richard dawkins has said frequently if we don't agree with religious or spiritual people we need to "insult them!
" tell their their out of their "fucking gourds!
" and make sure you really show them how stupid they are for believing in something they can't prove!".
Lisa thank you for your imput, I sincerely appreciate it.You are absolutely right and my wording was awful. I could have simply asked "why" instead of my diatribe!
Cofty thank you for the list. Amazon will be recieving some orders from me this very morning. I am always looking for answers and if these books offer them I shall be eternally grateful!
foolish is the man who neverreads a newspaper; even morefoolish is the man who believeswhat he reads just becauseit is in the newspaper .august von schlozer,german historianand publicist (1735-1809).
i came across this articke in the october 15th wt.
page 30.
richard dawkins has said frequently if we don't agree with religious or spiritual people we need to "insult them!
" tell their their out of their "fucking gourds!
" and make sure you really show them how stupid they are for believing in something they can't prove!".
richard dawkins has said frequently if we don't agree with religious or spiritual people we need to "insult them!
" tell their their out of their "fucking gourds!
" and make sure you really show them how stupid they are for believing in something they can't prove!".
richard dawkins has said frequently if we don't agree with religious or spiritual people we need to "insult them!
" tell their their out of their "fucking gourds!
" and make sure you really show them how stupid they are for believing in something they can't prove!".
richard dawkins has said frequently if we don't agree with religious or spiritual people we need to "insult them!
" tell their their out of their "fucking gourds!
" and make sure you really show them how stupid they are for believing in something they can't prove!".
Village Idiot:
I am not an athiest bu I certainly do not believe in the bible or any man concocted god, this is simply because I do not believe in magical beings or miracles. Based on the fact that geological erosion can be accurately measured by anyone with a micrometer who lets a garden hose run over a sand stone rock for 10 years, I don't need an evolutionist to tell me the Earth has been around far longer than 6000 years and I highly doubt every animal species has it's own diety defending it. Rather I would say science satisfies 99% of my questions but that missing 1% is enough to convince me that science has not quite yet found the answer that explains my nagging questions.
What are those questions? Well, here's one:
According to evolution birds are the defendants of reptiles. Driven by the need to escape predators on the ground the adapted to the air by developing wings. How does a lizard decide it's time to grow wings? Did one fall off a cliff one day and magically sprout wings? Science would clearly say no. So how many lizards tried to fly off cliffs before their subsequent generations began to show signs of wings? Surely every lizard that tried to fly failed or died trying? How did they pass on the adaptive gene process? And the ones that didnt die, how many times in their life span did they jump off "flyable" heights that genetic memory was passed on to the following generations who followed suit with the same dead end results?
believing this is the case is as bad as believing Moses parted the sea or any of the other biblical fairy tales. Any Paleontologist will admit that there are massive gaps in the fossil record which scientists have filled in with theory. What is theory? Speculation based on scientific hypothesis. It is not a fact!
I do nelieve animals adapt to circumstances and their environment like humans used to before they developed the intellectual capacity to change their environment. And I do believe in genetic memory. But until their is solid proof and a complete fossil record that can convince me otherwise, I simply cannot believe that there is a common origin of species. It always amazes me when devout evolutionists use the word "design" in their teachimg. Nature cannot design, design requires some intellectual capacity plain and simple. Decide - is it design or evolution, it cant be both!
The way an evolutionist would explain away things is no different than the way a religious person would, both place equal weight in a belief, just as I do when I look at life and am convinced that it was designed by some extraordinary capacity with an intelllect beyond our wildest imaginings. Whatever this entity is, it or they chose to furnish me with a biological mechanism which provides a sentient conscience and I believe it was for a reason. Clearly this creator meant for me to feel, communicate and have the ability to make a difference above above all other creatures on this planet.
