Posts by JanH

124

I Think That I Chose My Parents.

by Englishman in

jw
friends

do you believe in reincarnation?.

i dont think i believe in it in the same way that most believers do, which is that we keep coming back in different fleshly bodies until we have achieved perfection.. i do, however, strongly suspect that we may well be spirit creatures who find it necessary to inhabit a fleshly body from time to time, and that this entails us having to leave behind most of our past memories.. i say most memories, because many people seem to have some vestigal recollections that don`t seem to fit in with earthly experiences.. i`m pretty sure that i chose my parents!

i have a recollection of being shown a young and kind couple through some form of astral telescope and choosing to become their son.

JanH

I respectfully disagree, but you could have guessed that I would

It's amazing that you think a simple "i disagree" means anything. Of course you disgaree. But that is of no consequence, because you have no arguments. There is nothing factual to support your position. It's just wishful thinking from your part; you build on something less solid than sand.

I know a bit about science, and I have some creditentials on the subject of religion. Yet, it's the arguments and not the persons coming with them that determine what is correct.

So I ask you to substantiate your assertion, Es. How do you define religion? How do you define science? Explain how science is a religion.

This is how a rational enquiry works. If there is one thing this world has more than enough of, it's people who think they can resolve complex social or technical issues from an armchair.

- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein

29

i have a question

by willy_think in

jw
friends

my farther is a jw, my mother is rc i am neither.

i have done a study of world beliefs from, atheist to zoraster.

this includes many wtbts writings, old & new.

JanH

janh, what do you mean by the einstein quote?

Isn't that pretty obvious?

are you by association claiming that our "common sense" should be replaced by your wisdom. "

It's sad that religionists cannot but think in such primitive terms.

What I mean, and what Einstein meant, was that popular ideas should not be excepted from critical enquiry.

I think it was Ibsen who observed that once "everybody" accepts a conventional wisdom, it's probably wrong.

I challenge my own ideas constantly, and I have them challenged by others. Therefor, they evolved as I aquire new knowledge.

Logic and rational thought are the tools we have to deal with the world. If something is "my wisdom" it must be: use these tools.

That is the opposite of revealed religion, which is frozen in past superstitions.

willy_think sorry i don't do well when being treated in a condesending manner

It's amazing you can be offended. Agent started this by attacking atheists, and in a particularly silly way, and I answered him.

You should stick to facts and arguments.

- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein

124

I Think That I Chose My Parents.

by Englishman in

jw
friends

do you believe in reincarnation?.

i dont think i believe in it in the same way that most believers do, which is that we keep coming back in different fleshly bodies until we have achieved perfection.. i do, however, strongly suspect that we may well be spirit creatures who find it necessary to inhabit a fleshly body from time to time, and that this entails us having to leave behind most of our past memories.. i say most memories, because many people seem to have some vestigal recollections that don`t seem to fit in with earthly experiences.. i`m pretty sure that i chose my parents!

i have a recollection of being shown a young and kind couple through some form of astral telescope and choosing to become their son.

JanH

There were those, in time past who insisted there was scientific evidence that the world was flat.

A popular story, but totally untrue. People knew the earth was spherical centuries, perhaps millenia, before anyone came up with anything resembling science.

Science is not a belief system. It is a toolbox of methods for enquiry into everything that can be observed -- indirectly or otherwise -- to try to 1) find out exactly what happens; and 2)understand what forces cause these events.

Science is a methodology for finding out what works and is true, as opposed to what is untrue. The vast majority of beliefs people had in earlier times have proved to be untrue or unsound. Some have no observational consuequences, or are so popular that scientists are polite and leave them alone (ie. belief in a supreme creator-god).

Some few ancient practices have actually been proven sound, and these are retained. There are medicines on the shelves today that were also used in ancient Greece.

When science -- which is nothing more than systematic application of careful observation and sound logic -- have rejected something, it is extremely likely that this thing deserved to be rejected, because it was not true.

- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein

27

To All those on REINCARNATION thread

by RavynX in

jw
friends

risking the flames of the ignorant, let me suggest some reading for all you awakening humans who i have come to love:.

do a search on john edward, he has a site but i am not sure if it is johnedward.com or .org, and he is also on the sci-fi channel(cable tv in usa) and has a site on their page too.

i recommend getting one of his books and watching his show.

JanH

Just one question. Why do those who espouse the religion of science develop as rabid a conversion style as JWs in many cases? Is there some sort of punishment awaiting those who like to tinker in other areas?

I sometimes wished we did. Alas, for every skeptic willing to step forward, there are a million charlatans.

I have explained very well why I feel skepticism would be worth fighting and evangelizing for, in the "reincarnation" thread. No need to create new threads; try to answer what is there.

