@ Mad Sweeney. I sent you a friend request just now on Facebook. I hope it's you as there is more than one. But I see you have Randall Waters on your friend's list so I probably got the right one.
Peace
Posts by Awen
-
18Do you want to be my......
by watersprout infacebook friend???.
i will await with anxious anticipation, the sheer volume of pm's!
anyway i'm off to eat chocolate icecream and watch a film.... peace.
-
-
-
18
Do you want to be my......
by watersprout infacebook friend???.
i will await with anxious anticipation, the sheer volume of pm's!
anyway i'm off to eat chocolate icecream and watch a film.... peace.
-
-
Awen
My facebook is under two different names. One for my family and the other for internet friends. I'll provide the second on here. If you add me let me know who you are though so I know whether to accept or deny. LOL
Facebook name: Medewty Djehuty
-
82
I just can't do this anymore
by Awen indear friends:.
for years now after my exit from the wtbts i have searched for god.
as i have previously mentioned in other threads i looked into many other religions, including druidry, zen and tibetan buddhism (not really a religion), asatru, native american shamanism, kemetic orthodoxy, gnosticism and pandeism.
-
-
Awen
Dear Friends:
For years now after my exit from the WTBTS I have searched for God. As I have previously mentioned in other threads I looked into many other religions, including Druidry, Zen and Tibetan Buddhism (not really a religion), Asatru, Native American Shamanism, Kemetic Orthodoxy, Gnosticism and Pandeism. What I have found is amazing similarities between them all as far as their moral codes go and some similarities in their origins and personalities. I mention this because with the exception of certain differences between the archetypes for the most part they are the same religion.
For years I wondered why the God of the Bible blatantly ignored most of the world and only focused on one small nation of people. Then at the slightest sign of disloyalty he's playing whack-a-mole with their lives.
Yahweh seemed to be a very bloodthirsty God (see the link for a detailed account). I couldn't understand why the rest of the world was just ignored and prophets sent to only one group of people, unless of course that wasn't the case at all. To the Hebrew people the world was very small and so the accounts in the Bible as Yahweh being the Creator of the world made sense. But in our modern age we know the world was much bigger than the ancient world, including yet to be discovered continents. How do we reconcile this? How can the other people of other countries and continents be reconciled to the Hebrew God if they had never heard of him, or how could he rightly hold them accountable if he never bothered to contact them (send prophets)? It just doesn't add up.
Pandeism seems to answer this question.
Then we have the problem of the Bible. The Bible is not a unique book. Many ancient texts claim to be the sole "word of God". The Qur'an, the Apocryphal Books, the Dead Sea Scrolls, The Egyptian Book of the Dead (the Book of Going Forth By Day), the Sumerian texts, and the list goes on and on. Many stories in the Bible are obviously borrowed or even plagarized from much older texts. An example would be the Ten Commandments being an almost word for word copy of the 42 Purifications from the Egyptian religion. Not really surprising when you consider that according to the Exodus account many Egyptians left Egypt along with the Hebrews (if the account is even true) and may have had a hand in their writing. Consider also Moses had been raised an Egyptian and would know these laws by rote.
Then consider the personage of Jesus Christ himself. As has been pointed out in other threads there seems to be little or no evidence of a man like Jesus who existed in the 1st Century. Most everything about him seems to come from his followers. There is not one text (to my knowledge) that was written by Jesus himself. Then consider certain accounts in the Bible. When Jesus was praying in the Garden of Gethsemane and the Apostles were asleep, who recorded Jesus words to Yahweh as is found in the book of Mark? Since Jesus had been taken away shortly after that there would have been no time to relate it to his Apostles. One could reason that he told them after his resurrection but the account of the resurrection wasn't added to the scriptures until some 300 years later (according to some sources).
Then we have the problem of the NT itself. Most of it seems to be geared towards the people of the times. Even Revelation is written to the then existing seven congregations in Asia (seems like a small number for all the work that Paul did). Yet later John says he was "in the Lord's Day". The problem is that the book being written in symbolic language makes it as unintelligible as the Nostradamus Prophecies. It could mean any span of time. Many times Jesus says "Look I am coming quickly" to the seven congregations, yet 2,000 years later we are still waiting.
