Posts by simon17

18

500 Hundred Alien Planets -- Wow !

by Rabbit in

i know this doesn't have anything 'jw' about it, but, i think it's pretty cool.

our universe -- is really, really...big !.

life is out there - somewhere.

simon17

We already know that there are countless billions of alien planets out there. We just never had the technology to spot them. Even knowing they are there is probably meaningless because we could never reach them and it is quite likely that no intelligent species are there with the technology to recieve any messages (either they are behind us in development or way past us-in which case they would most likely be here already). Its cool that they can find them, but it really doesn't get us any closer to finding life outside our own.

Debator: To believe that God made the incomprehensible universe and filled it with NOTHING for 13 billion years is mind-blowing. And then he picked one and ONLY one planet to start fucking around, creating things and then destroying it with asteroids and ice ages and other incredible catastrophes for 4 billion years. I mean, to believe in God and to believe that is simply an astonishing believe in him wasting a lot of space for nothing.

38

"Evolution is JUST a Theory!"

by sabastious in

and i feel a little sheepish.. check this out:.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/plate_tectonics.

^ plate tectonics (from the late latintectonicus, from the greek: ?

simon17

There was nothing, then there was "light" and from the moment, life began in the universe.

Man was "created" of the earth as were all the living creatures.

Well it does say more than that, unfortunately. It says LIGHT existed BEFORE the sun and stars. Thats a major problem. It also has other major problems that contradict physical evidence, such as saying flowering plants were created before all the animals... also incorrect.

143

How do Jehovah's Witnesses Explain This Fossil Record?

by sabastious in

according to jws, evolution is false.

so how do they explain these human-like fossils?.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/human_evolution.

simon17

Science showing us the life "finds a way" is a good thing for anyone that believes in a Creator, it shows that God has endowed in"His" creation the ability to evolve and to meet the challenegs of existence, how is this a bad thing ?

Not that I agree with your conclussion PSac, but this is precisely the way people who believe in God should angle their arguments. God set the wheels into motion and did precisely what you just said. Then its just... ok we both have two different ideas of abiogenesis but we can agree to disagree because the evidence can support either conclusion at this point.

143

How do Jehovah's Witnesses Explain This Fossil Record?

by sabastious in

according to jws, evolution is false.

so how do they explain these human-like fossils?.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/human_evolution.

simon17

Fossil record is extremely incomplete so cannot be called proof.

DNA are the complex designed building blocks of life. They prove an intelligent designer.

To quote the Princess Bride: You keep using that word... I dont think it means what you a-think it means...

38

"Evolution is JUST a Theory!"

by sabastious in

and i feel a little sheepish.. check this out:.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/plate_tectonics.

^ plate tectonics (from the late latintectonicus, from the greek: ?

simon17

No, but [creation is] a theory nevertheless, which proports to explain life and all its complexity in competition with the (scientific) theory of evolution. See definition below. 1, 2 and 3 relate to scientific theory, 4, 5 and 6 fit non-scientific theory.

No, you're wrong. Your mixing up the two defintions of theory. Creation is a theory in the vernacular. Anyone can make up any guess and call it a theory any time (like a conspiracy theory... happens all the time with no real basis). A scientific theory must explain a wide variety of observations and successfully unify and answer a host of different questions with an explanation that has never been proven wrong. Creation is not a scientific theory in any sense of the word. Why? #1, the BIBLICAN account of creation is not supported by the physical evidence. Creation in general is not a scientific occurrence anyway.

Now, you may point to the creation of the universe (before the big bang). There are no accepted scientific theories as to what caused that. The evidence does not support any conclusion. There are hypothesis. And creation is just as good as any of these hypothesis at this point because they all lack evidence.

87

The EVOLUTION thread!

by BurnTheShips in

i would like to start a boilerplate thread to discuss evolution.

there seems to be a great deal of interest in the subject.. so, i ask our members, what do you think about the veracity of the biological theory known as evolution?.

is it true?

simon17

The issues of HOW or WHY the universe came to be are not addressed by evolution, nor are they suppose to be.

More than that even, really. People always say evolution vs. creation and that really doesn't make sense at all. Creation explains how life came into being. Evolution explains how life adapted and changed over time. It should be creation vs. abiogenesis (which is a perfectly fair debate since there are nothing more than scientific hypothesis on that). Evolution, in principle, is correct.