Of course, most of us can't be bothered to do more than post a few messages on a message board. It's hard to evangelize when you believe that people hurt first and foremost themselves, and they bloody well deserve it. A bit of darwinian selection will hopefully thin out the worst examples as time goes.

Your question could be framed another way: Why are many exJWs so concerned about what is the truth, what is factual, and to expose untruths, charlatans and frauds? However, even you see that if you put your question in this form, the answer would be very obvious.

I, like many others, believe that facts have an enormous value. Facts and truths saves lives, untruths and lies cost lives and it cost people misery.

For example, the comedian Peter Sellers died becuase he believed some Philipine "psychic doctors" who have been exposed as frauds, and refused medical science to cure his disease. This is just one celebrity example; there are thousands of oridinary men and women who have fallen prey to frauds. Even my father-in-law, a JW, visited a healer in his last days (didn't help). Well, I can understand him -- what did he have to lose? -- but I have nothing but contempt for the fraudster who used his misery to stuff his pockets.

What concerns me most about ardent supernaturalists is their total disregard of facts and sound, logical thinking. New agers like those who started this thread are no different from other supernaturalists who deny and denounce science, be it young earth creationists, flat earthers or christian science's "faith" healers.

- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein

27

To All those on REINCARNATION thread

by RavynX in

jw
friends

risking the flames of the ignorant, let me suggest some reading for all you awakening humans who i have come to love:.

do a search on john edward, he has a site but i am not sure if it is johnedward.com or .org, and he is also on the sci-fi channel(cable tv in usa) and has a site on their page too.

i recommend getting one of his books and watching his show.

JanH

I sometimes wished I was unscrupulous enough to exploit all this superstition and gullibility. Those who are, makes a fortune. There must be one born every second, at least.

It's called "cold reading". A few simple tricks used by conjurers since the dawn of time. And it still works today, in the space age. People want to believe. Desperately! Especially those who grieve over a lost one desperately cling to the idea that these charlatans can bring them back to answer vague questions. And then the charlatans laugh all the way to the bank.

See http://www.randi.org/jr/08-27-2000.html (scroll down a bit)

Quoth James Randi,

And why do I make such a huge fuss over such a carnival act as Edward? Because he, and the other "readers" who plague the public currently, are trading in grief. The bereaved who stand helplessly before these operators, tears streaming down their cheeks as they're fed bits of lotus, are being lied to and victimized. People like Edward use them and discard them. They turn their sobs into dollars. And no agency of the government will step in to stop this cruel, heartless racket.

See http://www.randi.org/research/r-files/coldread.html for more about the art of cold reading. Be a bit better armed the next time you watch this show. Of course, true believers will never check the facts. Like a true JW will never check if the quotations in the Watchtower book is honest, a true believer in the paranormal will never allow himself to critically examine his or her icon of superstition. "Don't confuse me with facts!" is the battle cry I hear in this thread. Sorry. No go.

- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein

29

i have a question

by willy_think in

jw
friends

my farther is a jw, my mother is rc i am neither.

i have done a study of world beliefs from, atheist to zoraster.

this includes many wtbts writings, old & new.

JanH

Usually when people who don't believe in God, want to talk about God, they always want to look at the bad in the world and blame God for it.

People who don't believe in God, don't blame God for anything. Isn't that pretty obvious? How can anyone write such a nonsensical sentence?

- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein

124

I Think That I Chose My Parents.

by Englishman in

jw
friends

do you believe in reincarnation?.

i dont think i believe in it in the same way that most believers do, which is that we keep coming back in different fleshly bodies until we have achieved perfection.. i do, however, strongly suspect that we may well be spirit creatures who find it necessary to inhabit a fleshly body from time to time, and that this entails us having to leave behind most of our past memories.. i say most memories, because many people seem to have some vestigal recollections that don`t seem to fit in with earthly experiences.. i`m pretty sure that i chose my parents!

i have a recollection of being shown a young and kind couple through some form of astral telescope and choosing to become their son.

JanH

Rem,

Thanks for your good comments. Like Carl Sagan expressed it, you provide a much welcome candle in the dark, to shy away the demons of superstition. It's good to hear that some people at least understand that this alienation from science is probably the most dangerous development in the world today. Kudos also to Tina, larc and perfectpie for speaking up.

Es called science "cold." Perhaps. Obviously, science has a serious PR problem. We see that in the public perception of science in TV and movies, the lack of funding, skepticism towards all new things, eco-hysteria, etc, etc. We also see that science studies in universities suffer from bad recruitment.

People are, thanks to the developments of science, living a life mostly sheltered from the harsh realities of nature. In times past, during the perhaps 500,000 years of human existence we have behind us, somewhere between 99% and 100% of all humans living were desperately fighting for their food, from day to day. Illness and death was the natural order of things.