It's because of this I belive this creator is omnipresent and attentive, why else would I be designed this way? And because I believe this creator is omnipresent I believe "it" is interested in our lives and our development as intellectual beings and for that I love this being. And for the abilty I have to trully appreciate all the beautiful and incredible things I see and experience in my life. And the fact that I will deteriorate like all matter and pass away to become matter is fine with me because I feel incredibly priveleged to have had the experience of life on this magnificent planet. Its why I'm comfortable with the finality of death and have no delusions of an after life.
But! To me this creator is interested in us and if it is ingenious enough to have designed this life, surely it must hold some degree of influence in its experiment and therefore in my gratitude I pray to it and refer to it as God for lack of a better term. And yes, I pray to it - not in the conventional way - and my prayers are almost always answered. How they are I do not believe is through any "Holy Spirit", but rather through introspect.
My point is: discounting peoples beliefs is to wag a finger at the holes anyone could fimd in your own beliefs. Rather than trying to point out the fragments by ridiculing others, why not simply discuss and offer your views with the intellect you have been afforded and thereby construct a common conduit of ideas and increase the pool of idea and afford each other the chance of higher intellectual capacity? After all, wouldnt that constitute a higher evolution of understanding?
the gb has been preparing the flock for the assyrian's attack, that now is starting from australia:.
elders, you can learn some helpful lessons from what we have just discussed: (1) the best thing you can do to prepare for the future attack of the assyrian is to strengthen your faith in god and help your brothers to do the same.
(2) when the assyrian attacks, you must be completely convinced that jehovah will save us.
(3) At that time, the direction that you receive from Jehovah’s organization may seem strange or unusual. But all of us must be ready to obey any instructions we may receive, whether we agree with them or not, because obeying these instructions will save our lives.
Jim Jones: "Yes its a strange instruction to drink this poison, but I did tell you you would ask you to obey strange instructions..."
the gb has been preparing the flock for the assyrian's attack, that now is starting from australia:.
elders, you can learn some helpful lessons from what we have just discussed: (1) the best thing you can do to prepare for the future attack of the assyrian is to strengthen your faith in god and help your brothers to do the same.
(2) when the assyrian attacks, you must be completely convinced that jehovah will save us.
(3) At that time, the direction that you receive from Jehovah’s organization may seem strange or unusual. But all of us must be ready to obey any instructions we may receive, whether we agree with them or not, because obeying these instructions will save our lives.
Jim Jones: "Yes its a strange instruction to drink this poison, but I did tell you I would ask you to obey strange instructions..."
foolish is the man who neverreads a newspaper; even morefoolish is the man who believeswhat he reads just becauseit is in the newspaper .august von schlozer,german historianand publicist (1735-1809).
i came across this articke in the october 15th wt.
page 30.
1averagejoe: let me get this straight. The jehovahs witnesses can disseminate their judgement based on media reports concerning other religions who also claim to be Christians and abide by the very versus you quoted, yet no others may do so when it concerns yoir Organization? Always the double standards.
do you realize that your religion's rhetoric is not unique? Jim Jones, David Koresh, Papa Doc and countless other cults have employed this very counter-intelligence techique in order to control their cult flocks?
Outside of religion, its also how every dictator and crooked politician has controled their population. If you were caught cavorting with those who expressed even the vaguest questions concerning the Communist Party or the Nazis you were branded as anti and severely puished. You of all people should know this, the Jehovahs Witnesses were subject to this very mindset under the rule of these tyrants.
And please dont smear the clear line that separates fact from gossip. They are NOT the same thing. If this were the case then why do the elders themselves listen to "gossip" in formulating their opinions on so-called apostates or adulterers for that matter? Did they not to have to regard information from others?
Oh that's right, common sense doesn't matter. Not using your brain and only hanging on the Organizations every word is all that counts on this planet simce it's followers are the only privelaged class anyway, right?
it is enthralling having everything being dragged kicking and screaming into the light of day.
however one of the most important things to ask is this:.
is the rc evidence admissable in other countries and other courts?.