Now some on these forums (myself included) have said many parts of the Bible cannot be trusted as it's been altered. The question is then, which parts can be trusted and how can one tell? So if it can't be trusted then why quote from it? If we throw the Bible out all together then what basis does anyone have for believing in anything that is written in it? It just doesn't make sense. basically it's being said to read the Bible, then trow it out and rely only upon your relationship with Christ. Well here's the rub. How do we know for a fact that the deity/spirit that we're in contact with is in fact Yeshua? It could be anything or anyone pretending to be such.
One thing that has bothered me is reading the thread where people spoke about praying to YHWH and getting no answer. I tried to figure out why this must be but couldn't come up with a satisfactory answer and be able to keep my faith. Then consider the immense unfairness of this world towards those who follow Yeshua and YHWH. One would think that IF they cared at all then they would at least look out for their own. But history has shown this isn't the case at all (the Inquisition, The Holocaust).
Then we have the Biblical accounts of burning bushes, ravens feeding people in the wilderness, a global flood, a marching band causing walls to tumble down, an unrecorded eclipse, the sun standing still so Joshua could kill more people, etc, yet NONE of this stuff happens anymore. Those people were supposedly given miraculous signs, whereas we today are given a collection of books who's authorship is questionable and a bunch of wars in the name of God. It seems to me that Yahweh was nothing more than a localized deity (much like Ra, Daghda,Shiva, were in other places) and his worship only spread because Christian missionaries used the sword to "convert" people. Had it not been for their efforts, many civilizations would still exist (the Celtic Druids for example), but because of their efforts to convert others, entire civilizations were wiped out. yet no word from heaven about any of this. We're all still waiting for an answer.
Were it not for some of the spiritual experiences I have had over the years, I would just chuck spirituality out the window and pronounce myself an atheist. I can't deny my experiences as being "in my head" but I can deny that there is something rotten with Christianity.
For myself I must apologize to everyone on these forums for promoting Yeshua. I have talked about "hearing" his voice in my head. But the truth of the matter is, I really am not sure who/what it is. Part of me wants to think it's Yeshua (Jesus), BUT when I was into paganism I still heard that voice. Given that the Bible is against witchcraft, this doesn't seem likely. I guess that I'm still holding onto some of the Wt teachings in regard to the 144,000 and other things. I feel SO stupid.
Also I have to admit that I have been back and forth on this issue many times. Perhaps it's time to finally admit that I simply don't know. There are too many prayers that have gone unanswered and I have seemingly wasted away most of my life on something that leaves me with more questions/doubt than answers.
So I guess what I am saying is I'm done with Christianity and all that goes with it. The things supposedly taught by Jesus (showing love to others) in the Gospels are wonderful things, but many books say the same things.
Oh and please don't send me any PM's regrading this issue. If you have something to say about this post, reply in this thread. I'll ignore ANY PM's sent to me regarding this issue. You know who you are.
That is all.
-
266
Favorite Songs Thread...........
by Judge Dread inhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_bo7dhgz1g.
jdw .
-
-
Awen
River--Joni Mitchell
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpFudDAYqxY
Pretty much how I feel about my life currently (pertaining to the world around me).
-
197
What is "truth" - COULD Einstein Have Been Wrong?
by AGuest inmay you all have peace!.
just came across this article:.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44629271/ns/technology_and_science-science/?gt1=43001.
-
-
Awen
Responding to the original topic.
What is Truth?
MY definition of Truth is: a series of observations that validate a hypothesis.
Scientific hypothesis
People refer to a trial solution to a problem as a hypothesis, often called an "educated guess" because it provides a suggested solution based on the evidence. Experimenters may test and reject several hypotheses before solving the problem.
According to Schick and Vaughn, researchers weighing up alternative hypotheses may take into consideration:Testability (compare falsifiability as discussed above)
Simplicity (as in the application of "Occam's razor", discouraging the postulation of excessive numbers of entities)
Scope - the apparent application of the hypothesis to multiple cases of phenomena
Fruitfulness - the prospect that a hypothesis may explain further phenomena in the future
Conservatism - the degree of "fit" with existing recognized knowledge-systems.So for myself certain experiences become subjective truth after having been tested. Someone else may come up with their own methods of testing and when compared to mine, they find the results are in agreement. Hence the subjective truth now becomes a mutually accpeted relative Truth (as far as the two of us are concerned) but still be considered by others to be subjective, objective or a relative truth because they have not done their own testing. Or if they have tested the theory they encountered different results due to a variation in the testing process.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis#Scientific_hypothesis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth
Truth has several definitions and perhaps for the subject of this discussion it needs to be addressed as to what particluar type of truth we are referring to.
