EdenOne, I agree with what you say. There are limits we can draw, however, to define that which could not have occurred. As an example, I cannot claim Columbus lived the same time as Aristotle, because that is patently false. Columbus spoke Italian, a language that evolved from Latin, itself a language that took time to develop, and that coexisted with Greek (though not the older Greek of Aristotles) in the Roman Empire.
Knowsnothing
JoinedPosts by Knowsnothing
-
124
Does your Theology Align with Reality?
by cofty inthesits are fond of reminding us that science cannot prove there is no god, and in this they are correct.
however, science should not be dismissed so lightly by anybody who values a faith that is more than a mere fantasy.. theologians like john shelby spong have shown the intellectual honesty to embrace the truths that science has discovered and adapted their religious beliefs to take account of reality.
sadly many theists lack the courage to do likewise.
-
-
-
54
my first post and some questions
by wallievase inthis is my first post after deciding to finally open an account here after months of 'lurking'.. a couple of issues i want to address-.
i have issues with people who go from being a witness to losing all faith in god or the bible which seems to be the case with some members of this site.
i just don't think you can let any religion change how you view god or the bible.. second-i don't feel the gb are bad people, i think most witnesses including them are misguided by something that has been drilled into their heads since they were little and are actually sincere people.
-
-
Knowsnothing
Hi wallievase! Welcome to the board!
You say:
I have issues with people who go from being a witness to losing all faith in god or the bible which seems to be the case with some members of this site. I
just don't think you can let any religion change how you view god or the bible.
Well, suffering and the general randomness of life, along with many illogical statements I would hear both from the pulpit and from brothers is what knocked me on my butt. I started questioning everything, and either the bible would hold under scrutiny, or it wouldn't. IMO, it doesn't.
Please reply, let me know what you think and what my next course of action should be as I think I'm too afraid to leave because of the effects on my wife,
family friends, etc.
Well, for some, leaving really isn't the best option. You might really shoot yourself in the foot there and end up loosing your family. You have to ask yourself what you value most in life.
-
124
Does your Theology Align with Reality?
by cofty inthesits are fond of reminding us that science cannot prove there is no god, and in this they are correct.
however, science should not be dismissed so lightly by anybody who values a faith that is more than a mere fantasy.. theologians like john shelby spong have shown the intellectual honesty to embrace the truths that science has discovered and adapted their religious beliefs to take account of reality.
sadly many theists lack the courage to do likewise.
-
-
Knowsnothing
Let's define reality first though, because that seems to be the trickiest part; getting all parties to agree to what reality is.
-
124
Does your Theology Align with Reality?
by cofty inthesits are fond of reminding us that science cannot prove there is no god, and in this they are correct.
however, science should not be dismissed so lightly by anybody who values a faith that is more than a mere fantasy.. theologians like john shelby spong have shown the intellectual honesty to embrace the truths that science has discovered and adapted their religious beliefs to take account of reality.
sadly many theists lack the courage to do likewise.
-
-
Knowsnothing
How can you prove there was no Adam and Eve?
Well, only as far as humanity existing for only 6,000 years. So yes, the purported Adam and Eve created by God directly, made 'from the ground', certainly did not exist.
And how can you prove there is no, as yet undiscovered, stage of evolution requiring intervention of some sort?
Evolution destroys any literal view of the Bible, and the Bible is quite specific about creation 'according to kind'. Besides the Bible, what other 'account' does the Creator give to humanity about what's what? Why even use evolution, such a wasteful process, to produce us?
Insisting that a given age for the earth in billions of years to two decimal places is an incontrovertible fact is a fine example of scientistic hubris. There is no
gerneral agreement on the age of the Fortingale Yew never mind the planet itself.
You can place the earth at minimum age given certain constants, such as radioactive isotopes with billions of years of half-life. Living beings are a bit harder to date.
-
371
Design or Non-Design, finally we know, Darwin's Doubt
by QC inif you want to read the definitive explanation on fossils and how life arrived its covered in darwins doubt, by s.c. meyer.
this is a game changer.
the bomb!.
-
-
Knowsnothing
QC, an example from nature then. You tell me what God's grand purpose for this is.
This is the larva of the ichneumonidae. It has been 'designed' to eat the host caterpillar alive. You can read more about it here.
This is but one of many examples of parasitism in the natural world. Tell me, why did God design parasitism? If I can wrap my head around that one, maybe you can persuade me to at least become a deist.
-
165
Board of bitterness
by 1009 ini always was a critical jw, now df and agnost.
but still this religion fascinates me.
in my eyes most jw are very sincere, but dumb sheep.. this board is filled with ex-jw.
