Posts by paranoia agent

11

I have a live one lol

by paranoia agent in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cov9xvrq1p8.

check the comment section for jw raiden25256666 posts, he just called me an idiot lol.

Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'

by Watchtower-Free in

http://uk.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11201273.htm.

ancient confession found: 'we invented jesus christ'biblical scholars will be appearing at the 'covert messiah' conference at conway hall in london on the 19th of october to present this controversial discovery to the british public.

london (prweb uk) 8 october 2013. american biblical scholar joseph atwill will be appearing before the british public for the first time in london on the 19th of october to present a controversial new discovery: ancient confessions recently uncovered now prove, according to atwill, that the new testament was written by first-century roman aristocrats and that they fabricated the entire story of jesus christ.

paranoia agent

bytheirworks wrote :

Paranoia agent is very confused & deluded.

I don’t know therefore I have no reason to believe.

That is the craziest thing you have said yet. Not knowing... is to immediately have a reason to believe.

People believe when they DO NOT know. They have no choice.

They will either believe for something or believe against something... but by definition, you can only believe when you don't know.

In fact, it is only when one doesn't know, that's when you ABSOLUTELY HAVE a reason to believe.

There is no need to be rude, I am sure we can discuss this like adults. I was pointing out the principals of logic you were applying in regards to negatives, that you do not seem to understand the principles.

Again you are presupposing that deities/Jesus/Jehovah exist, the old god of the gaps argument, the 'I don't know therefore god'. Why god? why not multiple gods or pagan gods?

By definition yes belief can be based on the unknown, I can believe that magic teapots float around Saturn and that flying pink unicorns exist, but this argument is a strawman because I never argued that I have beliefs in the same that are like 'I don't know if I have a lost twin brother, therefore I believe or 'I do not know if I have an invisible fire breathing dragon in my garage, therefore I believe' or I don't know <insert here>, therefore I believe'. So is it really that crazy??

Have a great day.

11

I have a live one lol

by paranoia agent in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cov9xvrq1p8.

check the comment section for jw raiden25256666 posts, he just called me an idiot lol.

paranoia agent

So far I failed to establish a dialogue, he isn't very bright even for a jw, does not seem to realise the bad name that he is giving other jw's.

11

I have a live one lol

by paranoia agent in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cov9xvrq1p8.

check the comment section for jw raiden25256666 posts, he just called me an idiot lol.

paranoia agent

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOv9XVrQ1p8

Check the comment section for jw raiden25256666 posts, he just called me an idiot lol

223

Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'

by Watchtower-Free in

http://uk.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11201273.htm.

ancient confession found: 'we invented jesus christ'biblical scholars will be appearing at the 'covert messiah' conference at conway hall in london on the 19th of october to present this controversial discovery to the british public.

london (prweb uk) 8 october 2013. american biblical scholar joseph atwill will be appearing before the british public for the first time in london on the 19th of october to present a controversial new discovery: ancient confessions recently uncovered now prove, according to atwill, that the new testament was written by first-century roman aristocrats and that they fabricated the entire story of jesus christ.

paranoia agent

bytheirworks wrote Saying Jesus didn't exist is like saying George Washington didn't exist.

You can't prove a negative... so you can't prove someone didn't exist.

All you can do is carefully examine the evidence presented that the person did exist.

but saying Jesus didn't exist is like saying George Washington didn't exist.

In which I replied: And you can't say that he did either, what I can say is that due to the lack of evidence I have no reason to believe that christ ever existed.

bytheirworks then pm’d me:

And you can't say that he did either, what I can say is that due to the lack of evidence I have no reason to believe that christ ever existed."

1st of all, I have the choice to say whatever I want. Whether you believe me or not, is your choice.

2nd, my previous argument stays undebunked.

You can't prove a negative, so you can NEVER PROVE that someone didn't exist.

You can only ACCEPT or NOT ACCEPT information presented that someone DID live.

So the question is then: "What information are NOT ACCEPTING?

I am curious as to why you pm’d me, you dislike discussions in the open?