Various theories and views of truth continue to be debated among scholars and philosophers. There are differing claims on such questions as what constitutes truth; what things are truthbearers capable of being true or false; how to define and identify truth; the roles that revealed and acquired knowledge play; and whether truth is subjective or objective, relative or absolute .
So it seems to me many of us are using different definitions of Truth while not realizing it. So for the sake of this discussion when a person replies, perhaps they might say for example "In my opinion the belief in God is a subjective Truth." That is to say based upon their own experiences but possibly different from those of others. "Or I feel the belief in God is bat-sh*t crazy because it's an objective Truth." In other words it's untestable and therefore unknowable.
However this is where it gets tricky. Though both persons are speaking about Truth, they are in fact speaking about different types of truth. Also Einstein's Theory of special relativity (discussed in the original linked article) is being presented as an example of one type of Truth (as it was then), another type of Truth (as it's regarded today) and a completely different type of truth (compared to others things).
The theory of special relativity seems to fall under the definition of objective and relative truth. It would be like saying: "Einstein came up with this theory with the use of mathematics (objective) and not because he thought it was a good idea (subjective). Others tested his theory and concluded it was an objective (based on evidence not opinion) truth. So today when discussing this theory we all agree that the theory is both relatively (based upon our own opinion) and objectively (testable) True."
Belief in God would fall under subjective Truth (based upon individual experience). It can also be seen as an objective truth (based upon the results of testing) done by the individual. However, unlike Einstein's Theory the results may not be accepted by others because of the type of testing done.
So to answer Shelby's question.
Does Truth change?
Yes it does.
Einstein's Theory although accepted in his time is undergoing a possible change just as Newton's Theory had to be modified.
Newton's theory versus special relativity
A comparison can be made between Newtonian relativity and special relativity.
Some of the assumptions and properties of Newton's theory are:The existence of infinitely many inertial frames. Each frame is of infinite size (covers the entire universe). Any two frames are in relative uniform motion. (The relativistic nature of mechanics derived above shows that the absolute space assumption is not necessary.)
The inertial frames move in all possible relative uniform motion.
There is a universal, or absolute, time.
Two inertial frames are related by a Galilean transformation.
In all inertial frames, Newton's laws, and gravity, hold.In comparison, the corresponding statements from special relativity are:
Same as the Newtonian assumption.
Rather than allowing all relative uniform motion, the relative velocity between two inertial frames is bounded above by the speed of light.
Instead of universal time, each inertial frame has its own time.
The Galilean transformations are replaced by Lorentz transformations.
In all inertial frames, all laws of physics are the same.They are virtually identical except for a few modifications.
When it comes to belief in God Truth can also change.
The Truth of Jesus that one held while a JW is no longer the same Truth that is held (by some) as an exJW.
They are both still Truths, simply different types.
.
-
15
Belief to non-belief
by Awen inhave anyone here went from being a very strict believer in god to a non-believer?.
actually i think many are.. but outside of the usual answers of "god doesn't exist" (which you must have had some very valid reasons for), were there many things that caused you to come to this conclusion?
i was watching a southpark video about joseph smith and the mormons and i thought it very funny that anyone could actually believe any of that stuff.
-
-
Awen
I realize now my error with religion. I wanted to believe.
I was talking with my best friend today at work about this subject and getting his opinion on it. In the course of the conversation it was brought to my attention that there have been many things in the past that we once thought were irrefutable facts or truth only to have them shattered at a later time. In fields of philosophy, biology, physics, medicine and the list goes on and on. What was once thought irrefutable was changed to a mere myth somewhat over night by the discovery of new methods of research or a new hypothesis put forth that challenged the core of our "beliefs".
So what are we to do in cases such as these? Do we cling to our old beliefs in the hopes that the news ideas will be proven false? Some have done so, for example. Some embraced it others did not. So to it is with religion.
