..specifically, the suffering of animals.
you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.
i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.
When I speak about suffering=bad I am speaking purely in philosophical terms.
What is the basis for saying [suffering=bad]
one can even make the case that [living =bad]
There is no scientific basis for making such an assertion. only feelings of pure conjecture. which is the case Cofty is making.
unless of course the basis for suffering=bad is purely based on subjective emotions
..specifically, the suffering of animals.
you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.
i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.
Being a philosophy nut myself, I would have to ask a question with your question.
how does one determine if suffering is evil? what standard are you judging this by?
apparently jwd has lost all their moles.. hasn't anyone even been to a convention?.
usually we know in advance..
I believe the "Kingdom Rule" book is a replcement of the "Organized to do Jehovah's Will" book which is distributed only for members seeking to get baptized. The book should place a huge emphasis on Organizational policy and order.
The "Your Family Can be happy" book should be the replacement for the "The Secret to Family Happiness" book.
Those are my assumptions up to this point. I will be going to the convention tomorrow thorugh sunday and ill scan an entire PDF of each book by Monday
i work at a hotel, and our hotel literally sold out in two days.
the jdubs aint playing!
you would think that the end of the world was coming how they were calling for hotel rooms.
Joliette,
I will be going to the Miluwaukee convention this weekend as well, on Saturday, we should meet up!
or should i say some things.... reading over another thread and a number of other threads i have to ask, why are we making excuses for jesus / god.. how can you fathom and all powerful god who created the universe and all the laws that govern it was not capable of:.
1. making sure the proper pronunciation of his name is not available.
2. that all his teaching are not preserved in an easy to discern manner so that ther is no confusion.
We do not need absolute morality in order to judge moral actions objectively.
Your comment is self-defeating Cofty. Absolute morality IS Objective morality! You begin by declaring we dont need absolute morality. Then you conclude by declaring we can JUDGE moral actions Objectively?? Either you have an objective starting point to judge actions, or you have a subjective starting point to judge them.
Whats more interesting is the convient definition you [Or Sam Harris] have given for what morality is:
Morals are nothing more than our musings about how we promote the flourishing of conscious creatures.
Thus sayeth Sam Harris, let it be written, let it be done...
Sorry I dont agree with the creeds of Sam harris as my moral starting point. Just because he says it [or you say it] does not make it absolute.
or should i say some things.... reading over another thread and a number of other threads i have to ask, why are we making excuses for jesus / god.. how can you fathom and all powerful god who created the universe and all the laws that govern it was not capable of:.
1. making sure the proper pronunciation of his name is not available.
2. that all his teaching are not preserved in an easy to discern manner so that ther is no confusion.
You have switched the question.
If somebody enjoys suffering they are mentally ill and we can safely dismiss their opinions.
well thats your opinion, lol
"There needs to be a absolute grounding for the truth claim being made [Suffering = Bad]"
Says who?
Well this was the original objection to God. The orignial question on the thread was: 4- [Why God] Allows people to suffer and will not help
This was the moral objection to God. My reply is simple, on what basis is suffering morally "bad"?
Cofty, your standard seems to be pain=wrong, however this cannot ALWAYS be true since not everybody believes that to be the case, many people love pain and consider it a fettish. Your simple dismissal of this by labeling them as "Mentally ill" [hmm sounds like something the watchtower would say] :) Hardly proves your case that your standard MUST be always true. In fact it isnt.
The rason why there must be an absolute standard is because relative standards will not be able to hold so called "Unethical actions of God" as truly being wrong. because after all, Gods actions are relatively good. Thats the point.
or should i say some things.... reading over another thread and a number of other threads i have to ask, why are we making excuses for jesus / god.. how can you fathom and all powerful god who created the universe and all the laws that govern it was not capable of:.
1. making sure the proper pronunciation of his name is not available.
2. that all his teaching are not preserved in an easy to discern manner so that ther is no confusion.
Go and ask somebody to kick you really hard in the balls and then get back to me about that.
Sure I might have a feeling of discomfort and pain, that's quite a different thing from labeling the physical effects of my discomfort from being ethically good or bad. Some people enjoy pain and even consider it a fettish.
There needs to be a absolute grounding for the truth claim being made [Suffering = Bad]
or should i say some things.... reading over another thread and a number of other threads i have to ask, why are we making excuses for jesus / god.. how can you fathom and all powerful god who created the universe and all the laws that govern it was not capable of:.
1. making sure the proper pronunciation of his name is not available.
2. that all his teaching are not preserved in an easy to discern manner so that ther is no confusion.
1. Making sure the proper pronunciation of his name is not available
This is one of the fallacious arguments that the Jehovah's Witnesses make, insisting on a specific "sound wave" for Gods literal name. What they are doing is imposing an american idea of names on the scriptures themselves. In all reality, this is not how the Jewish culture operated.
