goddidit

Joined

• started 46 topics
• posted 134 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by goddidit

• 
  3

  Definition of 'miracle'

  by goddidit in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i'm confused about the definition of 'miracle' for jws (or any other religion for that matter).. some describe it as an exception to the laws of physics.

  the laws of physics is just a description of reality.

  if god were to intervene in the world then his actions, being real, would be within this reality, right?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  goddidit

  I'm confused about the definition of 'miracle' for JWs (or any other religion for that matter).

  Some describe it as an exception to the laws of physics. What does that even mean? The laws of physics is just a description of reality. If god were to intervene in the world then his actions, being real, would be within this reality, right? Of course, god has the power to intervene more powerfully than us but it would still be within physics wouldn't it?

  My dad (a JW) told me some watchtower rubbish about water being affected by strong magnets so maybe that's what god used to part the red sea.

  As usual there's no evidence provided but I wonder what the point of the story is. Is it to make miracles seem 'possible'? Doesn't that defeat the point of a 'miracle'.

  I hope my rambling makes some kind of sense. BTW, I'm an atheist. Looking forward to your comments.

  Thanks
• 
  20

  1975, generation change and New Light - the WTBTS position

  by Nickolas in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the words below are taken from the latest version of the watchtower bible and tract society's history book.

  it is a response i have received from a jehovah's witness to my questions about how the watchtower bible and tract society represented the year 1975 and recent changes in generation teaching.

  beyond saying there are some interesting insights into the society's position on new light, i will withhold comment until i get some feedback from the board.. the bible itself says: do not interpretations belong to god?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  goddidit

  You wouldn't invite a builder with 99 bad jobs for every good one would you, therefore natural selection can't work!

  HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA ROFL!!!!

  I've actually read this in one of the rags.
• 
  4

  If a man performed real miracles...

  by sabastious in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  ...in this day in age, and told everyone that he was our creator would you believe him?.

  -sab.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  goddidit

  What's a miracle? I've always wondered.
• 
  14

  Random chance or design?

  by goddidit in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i don't read too much jw material because it's pretty much all the same old rubbish and the constant lies and propaganda drives me nuts.. however, i've noticed a common theme with the 'argument from design' articles.

  you know, look at the eye, isn't it complex, evolution is wrong, blah blah.

  all the ones i've seen end in a question like "what do you think, is this a product of random chance or design?".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  goddidit

  I can't begin to comprehend how anyone falls for it. What kind of mind does it take?

  I'm no expert on philosophy or any of the sciences but it's plainly obvious the JW mags are pure bullshit.

  Is it just because I've read a book or two and they haven't?
• 
  14

  Random chance or design?

  by goddidit in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i don't read too much jw material because it's pretty much all the same old rubbish and the constant lies and propaganda drives me nuts.. however, i've noticed a common theme with the 'argument from design' articles.

  you know, look at the eye, isn't it complex, evolution is wrong, blah blah.

  all the ones i've seen end in a question like "what do you think, is this a product of random chance or design?".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  goddidit

  "Well... the first thing that could be considered living would have to have been random chance..."

  But that's a different argument. What does that have to do with the formation of the eye?

  Following that logic just lumps everything into one bucket, looks for something science hasn't answered thoroughly yet, then proclaim "ahh haa, god must've done it then". Also known as 'god of the gaps'.

  I suppose that's what the writers are going for, which is why JWs don't even know what evolution is.
• 
  14

  Random chance or design?

  by goddidit in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i don't read too much jw material because it's pretty much all the same old rubbish and the constant lies and propaganda drives me nuts.. however, i've noticed a common theme with the 'argument from design' articles.

  you know, look at the eye, isn't it complex, evolution is wrong, blah blah.

  all the ones i've seen end in a question like "what do you think, is this a product of random chance or design?".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  goddidit

  I don't read too much JW material because it's pretty much all the same old rubbish and the constant lies and propaganda drives me nuts.

  However, I've noticed a common theme with the 'argument from design' articles. You know, look at the eye, isn't it complex, evolution is wrong, blah blah. All the ones I've seen end in a question like "what do you think, is this a product of random chance or design?"

  The propaganda in this question is obvious. Evolution is not random chance but that option is conspicuously absent.

  Has anyone seen an 'argument from design' article that *doesn't* end with this question?
• 
  15

  Debate

  by goddidit in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i'd like to have a one-on-one online debate with an active jw.

  it doesn't have to be private.. anyone have any suggestions how i might arrange this?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  goddidit

  Ooops, I forgot to get back to this thread. Bit busy now. I will try to bring this up again later. Thanks for all your comments and invitation.
• 
  15

  New book by Stephen Hawking

  by Dagney in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100902/lf_nm_life/us_britain_hawking.

  i wonder if the wtbs ever quoted from him based on his prior belief.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  goddidit

  I think his comments have been misunderstood. Einstein also used the word 'god' but that doesn't mean he believed in a personal creator.
• 
  15

  Debate

  by goddidit in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i'd like to have a one-on-one online debate with an active jw.

  it doesn't have to be private.. anyone have any suggestions how i might arrange this?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  goddidit

  So active means going to meetings and round the doors but not necessarily believing it?

  Are these active non-believers the people that just stay because they don't want to lose friends and/or family?
• 
  15

  Debate

  by goddidit in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i'd like to have a one-on-one online debate with an active jw.

  it doesn't have to be private.. anyone have any suggestions how i might arrange this?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  goddidit

  Maybe I need to re-ask the question but first I need some definitions please.

  I assumed there were simply active, meaning someone that believes it all and goes to KH, and non-active, meaning an ex-jw.

  Also, what is "conscious class"?

  I assumed there wouldn't be any active (by my previous definition) jws on this site at all. Is that wrong? If there is some, are they here covertly?