Hundreds of religions have come and gone over the centuries. Some we have vast quantites of information concerning them and others only scant knowledge. What about when we "outgrow" a religious path or it no longer speaks to us? Do we abandon it simply because we haven't found the answers or do we stick with it because it has carried us this far and has been a source of comfort to us?
It's somewhat like science. Ever growing, ever changing with the advent of new discoveries and ideas. The discovery of an ancient manuscript can cause us to question the foundations of our faith, just like the the CERN project in Switzerland has recently caused people to rethink Einstein's special theory on relativity. Some scientists are embracing these new findings whereas others aren't.
So what is a believer to do when evidence comes to light that seems to refute their long held ideas about God and the nature of the universe?
Should we immediately embrace these new ideas or do we stick with what has carried us through to this point, even though we may be vilified for it?
It's quite the conundrum.
As far as belief goes I have found many scholars on both sides of the issue stating that their ideas are the correct one and the others are false. As a non-scholar/scientist how can I possibly refute any of what they say? Should I even try? What is the basis of my belief? So far it's been based not upon scripture but my own experiences. To be sure I don't know why bad things happen to good people or why wicked people seem to enjoy such good lives while the humble live in poverty. There have been many reasons put forth in the Bible for why this is. There have been many philosophers who have tried to answer the question up to and including the idea that there is no God and that we're all just dust in the wind.
A believer could just trust in the word of the scholars. However as an exJW this goes against what I have learned about trusting those in authority whom I have never met and have no personal knowledge of. Unless I cant test it for myself and get a satisfactory result the ideas of others should be as hearsay simply for the reason that the other person might have an agenda which conflicts with what is actually true. The WTS is a prime example of this. The old addage "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me" seems applicable here.
So while I do not know why bad things happen to good people or why the wicked seem to prosper. Nor do I know if Jesus actually existed as a historical person. What I do know is the personage I've interacted with spiritually over the past decade and who identifies himself as Christ has never led me astray nor told me an untruth (unlike some scholars or would be prophets). So what do I trust? Words on a page that I cannot read and whose context has been changed countless times or my own experiences? We do know from the Bible that some things have been altered. Jeremiah and Jesus both spoke of these things. So how do we know for a fact that the things Jehovah supposedly did to his own people actually occurred? We don't.
The measurement of what is real to me and what is not can only be measured by myself and not someone else. It was once said "We are walking by faith not by sight." I now think what this means is the things outside a person can fool them, whereas the spiritual things inside a person don't even try. But we are encouraged to "test the inspired expression to see whether it originates with God" which I have also done. My conclusion is that yes, my relationship is with God and Christ and it's a dependable one. Could I be in error? Of course. But until new data comes along that refutes what I currently hold to be true, I will just stick with what I "know" rather than what others "think."
So far my relationship with Christ has gotten me through some very tough times that I don't think I could have handled on my own. Does this make me delusional to have trust in someone I cannot see or touch? As far as modern psychiatry in concerned, yes it probably does. Then again we have Psychiatrists who are Christians themselves, so how do they come to grips with this belief in the face of their own profession? I guess I should ask them.
So I stated before that my belief in religion is what caused me problems. But as I have also said elsewhere on these forums, I don't follow a religion. I follow Christ. Religion to me is a set standard of traditions, rituals, and dogma (ideas which cannot be changed). My relationship with Christ is just that, a relationship. I don't feel I need the trappings of a religion to enable me to come to know someone I already consider to be family. It would be akin to introducing myself to my brother every time we meet so that He would know who's speaking to him. Kinda irrelevant really.
So I said in my initial post that "a lie becomes a truth if you want to believe it" which still holds true. But who's lying to whom? Are we lying to ourselves and believing the lie? Or are we allowing others to lie to us and beleiving them?
I'm reminded of the phrase "To thine own self be true" which seems to indicate we should not allow ourselves to be over influenced by the ideas of others. In the final text of Revelation we are reminded that we will each have to answer for ourselves. We cannot be like Adam who tried to blame his sin upon God or his wife. God knew better but He wanted to hear it from Adam's own lips, just as He also knew what Adam and Eve had done, but wanted them to admit it openly. So it is with ourselves. Do we try to put the blame upon others (scholars) for certain beliefs? Or will we closely examine what he hold to be true and give an accurate and thorough witness about ourselves to God if asked?
I know my answer.
What's yours?
