Posts by fresh prince of ohio

107

Please someone, explain scientifically how an omnipotent,omniscience,omnipresent,almighty GOD came from nothing

by smiddy in

only scientific responses needed smiddy

fresh prince of ohio

I think OGD's analogy between proving *God's* existence and proving one's *love* for another only succeeds if you view God as just a poetic idea or something Platonic like "goodness" or "treeness" or the like. And even then only partially. Love, though not easy to define in precise scientific terms, is at least partly defineable, if in no other way but the subjective 'I know it when I see it' variety. God isn't really like that as God isn't an idea that corresponds to a strong emotion i.e. something you can (again) sort of measure.

I don't see how God can be defined either poetically or scientifically.

41

Best TV show lines!

by serenitynow! in

jw
friends

fresh prince of ohio

Edith: (Calling up the stairs) "Archie??"

*FLUSH*

23

The TENSION of unbearable BELIEF

by Terry in

i have a personal theory about russell, rutherford and franz.. it extends to end times religious people in general.. that is, highly intelligent...end times believers.... .

there is a tension to believing something that never seems to overlap with reality.. your intelligence keeps flashing "something's wrong".. but, your deeply held convictions (faith) tells you to shut the f**k up!.

so, you live your live with a "gnawing" away at your brain.

fresh prince of ohio

Great thoughts, and I think the Charles Manson comparison is legit enough.

I guess the difference would be that, Manson's methods of overwhelming and taking hold of a person's entire psychic existence were deeply personal (and with the women, sexual), and therefore a small following was the best he could ever hope for. Those infamous crazy-piercing brown/black eyes and all. FF's charisma came not from having a piercing, I-OWN-you stare nor an ability to gain complete psychological control of a small group of people, but rather a unique and bizarre set of circumstances that combined to put an intelligent and studious yet extremely kooky man from Kentucky at the head of an international, boisterous, and apocalyptic religious sect whose very existence RELIED upon an always immenent doomsday in the minds of the flock, and Fred's hypnotic (to the impressionable) writing style was just the trick.

Two men with different styles and different circumstances, but with the same bent towards believing themselves to be at the very heart of a grand cosmic drama that was being played out. You can throw Hitler and David Koresh and countless other into that category.

20

You can be a Professor at a University but no higher Ed. for Jdubs WTH?

by Kensho in

jw
friends

anybody know about a brother h. latchman in fl.

a jw elder was talking to me about him.

he was so impressed with the fact that he was a. sub.

fresh prince of ohio

1000% percent likelihood that said Prof is a convert. There's more than enough weird intellectual types in the world to go around, and JWism manages to snare its share of them. Plenty of evidence of that on this very site.

In the 90s when I was still in, a bro and his wife moved to the cong I attended. He was raised JW and was a WTSociety boy through and through, but at the same time he somehow had managed to attend business school, got an MBA, and was making bank at a local energy company. He quickly became the fugging DARLING of the congregation. Cognitive dissonance indeed...

34

Tell me---We all have regrets about being in the organisation,what's yours?

by MsGrowingGirl20 in

what is/are your regrets?

do u wish that you'd have pursued something or dealt differently with a situation?.

fresh prince of ohio

My deepest regret regarding JWism is how long I stayed in out of fear and guilt. I converted (as an adult) around 1992 and by 1996 I was burnt out on it completely. But I also had completely internalized their 'if you struggle or doubt anything, you're the problem' line. I stayed in until 2002, and by that time I was a complete freaking mental case from it.

97

The Wacky World of Dating Sites

by Terry in

jw
friends

sooner or later each of us who does not have a significant other goes out on the trail armed with our crappy photo and lame self-descriptions and awkward smile in search of our prey: an exciting mate!.

who'd have thunk it?

it ain't easy.. not easy, why?

fresh prince of ohio

I'm MAN seeks WOMAN in the 35-45 age group. Plenty of dents and dings in that category too.

Typical intro lines of woman-seeking-man ads on POF: "Tired of Losers!" or, "Tired of Players!" or, "Where are the nice guys?" Cracks me up. Get real - you're on a free dating website, you're in your 30s/40s/50s with a string of unsuccessful relationships behind you, but it's always our fault, lol.

20

Your thoughts on whether atheists and agnostics are one step closer to God than religionists?

by Fernando in

.

topgodapexspiritual persons (eg paul)middleatheists, agnostics, secularistsbottomreligionists (eg saul)seemingly in scripture the only persons jesus repeatedly tore into were the religionists (pharisees and sanhedrin or governing body).

it seems he gave the romans (secularists) scant attention, and chose to eat with the likes of prostitutes and presumably also lgbt persons..

fresh prince of ohio

Belief in "God" I think is really more of a belief in purpose, in fatherly love, in objective moral standards, in meaning, in an orderly universe.