-
-
Knowsnothing
Side question: Is it wrong if a country sends its youngster into war for the cause of oil to defend the population? Why is that commonly considered honorable? And where does that differ from Jihad? They too believe that they are fighting for a higher cause. Here in Colombia we have an annual 'cleaning' where drug addicts and pedophiles are murdered. It's unlawfull, but tolerated. Is that wrong? - 1009
Point taken 1009. It's all relative and this world really is a case of 'might makes right'. There is nothing wrong with the world, everything is as should be, and you should simply accept it. We really have nothing much to discuss when we make it to this point.
-
371
Design or Non-Design, finally we know, Darwin's Doubt
by QC inif you want to read the definitive explanation on fossils and how life arrived its covered in darwins doubt, by s.c. meyer.
this is a game changer.
the bomb!.
-
-
Knowsnothing
QC, I don't quite understand you. If you accept all we see around us is designed, why is the design so bad? I like those pictures too, but that's only a part of reality. Cantleave's pics show the other ugly side as well.
-
165
Board of bitterness
by 1009 ini always was a critical jw, now df and agnost.
but still this religion fascinates me.
in my eyes most jw are very sincere, but dumb sheep.. this board is filled with ex-jw.
-
-
Knowsnothing
Adamah stated earlier: " The eisegesis in Acts rests upon a foundation of their far-greater misunderstanding of Genesis 9, which is based on a mistranslation which resulted from confusing a blessing with an obligation." Is it ethically wrong to misunderstand something? Is it ethically wrong to believe that what the Biblical commands on the subject of blood should be applied to the medical use as well? And if you believe that, is it ethically wrong to abstain from blood? And if you are a religious leader, is it ethically wrong to teach what you believe?
Is it wrong to teach jihad? That if you blow yourself and others up for the cause of your religious movement, you will gain eternal life in heaven?
-
371
Design or Non-Design, finally we know, Darwin's Doubt
by QC inif you want to read the definitive explanation on fossils and how life arrived its covered in darwins doubt, by s.c. meyer.
this is a game changer.
the bomb!.
-
-
Knowsnothing
If the universe was designed, it is a huge waste of space. To have only one inhabitable planet...
-
89
4 sincere questions for those that believe there is a God
by S EIGHT ingreetings.. allow me to set the questions up.. after 30 years in the truth (i'm now late 40's) and having established the truth about the truth i consider myself agnostic going on atheist.. i struggle to believe there is a god when i observe life yet i try to convince myself there must be something out there.. here's the basis of my question: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23583116 .
in summary, 2 young boys have been killed by a snake that escaped from a pet store in canada.
it made it's way up through the ventilation into the apartment they were staying in.
-
-
Knowsnothing
Hi Laika. You said, " If humankind has the resources to end hunger and then opts not to, why is it fair to criticise others for doing what they assume is the same thing?"
Well you see, I don't think the issue is as black and white as that. It is true that we have the power to feed a few billion more people than exist today. The problem is there are many things that can hold one back from such a thing, not to mention that in some instances our efforts will be futile.
For example, suppose I wanted to feed the hungry baby boy you see in the picture. I presume that he is in Africa. Well, I live in the US, and to get him food from here takes considerable expense. Most food perishes within a time limit, so depending on the food I send, I may also have to refrigerate it or process it so as to extend it's expiration date. Then there is the transportation, either via air or water. When it arrives, how can I guarantee someone else will not take it, for the simple fact so many are already starving?
Well then, you might just object and say, "send more food! What is the problem?" The problem is I as an individual have limited resources of my own, and cannot send much more. I need to form a coalition of some sort, in order to send more food and hopefully achieve my goal of ending hunger at least for that one child. Well, I finally manage to feed the child. As he grows, so too does his family, because he becomes a father of his own. There are now more mouths to feed depending on the same resources... the same amount of food has to be divided up more and more, to the disadvantage of the individual.
Now add to that situation the scarcity of food and water in Africa, along with its poor administration and the ignorance of the populace in general, and my efforts are simply going to be a drop in the bucket. Millions upon millions will still go thirsty or hungry.
In any case, let's look at the bigger picture here and see where the problem stems. Resources are limited. Humans like to reproduce and when resources are relatively plentiful, death and illness are low. This means the population spikes exponentially like it has this past century. Even though for a time you will have plenty of people eating plentifully, food production fueled by the limited resource (oil) that sparked this exponential growth will plateau, it will level off, and then MANY more will be hungry and will starve. There will probably even be war over food shortages.
One looks at this situation and thinks to oneself, if God exists, he has doomed humanity to failure. He put us in a small planet, in a vastly, enormously huge universe that as we know is extremely hostile to life, with limited resources, and with innate desires to reproduce extensively. A designer that has infinite resources and power would not limit their creation to futility. This is one of the reasons I don't believe. It makes no sense, and indeed, there seems to be no evidence of a Creator intervening in our affairs.
