in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
The origin of life is a very hard problem because it appeared so early on Earth (possibly less than 500 million years after the formation of Earth).
The other problem is life is only found on Earth and we can see a huge share of the universe and nothing... This fact threatens panspermia.
And if you add the very late origin of consciousness in just one specie the entire thing becomes a gigantic mystery.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Would the resurrection of a dead body - dead, totally dead, brain dead, not frozen, really dead, dead for a week, stored in a drawer in the morgue - pose a theological challenge for JWs?
Yes.
JW theology is a mess.
They deny it but actually they believe in soul.
They believe in what is called in theology as the "sleeping soul". But they deny this. Worst of all they believe their sleeping soul are kept inside Jehovah.
They mentioned the spirit of Jehovah returning to Jehovah after death but this spirit is impersonal and can't be their souls. So they must accept something in them survives death.
Is astounding how someone can accept something so messed up with its own internal consistency.
So resurrection of a clinical dead body will be the equivalent to someone take something directly from the inside of Jehovah.
Such thing would not just challenge JW theology but every theology existent today.
while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
We discussed a lot about the problem of evil and here are some interesting links about the problem of consciousness :
https://aeon.co/essays/your-brain-does-not-process-information-and-it-is-not-a-computer
while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
Some say looter is an old man.
But I think he and Viviane are two spoiled brats fighting like that.
Just kiddin'
:D
while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
Then you need to be more Zen about life and stop inventing hellfire/purgatory/angels/demons etc to explain things that don't need an explanation beyond "shit happens".
Good night
Yes Zen says that if you really want to know if you needs something you must throw it away. If you have to pick it up again this thing is needed for you.
I need my " why". :D
Good night
while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
This reduces the "why" question to the more rational and mundane question of "how"?
while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
Buddhism and Catholicism are very concerned with the experience of suffering specially the suffering next to death. That's why we pray "Nunc et in hora Mortis nostrae".
Objectively speaking I think this view in face of unjustified suffering and death is better than " shit happens".
while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
Mercy is achieved by expense of Justice. In Christianity God's Mercy is achieved through justice. Justice is not put aside to achieve Mercy.
That's the point of the Ransom view about the Crucifixion. Crucifixion of Christ payed the expense provoked by Mercy.
Suffering plays a kind of monetary value in Christianity. In Buddhism suffering (dukkha) is a central key too. In Buddhism suffering is partly explained by Karma (in cause and effect sense). Catholicism have a similar view in the doctrine of Temporal Penalties. Temporal Penalties can be paid on Earth or Purgatory. The payment on Earth is more valuable than Purgatory. That's why the Good Thief after his death at the cross went directly to a blissful sphere on Purgatory called Paradise (also called Abraham's Bosom and is the last sphere before Heaven. This Paradise in Purgatory is the JWism interpretation of "millennial earthly paradise" ) because after his Repentance on cross he suffered in same way Christ did.
The problem of evil is not about suffering itself but unjustified suffering or mysterious suffering of innocents.
Suffering can be meaningful as Nietzsche said that you cannot be a hero if you not suffer. Nietzsche viewed suffering (in an atheistic sense) as an opportunity to become stronger.
Suffering is meaningful in the bodybuilding world where the basic premise is "no pain no gain". When they show their muscles (and a lot of smiles) they're literally showing the result of pain.
Christianity gives meaning to suffering because a Christian believes in an immortal soul that gains eternal Glory through suffering (specially unjustified suffering in innocents).
To an Atheist there's no possibility of any metaphysical reason for suffering so it's pointless.
Buddhism says a person in this situation suffers twice. First because it's not possible to avoid suffering itself (with or without a metaphysical explanation) and second this person is doomed to only accept suffering as totally pointless, just "shit happens". Even though its mind will not accept the "shit happens" and will keep trying to make sense out of the situation and this causes an extra huge psychological suffering.
while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
John Mann life is more meaningful and precious now that I'm almost certain there is no afterlife.
Are you catholic? You went from a modern day abusive cult to one of the originals that is responsible for hundreds of thousands of child abuse victims and millions dying too young in Africa due to the condom use ban.
See this is what a theist morality gets you. A human sacrifice cult that thinks it's merciful that a billion people go to purgatory just because they were born on the wrong continent. And you theists wonder why you are derided here and ever more so in the public square.
Is true that there's a serious problem about child abuse but the Church are solving this problem.
The Christian morality only accepts sex between married persons. How can the ban of condom kill married people?
while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
False dichotomy alert!
True.
There's also the possibility of God is evil and the possibility of Deism. And maybe more.
The evil God possibility is dreadful. What could we do in such scenario? Just deny His existence would not be a solution.
But usually the common positions are the dichotomy I mentioned.
Wait, god didn't know something? You just wrote he was omniscient. Do you actually know what omniscient means?
We speak in a colloquial mode when we say God thinks, decides, etc...
God possess omniscience and omnipotence.
This implies that He can decide what to known.