As late is in the 1782, when the situation was much better than it had ever been earlier in history, the enlightement philosopher Rousseau said that it was the natural order of things that half of all children died before their eighth year, and it would be futile to try to fight that. Those who are parents can perhaps imagine how it would be to live this grim life. This -- or actually a worse condition -- has been reality for all humans until the last century, when science brought progress our predecessors couldn't imagine in their wildest dreams.

Is science cold and sterile? Perhaps. But it brings and protects life. And without life, there is little use talking about feelings and emotions. It was the passion that is human that brought the pioneers of science to work towards this goal (and further), but it was the cold thought of reason combined with hard work that gave the results.

The superstitions and ignorance of the masses, living in ignorant bliss of what holds the harsh realities of nature at bay, are indeed threatening the foundation of our civilization. It is that important. So be it if we have to offend some people who think they hear voices in the process of spreading that message. It's perhaps the only message in human history that would deserve a zealous evangelization campaign.

- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein

30

Did Christ exist?

by uncle_onion in

jw
friends

jesus christ is the main feature of christianity.

what proof is there of him existing?

we touched on this subject on the the last thread that i started, but i would appreciate in depth veiw points and "evidence" please.

JanH

Thanks, idaho.

Take your time.

What I forgot to say earlier, is that I think there may be some real archeological artifact behind this, and it's just been distorted (intentionally, or just through amateurish interpretation). But it's hard to know without exact references.

- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein

103

The "Ransom Sacrifice" short version.

by Norm in

jw
friends

in the christian part of the world not many of us have escaped the much hyped and published sacrifice christ supposedly made when the romans executed him.. i myself was going around for years parroting this strange concept without giving it much thought.

thinking and faith some times do not mix very well.. anyway, apparently god made a royal blunder when he created the first humans and they plunged mankind into death and despair first crack out of the box, while god stood by and watched helplessly.

then we are told that god for this reason, in his infinite wisdom took mankind for ransom for thousands of years.

JanH

aChristian,

I consider it interesting that you posted such short and unsubstantual replies to both Norm and myself.

Your response to Norm was particularly disinginious. Paul's "argument" was an ad hominem of the worst sort; he simply said "those who disagree with me are evil" or something to that effect. There is no argument herein; merely an assertion. Your adoration of Paul is based on your supernaturalism, that is, the argument is circular.

Your answer to my arguments was totally self-defeating:

As you may recall, the Bible tells us that when Christ returns all Christians, the living and the dead, will be made both immortal and incorruptible. (1 Cor. 15) That being the case, they will then be able, of their own free will, to eternally live perfectly righteous lives, something Christians have always had the desire to do but not the ability to do.

Aha, so it was possible for God to create beings who both had "free will" and live perfectly rightous lives without suffering and pain.

Then, why don't humans living now exercise this option?

It must of course be because God decided to create humans unable to follow his own laws, and unable to live happily with a free will. Thus, God wanted humans to suffer. When he denoucnes humans for breaing his laws, it is pure hypocrisy, because that was his intention from the start.

Otherwise, explain why it is not possible now but will be in the future.

Finally, to engage the "free will" argument, please explain what exactly this is. So far you've only used the expression as a magic wand to avoid dealing with the issues. Does it mean that nothing constrains our will, only our execution of the will? What, if anything, is its limitations? Be concrete.

- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein

30

Did Christ exist?

by uncle_onion in

jw
friends

jesus christ is the main feature of christianity.

what proof is there of him existing?

we touched on this subject on the the last thread that i started, but i would appreciate in depth veiw points and "evidence" please.

JanH

idaho,

The president of the H.U.J. seems like a credible source.

Yes, except that he's dead, so it can't be checked that the quotation is correct (again, conveniently!). Also, he's not that credible a source to begin with. He is an economist, hardly a relevant background to evaluate archeology journals. It simply sounds extremely unlikely that such a figure would recommend this allegeded journal. It is obviously not peer reviewed. It does not cite references. It has a web page that looks like it was made by teenagers. No serious academic, no matter what field, would recommend such a rag.

The quotes you brought up just confirms what I said earlier. Claiming that such a revolutionary piece of archeological evidence has not surfaced in anyof the world's well-renoweed journals, and neither in the countless scholarly discussions of the historical Jesus, but only in a rag nobody has heard of, is far beyond serious consideration.

If you insinuate I brought doubt on the credibility of Prof. Sukenik, you are not arguing honestly. I don't think he ever had anything to do with this; this journal just engages in dishonest name dropping. Since he died in 1953: please explain how this amazing discovery has remained hidden to all but this strange journal for half a century!

The facts I have brought up is more than sufficient to cast doubt on the idea that this artifact even exists. Remember Ron Wyatt? He is (in)famous for, for example, claiming that he has found the remains of the Egyptian army on the bottom of the Red Sea. Of course it is just his invention. Yet, many Christians believe it, because they want to believe. This looks like the same thing over again.

- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein