Thanks for the news about this. Someone posted a link to PZ Myers as well, who commented on it on his site. Worth checking out, unless you're a creationist. Reading Myers is a lot like R. Dawkins in a debate, so...ya know. Up to you.
IsaacJ22
JoinedPosts by IsaacJ22
-
32
New Awake: Is Atheism on the March? (Ironically, WTS complains that Atheists should keep it to themselves)
by Elsewhere inhttps://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://download.jw.org/files/media_magazines/g_e_201011.pdf.
the article begins with:.
"a new group of atheists has arisen in society.
-
-
-
43
Was the legend about Smurfs being demonic just an urban legend, or was it mentioned in the literature?
by IsaacJ22 ini never heard about the smurfs being evil until i joined the forum.
but when i look in the volume library, the word doesn't come up.
i was wondering if anyone ever heard mention of it in the literature--as in, was it an official position?.
-
-
IsaacJ22
This is interesting stuff, especially the other (non-Smurf) examples of knee jerk reactions. I may be able to use some of that. Thanks everybody!
-
43
Was the legend about Smurfs being demonic just an urban legend, or was it mentioned in the literature?
by IsaacJ22 ini never heard about the smurfs being evil until i joined the forum.
but when i look in the volume library, the word doesn't come up.
i was wondering if anyone ever heard mention of it in the literature--as in, was it an official position?.
-
-
IsaacJ22
Well, guess I'll have to remove a few of my wise cracks. ::Sniff:: Thanks everybody.
-
43
Was the legend about Smurfs being demonic just an urban legend, or was it mentioned in the literature?
by IsaacJ22 ini never heard about the smurfs being evil until i joined the forum.
but when i look in the volume library, the word doesn't come up.
i was wondering if anyone ever heard mention of it in the literature--as in, was it an official position?.
-
-
IsaacJ22
I never heard about the Smurfs being evil until I joined the forum. But when I look in the Volume Library, the word doesn't come up. I was wondering if anyone ever heard mention of it in the literature--as in, was it an official position?
Also, I've been told that Mork & Mindy was seen as a bad thing because they were living together, but unmarried. (Like Mork was getting all kinds of action...right.) I think my wife told me that one. No references found there, either. Were both of these just local complaints/urban legends, or were they "legit" complaints from the Society's leadership?
I'm working on something right now--a podcast for my site, actually. If these problems were unofficial, maybe I can find some other complaints that were equally silly to include by searching the forums. If anyone wants to suggest a few, that would be helpful, too.
Thanks for your help.
-
11
I want to know the truth
by robson inhi, i need to ask a question about the privileges a co posseses at the helm of the christian congregation of jehovah's witnesses.. i would like if someone would like to respond to some of my questions cause you all know at the hall nobody will do that for me and i've done that in the past and they just don't care about me so you guys are my only hope.. .
1. who finances the co expenses.. 2. how true is the blue envelope given to them at the district convention.. 3.where do they live.. 4. who pays for their cars.. 5.how they get insurance.. and so forth, any one knows about all of this going on at the teocratic bureaucreacy..
-
-
IsaacJ22
I meant, they built an upstairs aparment in their KH for him and his wife to live in.
-
11
I want to know the truth
by robson inhi, i need to ask a question about the privileges a co posseses at the helm of the christian congregation of jehovah's witnesses.. i would like if someone would like to respond to some of my questions cause you all know at the hall nobody will do that for me and i've done that in the past and they just don't care about me so you guys are my only hope.. .
1. who finances the co expenses.. 2. how true is the blue envelope given to them at the district convention.. 3.where do they live.. 4. who pays for their cars.. 5.how they get insurance.. and so forth, any one knows about all of this going on at the teocratic bureaucreacy..
-
-
IsaacJ22
If it helps, I know a local congregation that built an upstairs apartment for the CO to live in! They did this of their own accord. I was told that before this, they had different arrangements depending on what congregation they were at. But I think that last part might have been an assumption on the part of my wife. :-)
-
3
Review of my webpage about the new brochure "The Origin of Life"
by Copernic ini'm looking for proof readers (english is not my native language ) or reviews about my wiki page dedicated to the quote mining in the brochure "the origin of life, five questions worth asking".
aknowledgement to wobble, third eye open, designer stubble, keinlezard who helped me to do it.
the brochure was life created ?