When moses was speaking to God on Mt. Saini, he asked God "Who should I say sent me?" God replied not with a literal name, but instead, with his attribute or character of his being. He said "I AM who I AM, say this to the people of Israel, I AM has sent me to you"
The attribute of God in calling himself "I AM" means I am what I will purpose to be. In that culture a name defined your attribute or character. For example the Egyptian gods had names cooresponding to thier specific geographical region and attribute. [god of fertility, god of the nile, god of the sun etc..] What the God of Israel was declaring was that He was the Creator God.
So when the Israelites were saved from the Red sea, they literally called out the name of God according to his attribute. They would say The Lord of Salvation, when it came time for the Sabbath, they would call out Gods name; the Lord of Rest. so on and so fourth.
The hebrew people understood this, they understood that there was no "Single Name" that could identify God, since he had many attributes to his character, you could not put God in a box. This is why they used 4 characters YHWH [which cannot be pronounced] to identify as a symbol of God.
The Jehovah's Witnesses error by trying to turn this symbol into a literal name of God, which is not its purpose. The name Jehovah comes from a combonation of YHWH and Adoni [which means Lord]
Its almost superstitous on the Jw's part to think of the name "Jehovah" as almost like a talisman. As if you say the literal name Jehovah, God will perk his ears a little closer to your ears.
2. That all his teaching are not preserved in an easy to discern manner so that ther is no confusion.
The purpose of the OT was to point you to the messiah, the NT reveals the messiah thus giving the individual a basis for Faith in Jesus. The argumentation here assumes that we must have an exhaustive list of every saying of Jesus in order to have an accurate knowledge of Him. This is not the case.
When it comes to Salvation, Jesus laid it out quite simply by saying this:
[John 8:47] "Whoever is of God hears the words of God. the reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God."
Scriptures testify of Jesus, belief starts with God, we respond in faith.
Yet again this contradicts the Watchtowers view that KNOWLEDGE is the starting point for faith. If we use Watchtower presuppositions, I can fully understand why you would draw this conclusion and not understand why we dont have more "knowledge" of the scriptures.
3. Made hs presence evident to a small group of people in the middle east and pretty much gave a giant fuck you to the rest of civilization of thousands of years
this is an argument from silence. What makes you think he didnt? The only way to substantiate this assertion is to insist you have exhaustive knowledge on the middle east and other areas throughout history to declare he didnt reveal himself to individuals.
4. Allows people to suffer and will not help
Ok this one I might need a clarification on your point of view a little more. here you are making an ethical judgment against God, however I do not understand which ethical standard you are judging him from?
Suffering = Bad
you need to substantiate
1) Why suffering is bad
2) What ethical standard do you make judgments from?
3) [Implied] Why God allowing suffering makes him unethical
i am reuniting with past students and return visits.. i met up with a young lad i used to call on.
he is not baptised, but at university in his 20's and living away from home.
his mother is a jw and his father is not.
Are you an Apostate?
A: Well that depends on the context in which you are using the term.
[For the Christian] The biblical view of Christian apostasy is renouncing your faith in Jesus [Hebrews 6:4-8] having a confession of Jesus and later resorting back to the religious traditions and sacrifices that were meant to point to Jesus.
In other instances, especially for the church in Corinth, people would confess Jesus yet would live in a way inconsistent of thier faith [Sleeping with thier step mother, getting drunk on communion wine etc..]
From a biblical standpoint, no I am not an apostate.
However I have learned over the years in the Watchtower organization that the label "Apostate" should always be used in a negative sense. However Jesus was in many ways an apostate against the religious system of his day.
He rebelled against the religious system because even though the leaders knew the word of God, they did not honor it. One particular ocassion Jesus found himself eating with tax collectors [Matthew 9] and other people labeled "bad association" The pharisees saw him eating with them and said to Jesus disciples "Why does you teacher eat with such scum?"
Jesus reply was profound: "Sick people need a doctor, healthy people dont. Now I want you to go learn the meaning of this verse [Hosea 6:6] I want you to show mercy, not offer sacrifices" For I have come to call not those who THINK they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners."
This brings me back full circle to your question. Am I an apostate according to the bible? No.
Am I an apostate against the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. Oh yes, for they like the pharisees know nothing of mercy, only sacrifice. I could never again be apart of a religious system that abuses the scriptures such as they.
Hello everybody,
Sorry about the late introduction. I have been on this site for the better part of 3 years and have been watching the threads. I am a 4th generation Jehovah's Witness and have left in 2009. During that time I have come to faith in Jesus. Unlike the Watchtower who tells you WHAT to believe, I found it very important to know WHY I believe it.
This thread was particularly interesting to me since it deals with the moral aspect of Gods existence. I would like to flesh out this a little more. Perhaps get some more details from Captian Obvious from this comment:
"If God was a real person, he certainly would have a credibility problem with me and I would be up in his face (while fearing he'd turn me into some sort of disgusting lower life form). I'd still do it. Goddammit, I want answers and he's been confusing the crap out of everyone for millennia." What is your position exactly?
1- God isnt real
2- God is real but I have a credibility problem with him?
3- I dont know if God is real but even if He was he is not credible?
