the platform (probably mid 1990's). I remember feeling slightly ill at the time, thinking (but suppressing) that something had to be wrong...
-
21
Journal of Philosophical Psychology cites JWs as an example of a self-validating belief system
by slimboyfat ina recent article in the journal of philosophical psychology titled: 'how convenient!
the epistemic rationale of self-validating belief systems' by maarten boudry says that one of the defense mechanisms of self-validating belief systems is "multiple endpoints and moving targets" and cites jws to illustrate the point.
here are the sections that discuss jws:.
-
-
Cadellin
Right, and I would add that they are one of the more extreme cases.
-
24
Independent verification of Mexico Vs. Malawi
by Knowsnothing ini posted on manki's crisis of conscience thread the following, and decided it deserves a thread of it's own (giving it was completely ignored, lol).
i'll give you a head start, manky.. http://tearsofoberon.blogspot.com/2009/10/mexico-military-and-jwsthe-truth.html.
under the subheading 6.0 lies and exaggerations, he goes on to say this:.
-
-
Cadellin
Bucholz, thanks for the info! So, did very many Mexican brothers obtain a "fake" cartilla? How was this whole thing viewed by JWs there? To me, the bribery was one thing but the carrying the cartilla that said the "brother" had completed his military training seemed somehow worse. Or am I misunderstanding?