God separated from those things is really difficult to define in a meaningful, tangible way. Where is God? What is God made of? How did God come into existence? How does God bring other things into existence? How does God decide what is morally right? Why did God create the universe? These are questions with no answers, but not everybody who believes in God asks them.

If atheists and aggies are closer to God in some sense, I guess it would be that it's in that we've given more thought as to just what God is, stripped of the tribalism and religious and moral baggage that are tied to the concept.

63

Circuit Assembly Confronting Apostate Challenge

by watson in

jw
friends

well, i sat thru day 2 of the latest circuit assembly.

instead of having the co or do re address the "generation" confusion, they had a couple of brothers do a demonstration.

mocha break out in service, weaker brother mentions he's tired....all of the changes lately, the confusing new understanding of that generation, et al.

fresh prince of ohio

In his Keynote Address about Armageddon, he was trying to show us how Jah's "cleansing" of the eart was necessary. So, he used the example that if your house full of ants, or cock roaches..or, or, if what about snakes.....would you just leave them alone? Wouldn't you want to have them completely out of your house??

Such make-me-illustrations just make every person outside of the borganization into undifferentiated parts of one giant abstraction that serves as the painted backdrop of their religious fantasy. I wish that they would keep it a little more real. "The guy who delivers your mail? He's gonna get whacked. All the people that live on your street? On your block? TOAST! Your coworkers? They'll all be lying dead in ditches after Armageddon, baby. All the people that work to build the roads you travel on, produce the TV shows you watch, harvest the food that you eat, run the government that sorta holds thing together, our grand Creator is going to KILL EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM as part of the glorious fulfillment of His purposes friends!"

19

How would SOPA affect us?

by Aussie Oz in

jw
friends

i note a lot of recent news about sopa and both sides of the story.. i hope this will not turn into a debate about it or its legalities or the constitution, it's about the effect of it itself.. mixed in no doubt is a large amount of speculation from both sides as to how it will or will not work and the 'freedoms' under threat.

i beleive the concept of protecting intelectual property etc is fine, as i want the same protection for my artwork etc, but i gather this bill may go to far as it were.... many feel it will adversely effect the internet in as diverse ways as making sites shut down either by force in in self protection such as etsy, flickr, utube, wikipedia and social networking sites.. is it all being blown out of proportion?.

do we as an online community very used to posting, cut n paste, links etc face the risk of simon having to pull the pin?.

fresh prince of ohio

rebel8, I'm no expert as I'm really not all that smart, but my understanding of SOPA is that sites hosted outside the US but accessible in the US (I'm not sure exactly where this site is hosted) are really its primary target. If this legislation passes as-is, then a copyright holder, SUCH AS THE WBTS, could file a complaint with the Justice Department naming JWN and others as infringers on their copyrights. The Justice Department could then have US traffic to this site BLOCKED, just based on a simple allegation and nothing more. It's scary shit. You KNOW the WBTS would go Theocratic Warfare APESHIT BERZERK on ex-JW sites such as this one if these laws pass. SHUDDER!

Here's a visual aid:

http://americancensorship.org/infographic.html

34

I would like your opinion on Bertrand Russell's comment

by Terry in

could we discuss our reaction to bertrand russell's quote below?.

if i were asked to prove that zeus and poseidon and hera and the rest of the olympians do not exist, i should be at a loss to find conclusive arguments.

an agnostic may think the christian god as improbable as the olympians; in that case, he is, for practical purposes, at one with the atheists.. .

fresh prince of ohio

I always come back to the doctrine of the Virgin Birth. IMO, on this doctrine the whole truth or lack thereof of Christianity hangs.

This is so on-its-face impossible for me to believe, and so beyond any attempts at literal proof, that I don't feel any obligation to PROVE that it didn't happen. This is one of the most extraordinary claims made about Jesus and I can't imagine how any extraordinary, or even ordinary proof could be provided authenticating it. It is a 100% leap of faith to believe it, and I sometimes wonder just how much hard thought this doctrine is given by persons professing Christianity, in terms of, 'this is just a willing belief in something entirely unprovable and therefore it is perfectly reasonable to reject it and therefore I cannot fault a soul for not believing it'.

Of course there are Christians who insist that "spiritual truths" don't necessarily have to be "literal truths" or whatnot, and I can respect that, I guess. But all it amounts to is a kind of existentialist Christianity, in other words, just choosing to believe something not because of its literal truth but because of its ability to provide meaning. I've tried that course but in the end it just doesn't work for me. Maybe I'll keep trying, I'm always a bit enticed by the Kiirkegaard school but there's just not enough meat on that bone to really chart your life course based on it.