As for this post allow me to comment from top to bottom, I never implied that you are not allowed to speak your mind and I don’t think you understand that under your own terms on “prove a negative” is the non existing of jesus/Jehovah/deities, take your pick, because you are presupposing that Jesus existed.

The rules of logic that you are applying are misconstrued, there cannot be evidence for absence therefore there can not be evidence for Christ because there is an absence of evidence. And also, rather than disproving Christ we can disprove the bible, we can disprove that there are any historical evidence for Christ who raised the dead and cured the blind.

So your argument does not need to be debunked because it’s flawed, I rest my case on the null hypothesis, that I don’t know therefore I have no reason to believe.

Have a great day.

9

Spirituality versus Religion

by Fernando in

there seem to be many ways to explain the difference.

the one below seems moderate - even neutral.

your thoughts?.

paranoia agent

Note that this journal uses the explanations to define spiritualism, not a great word in my opinion considering that by these terms set out on this paper sex is also a form of spiritualism. Transcendent meaning simply means meaning beyond human experience, which there is no scientific evidence for. This paper is not to prove spiritualism but to explain it's philosophical concepts on patiencs and if spiritual needs are necessary for dying patients.

Also its important to note the criticism that this field has had - biopsychosocial

"Some critics point out this question of distinction and a question of determination of the roles of illness and disease runs against the growing concept of the patient–medical tradesperson partnership or patient empowerment, as "biopsychosocial" becomes one more disingenuous euphemism for psychosomatic illness. [ 20 ] This may be exploited by medical insurance companies or government welfare departments eager to limit or deny access to medical and social care. [ 21 ]

Some psychiatrists see the BPS model as flawed, in either formulation or application. Epstein and colleagues describe six conflicting interpretations of what the model might be, and proposes that "...habits of mind may be the missing link between a biopsychosocial intent and clinical reality." [ 22 ] Psychiatrist Hamid Tavakoli argues that the BPS model should be avoided because it unintentionally promotes an artificial distinction between biology and psychology, and merely causes confusion in psychiatric assessments and training programs, and that ultimately it has not helped the cause of trying to destigmatize mental health. [ 23 ]

Sociologist David Pilgrim suggests that a necessary pragmatism and a form of "mutual tolerance" (Goldie, 1977) has forced a co-existence of perspectives, rather than a genuine "theoretical integration as a shared BPS orthodoxy." [ 24 ] Pilgrim goes on to state that despite "scientific and ethical virtues," the BPS model "...has not been properly realised. It seems to have been pushed into the shadows by a return to medicine and the re-ascendancy of a biomedical model." [ 25 ]

However, a vocal philosophical critic of the BPS model, psychiatrist Niall McLaren, [ 26 ] writes:

"Since the collapse of the 19th century models (psychoanalysis, biologism and behaviourism), psychiatrists have been in search of a model that integrates the psyche and the soma. So keen has been their search that they embraced the so-called 'biopsychosocial model' without ever bothering to check its details. If, at any time over the last three decades, they had done so, they would have found it had none. This would have forced them into the embarrassing position of having to acknowledge that modern psychiatry is operating in a theoretical vacuum." [ 27 ]

The rationale for this theoretical vacuum is outlined in his 1998 paper [ 28 ] and more recently in his books, most notably Humanizing Psychiatrists. [ 29 ] Simply put, the purpose of a scientific model is to see if a scientific theory works and to actualize its logical consequences. In this sense, models are real and their material consequences can be measured, whereas theories are ideas and can no more be measured than daydreams. Model-building separates theories with a future from those that always remain dreams. An example of a true scientific model is longer necked giraffes reach more food, survive at higher rates, and pass on this longer neck trait to their progeny. This is a model (natural selection) of the theory of evolution. Therefore, from an epistemological stance there can be no model of mental disorder without first establishing a theory of the mind. Dr. McLaren does not say that the biopsychosocial model is devoid of merit, just that it does not fit the definition of a scientific model (or theory) and does not "reveal anything that would not be known (implicitly, if not explicitly) to any practitioner of reasonable sensitivity." He states that the biopsychosocial model should be seen in a historical context as bucking against the trend of biological reductionism, which was (and still is) overtaking psychiatry. Engel "has done a very great service to orthodox psychiatry in that he legitimised the concept of talking to people as people." In short, even though it is correct to say that sociology, psychology, and biology are factors in mental illness, simply stating this obvious fact does not make it a model in the scientific sense of the word. [ 26 ] [ 28 ] [ 29 ] [ 30 ]

