I am totally not touching this thread.
Well you're welcome to, certainly. Or not. Either way. Of course, if you believe in parallel universes, there's a universe out there where you did "touch" this thread.
"the trouble is that in an infinite multiverse, everything that can happen will happen - an infinite number of times" (newscientist mar 2010).
I am totally not touching this thread.
Well you're welcome to, certainly. Or not. Either way. Of course, if you believe in parallel universes, there's a universe out there where you did "touch" this thread.
"the trouble is that in an infinite multiverse, everything that can happen will happen - an infinite number of times" (newscientist mar 2010).
I was having a related conversation with a friend of mine recently.
Quantum Mechanics does weird things to our understanding of space time, as does causality and entropy. The idea is that everything that can happen does happen (at least on the quantum level). Is the electron here or there? Well the answer is both/neither until you observe it.
This also crosses into Parallel Universe theory, where there is an expression of existence out there somewhere wherein every possible outcome of a situation plays out. Do I put on white socks or grey this morning? Do I marry her or break up with her? Somewhere there is a universe where I am married with 2 kids, somewhere there is a universe where I'm still a bachelor, somewhere there is a universe where I'm dead, etc.
But your question was basically: "is there a universe where the Watchtower teachings are right?" I would say that depends on your definition of "right" as well as your understanding of God and how he/she/it relates to the universe/multiverse.
Quantum possibilities of "anything" happening only apply to matter and energy as expressed in our physical existance. Did God create the universe? Or does God exist inside of our universe? If he exists within it, as an expression of energy, is there a universe where there is no God? If so, how did the universe come to be?
If God exists outside the universe/multiverse and our understanding of space-time, then God's existance (and personality one would assume) is not subject to alterations based on quantum uncertainties. In this case, is God's existance and personality an absolute? Or has he/she/it changed over time, altering to suit the occasion in a similar way to how we grow as individuals, albeit on an infinitely greater scale?
The reason I'm bringing all that up is that for a certain teaching of the Witnesses or any other religion to be "right" means that the teaching is an accurate representation of both the form and character of God. And that their interpretation of his personality and motives as well as what his actions have been related to be are all accurate. That's a pretty tall order. It's by no means impossible. But the nature of God, the nature of time, the nature of the universe, and cause and effect are all at the heart of any teaching about these things being "right".
To say that there is a universe where the teachings of the Witnesses are right, first of all implies that they are wrong in this one. But it also assumes that God changes from one universe to the next. Otherwise how could they be "right" in one, but "wrong" in another?
I would also submit that for any teaching to be "right" it should also hold up under scientific scrutiny. After all, what is science but an attempt to understand what is? And if a thing IS, was it not God who caused it to be? Therefore in my mind, True science and True religion are different expressions of the same thing.
Those are my thoughts on the matter, for what they're worth...
i have a female friend who has dated a guy for over a year simply for the sex.. a lot of people i know have zero desire to get married or to be in a very serious relationship but of course, they still want sex.. what do you think of this?.
Well I'm in a serious relationship now, but it's a good question which my girlfriend and I have differing opinions on.
She would say that dating someone just for sex is wrong. I know because we've talked about this hypothetically (not that I'M doing that, we were talking about another friend).
My feeling on the matter mirror's keyser's:
As long as both parties have this understanding, I have no problem with it.
Single people want sex too. Nothing wrong with that in my mind. But I would say that both parties need to be on the "same page" and have the same understanding about what the activity and contact does and does not mean for them.
I might add that being in a "dating" relationship and having sex for that long (you said over a year, Min), I can't help thinking that you WOULD develop feelings for the other person in that amount of time. Not saying you'd be ready to tie the knot, but that you would at least have SOME feelings. And I think that's where Terry's comment applies:
Using another person (by consent or otherwise) is a haunting and degrading awareness implying something deeply deficient inside you.
