I need to quit reading this shit. It just makes me angry at the WTBTS. Otherwise, I have a measure of peace and happiness when I ignore it.
SweetBabyCheezits
JoinedPosts by SweetBabyCheezits
-
55
shunning is love - Feb 15 2011 Watchtower
by jj123jj123 in18 if you face a similar situation, please remember that jehovah sympathizes with you.
by cutting off contact with the disfellowshipped or disassociated one, you are showing that you hate the attitudes and actions that led to that outcome.
however, you are also showing that you love the wrongdoer enough to do what is best for him or her.
-
-
-
109
Feb. 15 Study WT - More creationism and stupidity - A response
by eric356 inwell, the wt is back on it: "today, there is a rising tide of atheistic and evolutionist propaganda dependent on flawed and baseless reasoning.
we should not let this flood of faulty thinking confuse or intimidate us.
" (pg.
-
-
SweetBabyCheezits
Ahhhh.... is that a joke, BXJW?
-
23
I'm Movin' On
by OnTheWayOut init's a song by rascal flatts.
it really sums up my feelings about the jw's.
i have finally reached a point where i am at peace with my past.
-
-
SweetBabyCheezits
I fare you bidwell, OTWO. Your 'stache reached the Selleck-osphere, just sos you know.
wait, you were being ridonkulous. nvm.
Nick, i'm new to single malts. enjoy one for me, too.
-
23
I'm Movin' On
by OnTheWayOut init's a song by rascal flatts.
it really sums up my feelings about the jw's.
i have finally reached a point where i am at peace with my past.
-
-
SweetBabyCheezits
We're wise to your ways now, OTWO. Even half-sober, it only took one wolf-cry.
-
237
Loftus: Are We Angry Atheists?
by leavingwt injohn w. loftus responds to the "angry atheist" assertion.
are we angry atheists?.
.. if we are angry, christians will see this as a sign we are god haters.
-
-
SweetBabyCheezits
Six, I'm loling in my pants right now. You've caughtme in a very semi-sober state of chucklehood.
-
237
Loftus: Are We Angry Atheists?
by leavingwt injohn w. loftus responds to the "angry atheist" assertion.
are we angry atheists?.
.. if we are angry, christians will see this as a sign we are god haters.
-
-
SweetBabyCheezits
Who wants to come sit around the firepit and have this discussion. this is great.
-
237
Loftus: Are We Angry Atheists?
by leavingwt injohn w. loftus responds to the "angry atheist" assertion.
are we angry atheists?.
.. if we are angry, christians will see this as a sign we are god haters.
-
-
SweetBabyCheezits
Here is what I think is a relatively unbiased account of the matter. Everybody got egg on their faces, IMHO.
Dammit, Burn, if I didn't like you.... well, I don't have anything to finish that with.
C'mon, the best unbiased account is the actual translation of the judgment against Galileo, isn't it? Did you read it? How can you still possibly still hold that the Church - as an entity - didn't have a major role in opposing Galileo's Copernican theory advancement? It says nothing against you, specifically. Stop being defensive. :-D
And hell yes, plenty of non-devouts might've balked at heliocentricity back then, too. But you can't deny the Church's involvement! Also, I've had a strong 151-n-coke on a very empty stomach so I'm probably not cohesive thru my argument here. Aarrgh!
As a matter of critical thinking I should admit that I discovered something about myself in this whole ordeal. And this might be to my own detriment but alky makes me more honest (or stupid) so I think it should be said. Once I state an argument for my perspective, I realize that I start searching for additional supporting material. Don't we all? Who wants to look like an idiot and be proven wrong. Nonetheless, my goal is to avoid that shit. But if I get something right at least let me have a tiny victory for my argument.
Stilll I want to identify occasions when I do that I stop it. So I'm backing out of this to find neutral ground amd make sure I'm not just using confirmation bias.
Goodwill to you, sir. I'll hit you back when I'm sober and realize that I've showed my hand and then I'll be pissed.
-
237
Loftus: Are We Angry Atheists?
by leavingwt injohn w. loftus responds to the "angry atheist" assertion.
are we angry atheists?.
.. if we are angry, christians will see this as a sign we are god haters.
-
-
SweetBabyCheezits
I especially enjoyed this part of the Inquisition's judgment against GG....
"And whereas this Holy Tribunal wanted remedy the disorder and the harm which derived from it and which was growing to the detriment of the Holy Faith, by order of His Holiness and the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Lord Cardinals of this Supreme and Univesal Inquisition, the Assessor Theologians assessed the two propositions of the sun's stability and the earth's motions as follows:
That the sun is the center of the world and motionless is a proposition which is philosophically absurd and false, and formally heretical, for being explicitly contrary to Holy Scripture;
That the earth is neither the center of the world nor motionless but moves even with diurnal motion is philosophically equally absurd and false, and theologically at least erroneous in the Faith."
-
237
Loftus: Are We Angry Atheists?
by leavingwt injohn w. loftus responds to the "angry atheist" assertion.
are we angry atheists?.
.. if we are angry, christians will see this as a sign we are god haters.
-
-
SweetBabyCheezits
Me: That the Catholic Church condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture" is one example in history.
BTS: Actually, this is not accurate.
Me: So how is my statement inaccurate?
BTS: Your statement is inaccurate in that it creates the impression that official Catholic doctrine condemned the idea of heliocentrism.
BTS: It did happen, but painting the Catholic church of the time as monolithic is not accurate.
The point is that faith in scripture was a major influence and, at that time, the Catholic church had prominence. I never said it was official doctrine but to deny the Church's fat finger of supremacy poking around in the issue is just that: denial.
Finocchiaro's translation of the Inquisition's judgement against Galileo can be read here:
What can we conclude from all this? Galileo was right about heliocentrism, but we know that only in retrospect because of evidence that emerged after Galileo’s death. The Church should not have tried him at all, although Galileo’s reckless conduct contributed to his fate. Even so, his fate was not so terrible. Historian Gary Ferngren concludes that “the traditional picture of Galileo as a martyr to intellectual freedom and as a victim of the church’s opposition to science has been demonstrated to be little more than a caricature.” Remember this the next time you hear some half-educated atheist rambling on about “the war between religion and science.”
We can conclude (as Nick noted) that the WT is certainly not the first revisionist organization and Souza is hardly unbiased in his assessment.
-
237
Loftus: Are We Angry Atheists?
by leavingwt injohn w. loftus responds to the "angry atheist" assertion.
are we angry atheists?.
.. if we are angry, christians will see this as a sign we are god haters.
-
-
SweetBabyCheezits
Your statement is inaccurate in that it creates the impression that official Catholic doctrine condemned the idea of heliocentrism.
Are you serious??? This sounds like the WT saying, "Well we didn't OFFICIALLY state the end would come in 1975." I don't care if it wasn't official doctrine. That shit happened.
The Inquisition's ban on reprinting Galileo's works was lifted in 1718 when permission was granted to publish an edition of his works (excluding the condemned Dialogue) in Florence. [119]
So do you really believe the church had no influence in opposition of Galileo's promotion of Copernicanism?
My statement was not inaccurate. You just don't like it because you're an Angry Christian.