The psychiatry professor and author S. Nassir Ghaemi considers Engel's model to be anti-humanistic and advocates the use of less eclectic, less generic, and less vague alternatives, such as William Osler’s medical humanism or Karl Jaspers’ method-based psychiatry. [ 31 ]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biopsychosocial_model#Criticism

223

Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'

by Watchtower-Free in

http://uk.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11201273.htm.

ancient confession found: 'we invented jesus christ'biblical scholars will be appearing at the 'covert messiah' conference at conway hall in london on the 19th of october to present this controversial discovery to the british public.

london (prweb uk) 8 october 2013. american biblical scholar joseph atwill will be appearing before the british public for the first time in london on the 19th of october to present a controversial new discovery: ancient confessions recently uncovered now prove, according to atwill, that the new testament was written by first-century roman aristocrats and that they fabricated the entire story of jesus christ.

paranoia agent

bytheirworks: And you can't say that he did either, what I can say is that due to the lack of evidence I have no reason to believe that christ ever existed.

cofty: The evidence for a man by the name of Jesus is very strong, the evidence for christ is nil. Read Did Jesus Exist by Bart Ehrman.

14

Do Jehovah's Witnesses, suffer from Stockholm Syndrome? What do you think?

by LoisLane looking for Superman in

.

i believe they do.. loislane.

paranoia agent

I don't know about Stockholm but I have met elders with the dunning-kruger effect.

86

A House Divided Against Itself Falls-Luke 11:17

by Stand for Pure Worship in

jw
friends

that text reminds me of one of a handful of problems peculiar to the ex-jw community.

second only to the wild beast's internal divisions, is the divided makeup of the ex-jw populace.

you know the one thing that indicates jehovah's blessing upon the worldwide association of kingdom proclaimers, is not only the continued success of the preaching work, but along with it the unity and love amongst the brothers and sisters.

paranoia agent

No, I haven't backed out, I just haven't had a moment to read everything. Have to admit I'm surprised by some of the comments. Some of you have legitimate gripes with the way you were treated by individuals within the organization. Some of you I believe Armageddon didn't come on your stopwatch and so you gave up. It was all about petting a Panda bear for you or having a wildebeest farm. Back to those treated poorly by a few individuals, I was treated poorly by someone on my job, does that mean I should look for other employment as a result?

I think that you are making some assumptions, assumptions that I made when I was in about ex members, that things didn't go our way so we are rebelling. That would be the case to some, not I thought, I simply started reading more on this thread, then some books and then came to the conclusion that the fruits are rotten, in accordance to watchtower doctrine, but it is understandable that we have ex members who are angry. For example let's say you are brought up spending many hours as a jw only to find later in your life that it's a lie, you want answer and start to dialogue with elders only to be marked, you push on with your un-answered question so to be silenced again, if you are not too careful you will be disfellowshipped and the same applies if you simply change religion, and anyone including family who are jw's will shun you. Would you be angry then? I can change employment but I can not change my family or my 28 years of service, some have put themselves in harms way, others have died because of no blood or decided for others, some don't se their kids, others don't see their parents, some spend 2/4 to 3/4 of their life converting others to become jw's only to regret ever doing so. You might not agree with me on the doctrine issue but I hope, at least where this anger comes from makes sense.

17

Email conversation with a colleague

by zakharijah in

i just wanted to share this conversation i had by email with a jw colleague last year at easter.

(on my professional email address).

or how can you say to your brother, allow me to extract the straw from your eye; when, look!

paranoia agent

It's also true that jw's are more like work colleagues than brothers/sisters. She certainly does not care for you, she cares for Jehovah incorporated.