If a person has been seeing someone regularly and having sex with them for over a year, and doesn't care one way or the other about that person (that is, it's JUST sex) I agree that it might be an indicator of an emotional problem. Either this individual has an inability to form personal attachments at all, or this is not a person he/she is at all compatible with. Either way, I tend to think that it would be a tight rope to walk. This girl/woman may not have any feelings for the guy, but what if this fellow formed an attachment for her?
Like so many other relationship related questions I think it comes down to openness and honesty.
I think it would be cruel to string someone along who has other intentions or feelings that are not shared just to satisfy your own personal needs.
Of course, if full disclosure is made, there are open lines of communication and both parties know EXACTLY where the other stands on the issue, then BOTH have made that choice for themselves. I'd say in that case, anyone has the right to decide their own love life, even if their decision ends up causing them pain down the road. Is it the wisest decision? Maybe not. But it IS one they have the right to make.
11 months and 3 weeks.....nothing.
then one week before the memorial all the brothers start to ring and visit with the "we miss you....loved to see you there.
" same with the c.o visit.
Yeah, I got an invitation from grandmom the other day too. Hasn't called me or talked to me in almost a year, but I showed up at her house the other night to help my brother (who is also not a witness) move some furniture she was temporarily taking of his and don't you know it? Not 5 minutes after I walked in the door came the question "Do you know when the memorial is this year?" as well as the written invitation. Thanks gram. I haven't gone in the last 5 years. Guess she keeps hoping this will be the year?
So I told her, yeah I know when it is. She was actually surprised and said "You do? How?", not knowing where I would have come across this information. I told her "the internet", because sites like this invariably have some people talking about it (and I think someone even posted a PDF of the invitation somewhere). She just got a puzzled look and said "oh", not quite putting two and two together I think. So I left the invitation on the counter because I obviously don't need it since I already know what day it's going to be. That was the end of that conversation.
But you're absolutely right, Witness 007. Seems like those "special" events trigger a surge in pretentious, imitation interest. You might add, Circuit or District Assembly to your list of events that produce this behavior. At least it was for me last year. 3 different people who had nothing to do with one another each invited me to the District Convention. For the first time in years. Needless to say I thought that was very odd as well...
I came here because I was finally at a place in life where I was ready to deal with my past instead of just pretending it didn't happen.
In short, to help and be helped.
would you use the handicap stall that is big and roomy ... even if other smaller stalls were available?.
Sorry to throw out a tangent here, but Elsewhere, I loved the Picard Facepalm ASCII art!! That was great, man!
And I agree with Keyser about the handicapped stall:
I would, and I have.
i figured that after reading the suicide thread through, we need a more positive thread.. so what makes you happy?
?.
jack and diet coke
That's funny. That's my drink of choice as well...
i figured that after reading the suicide thread through, we need a more positive thread.. so what makes you happy?
?.
Dandi, you're ok!
Why thank you, Min! You're not so bad yourself.
Tanqueray and tonic.......
how about borrowing a female goat and luring him back with the prospect of goat-love?
LOL!!
.
if you're an ex-atheist, what changed your mind?.
please be as brief or comprehensive as you'd like.
I toyed with atheism for a while after I rejected pretty much every religion mankind has concocted. But I came back to the middle a little more and settled on agnosticism, due in large part to physics and studying the order that exists in and the complexity of the universe. In the absence of quantifiable, observable evidence I cannot prove the existance of God. But neither can I disprove it.
It becomes a choice to believe in the existance of a higher power or not. Now, having made the choice to believe that He exists at all, the challenge is to determine what if anything He expects of us or wants us to do. But this is where religion can come in and start polluting the thought process.
I profess no religion, but at this point I'm not atheist. That's as far as I've personally come with it. I'm still searching...
i figured that after reading the suicide thread through, we need a more positive thread.. so what makes you happy?
?.
Things that make me happy:
Being accepted for who I am, not who others would have me be
The intimacy of a friend who knows you better than you know yourself
Second chances
Music
Sunshine on my face
Knowing that someone loves me
Great counterpoint to our previous topic.