But you could certainly believe that God created simple life and let it evolve. Or that God guided the evolution of life. Where you start to run into trouble is "God created man 6000 years ago." That doesn't work.

36

586/7 vs. 607 (another one) Critique my letter please....

by bigmouth in

jw
friends

since moving back to another town i've met up with an elder i knew from way back.

(i met him coming out of a salvation army shop.).

he visited me at home a few weeks ago, and as i seem to be getting more comfortable at fading i invited him in and told him i was very concerned over the 607 bce.

simon17

Yeah its a nice letter but I think its a little too much misdirection and not focused enough on the core issue. I think it should be far shorter and far more pointed. You give a JW a letter like that with 50 things they can focus on, then you'll NEVER get them to focus on the one thing they want. He'll wade through that and find something that is questionable, attack that, and then feel good about all his beliefs.

I would go more with:

"Thanks for getting back to me and doing that research. I know I have looked into the WT's thoughts on the matter quite thoroughly and am very familiar with what I believe to be very unsubstantiated claims that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE. I have also looked through extensive current archaelogical opinion and evidence on the matter, all of which point to 586/7 BCE instead. Have you looked at what that evidence is? These same people are the ones who have unearthed all the evidence for 539 BCE as the date of Babylon's overthrow. Have you looked into why the WT trusts THAT date, but then DENIES the other which is found in the exact same way, with the exact same evidence. It is impossible to accept one of those two dates and dismiss the other."

I think something like that makes him focus on the crux of the matter without any wiggle room.

24

What do you think will be WT doctrine in 10 or 20 years time?

by roguepixel in

the world/science/technology and society (not the society) are changing so rapidly.

what does everybody think will be wt$ doctrine and belief in 10 or 20 years time?

i'm thinking mainly about advances in medicine and cloning, which were always looked upon as being a cut-off point.

simon17

There is no need to overhaul the generation teaching anymore. Its good to go for at least another 60 years or so before its a problem again.

Some people NEED a continual urgency in their life.... so it might not be as much of a mass exodus as you think.

46

Pissing On JWs That Are Geuninely Searching Here

by minimus in

jw
friends

i just want to say something about witnesses who come here just to try to rebel rouse as opposed to jws that come here and are "searching" or are "active" members in the organization but are reading info on this site.. there's no reason to "beat down" witnesses just because they still go to meetings and we don't.

i've seen some insulting words against present elders and it's unnecessary and judgmental, in my honest opinion.

some jws like to spar with us on this board and it's a losing effort for them in reality.. who knows when or what will make someone actually leave the tentacles of the organization.

simon17

cantleave that is a very odd post... You resent those who are undercover elders. Then you give two potential reasons why, and they are contradictory. 1st, that they are hypocritical. 2nd, because you wouldn't have enjoyed it but you dont NEED to have the status. Perhaps they do it because they think they can genuinely help people they have known a long time in their congregation that way. Perhaps they are afraid of what will happen when they leave, since everyone's family situation is radically different. Its a very difficult life, and I dont think its fair to pass judgement or appropriate to resent their actions.

24

What do you think will be WT doctrine in 10 or 20 years time?

by roguepixel in

the world/science/technology and society (not the society) are changing so rapidly.

what does everybody think will be wt$ doctrine and belief in 10 or 20 years time?

i'm thinking mainly about advances in medicine and cloning, which were always looked upon as being a cut-off point.

simon17

Its silly to think the WT will shrink from these things. There are literally millions, even billions of people out there who belief in the most irrational of things in the name of religion. People need the guidance even if fundamentalists (some even with PhDs) insist the earth was 6000 years old or muslim extremists insist that killing westerners is what Allah wants them to do. People will belief the JW doctrine. And people will accept it blindly for social reasons. And thousands upon thousands will never question their beliefs. And thousands more will be trapped half inside.

That said:

* The 144k doctrine will change. Its an obvious thing to do. This OR, they will allow everyone to partake at the memorial, even if they are a member of the great crowd.

* Advances in medicine wont help anything. If anything, it will make bloodless surgery MORE mainstream and widespread because its better medically and more efficient.

* This will probably be cyclical but they will loosen up on higher eduction again.