-
47
Was Jesus a Buddhist Monk?
by skeeter1 inone of the things that most bothered me about the bible, is the narcasist, lunatic jehovah who orders killings of women, children, starts wars, etc....and the advent of peaceful jesus.
some people say that jehovah was a killer to protect "his" people, but couldn't a perfect, all-knowing god have found a way better then to walk on the earth and tell abraham to kill his first born son?.
on my spiritual journey, i now see how the earlier gods (roman, greek, pagan) are intertwined into the old testament.
-
-
Awen
I'll add something about belief when it comes to Jesus.
What we have are accounts attributed to people who weren't eyewitnesses. They wrote in behalf of others as far as we know.
Many people believed in Zeus, Apollo, Hades etc because there were many stories written about them. So the basis of a belief (not a truth) can be set at the doorstep of a story. Just because many people believed in something does not make it true. Flat Earth, Moon made of green cheese, you get the idea. We have to step outside of belief for a moment, suspend belief if you will and look at the hard evidence. For a long time true believer this has been very difficult for me, however I have been unable to find real evidence based upon belief as belief varies from person to person, but unchangeable truth stays the same.
Unfortunately with the suspension of belief the evidence for a historical Jesus is quite scarce. We have writings of people who lived after his death, but so far nothing from anyone who lived during his lifetime which is odd considering the dramatic impact his life has had on the world. Some might say it's a conspiracy. Whereas others would say it's no surprise.
The thing is we can compare Jesus to Buddha or Mithra or Osiris or many others and find commonalities in their teachings and life stories. I think this is purposely done to give their teachings more weight and validity. But is it true?
No one can answer that question while still holding onto belief. Belief clouds one's judgement.
Suspend belief and make your observations. The answer becomes startingly clear.
-
51
What Do You Like For A Drink?
by minimus ini'm usually a cognac drinker.
i love armagnac too.
and i enjoy a martini i invented---mandarin vodka with a slight bit, usually about a capful of chambord served in an ice cold martini glass.. this saturday i'm mixing with my gf's friends and family in conn. with some affluent people and i might want to try something different.
-
-
Awen
Single Malt Scotch Whiskey (imported)
Margarita made with Two Fingers Tequila.
Cognac -Hennessey (in the proper glass so it can breathe) with a bit of caramel added.
Mint Julep made with Jack Daniels Old No 17 Tennessee Straight Bourbon Whiskey
I hope to try some Absinthe (properly prepared with slotted spoon, sugar cube and cold filtered water).
Not much of a beer drinker as all American beer tastes the same to me (mule piss). Guinness Extra Stout is okay but a bit strong for my palate. Samuel Adams Summer Ale is about the only one I like so far.
Perhaps some beer recommendations are in order?
I'm a smoker too. Usually pipes and the occasional cigar. I live in tobacco growing country and so I'd like to find a place nearby that rolls cigars by hand. Thus far, nothing.
-
26
Last Weekend Ever (according to OBVES) Whatcha gonna Do?
by LostGeneration inobves says the world ends next week, meaning this is the last weekend ever!
better make it a good one!.
i'm gonna step out on a limb and predict that i will have at least 1,784 more weekends before my dirt nap starts, so i'm gonna sit on my rear and watch as much college and nfl football as possible.
-
-
-
15
Belief to non-belief
by Awen inhave anyone here went from being a very strict believer in god to a non-believer?.
actually i think many are.. but outside of the usual answers of "god doesn't exist" (which you must have had some very valid reasons for), were there many things that caused you to come to this conclusion?
i was watching a southpark video about joseph smith and the mormons and i thought it very funny that anyone could actually believe any of that stuff.
-
-
Awen
Thank you so very much leavingwt for this link.
I read all the way through it, every word and found a kindred spirit. For many years of my life but especially the past decade every word that was on the webpage I have at one time or another thought to myself.
I realize now my error with religion. I wanted to believe. No matter what arguments or facts were presented they were dismissed or faound fault with because of one immutable fact. I wanted to believe. I'm reminded of one of my favorite movies (The Karate Kid 2) and a singular line from the movie that I have carried with me all these days since. I thinbk it applies to religion as well as a great many other things.
"A lie only becomes truth if you want to believe it." --Mr Miyagi
Words cannot express the gratitude I feel right now for everyone who has commented.
Thank you all so much.