-
-
IsaacJ22
I am linking to your article from my web site at Atheist Geek News. This is great, and thanks. I will let you know if I see any problems.
-
243
Let's settle this for once and for all...... is atheism a belief, a non-belief or an anti-belief?
by Quillsky inmy opinion is that atheism is not a belief.
it is a belief in no belief..
-
-
IsaacJ22
As others have said, I don't see why this is so hard either. The only real confusion that makes sense to me is that many people are used to a single definition of the word and can't seem to get that one out of their head. Depending on what dictionaries you use, both the following definitions are technically accurate (as are several more I won't mention):
1) atheists actively disbelieve in God, just as many of us disbelieve that the Society has the "true religion." If asked whether any gods are real, an atheist by this definition must answer, "No. Without question." This seems to be the definition that many people can't let go of. Still, we atheists must remember that it's a valid definition too.
2) atheists are people who do not believe in God, but don't necessarily cross the line into disbelief. You might not believe that vitamin C cures cancer because you haven't seen proof, for instance, but still withold final judgment until proof is offered one way or the other.
In other words, atheists these days see belief in gods as on-off switch. There is no fence, like agnosticism is supposed to be, to sit on. Either you believe or you don't. Disbelief isn't a factor. If you don't believe in any gods--or are simply unconvinced that any gods exist--then we consider you an atheist. That's it, really. The more I talk about it, the more complicated it will seem.
Most atheists don't consider agnosticism to be a fence between theism and atheism. It is something else entirely. An agnostic believes that you can't prove or disprove gods absolutely. But you don't have to have proof to believe or even disbelieve. So you can be an agnostic Christian (believe in God without believing he can be proven or disproven) or an agnostic atheist (not convinced any gods are real, but without believing this can proven either way). This is why defining agnosticism as a middle ground between the two doesn't work very well, at least to me, and it sounds too wishy washy for atheists who have chosen to be bold and "come out" as nonbelievers. So most of us don't like to use it.
Most self proclaimed atheists are actually agnostic atheists these days, also known as weak atheism. These are valid philosophical terms. If you look up "weak atheist" or "agnostic atheism" you will find definitions for them online or in books that discuss it.
-
24
Water cloud over the earth? Anyone remember this teaching?
by QuestioningEverything inhaving a discussion with my sister and she remembers that there used to be a teaching that the earth had a watercloud over it and that's how we got rain.
anyone else remember this?
i vaguely do..
-
-
IsaacJ22
The ancient authors of the Bible are supposed to have believed in a water canopy according to modern scholars, though of a slightly different sort. It was once thought that God made a dome of metal and covered the Earth with it. The dome was surrounded by water and kept the water at bay. The Earth was believed to be flat, but round, like a plate. The sky was the interior of the dome, which was laden with jewels that sparkled at night. There were "shutters" in the helmet, and God would open them occasionally to let the rain in. Presumably, during the flood, he opened all the shutters wide and at once.
Or so I understand it. I'm sure others here know more. You can actually find some references to part of this story in the old Insight Books. My wife didn't really believe the story until she found it there. (She's still a JW.) I can't remember what the term was ... something to do with the "firmament" or the expanse that serparates the water canopy from the oceans mentioned in Genesis? The New World Translation uses a different word than most modern Bibles, which makes it sound like a space between the oceans and the canopy. It's actually supposed to be this metal dome thingy.
Anyway...
-
24
Water cloud over the earth? Anyone remember this teaching?
by QuestioningEverything inhaving a discussion with my sister and she remembers that there used to be a teaching that the earth had a watercloud over it and that's how we got rain.
anyone else remember this?
i vaguely do..
-
-
IsaacJ22
I was told about this when I was a Witness by some older Witnesses, and even told that it was scientific ... when it isn't, of course. It's not that uncommon a belief among creationists and fundamentalists, Witnesses aren't the only ones who believe it.
I think one of those old episodes of "In Search Of..." made the claim too.
I suppose you could just write it off as a miracle if you wanted either way, they just add the "it's backed by science" claim to make it seem even more cool.