Posts by mindseye

76

I used to be a JW! Shocking, I know

by NewChapter in

it's true.

i used to be a jw.

i was duped.

mindseye

I think a person's experience as a Witness usually gives them an unique insight. Typically the average Ex-JW has experienced multiple sides of life, being in a form of fundamentalism and seeing the worst side of religion, then usually rejecting religion altogether and appreciating the value of critical thought. When going to college, I found that many were just going through the motions to get their degree. Because of my background, I appreciated the chance to develop critical thinking skills.

I've also found that when holding a strong opinion - typically in a political debate - that some of my non-JW relatives have used my JW background against me, targeting a strong opinion they disagree with on 'that type of thinking you learned as a witness.' It really is a cheap shot, and an ad hominem attack. Instead of addressing the argument, some resort to attacking the background of the person.

In the end, I would say that my background has strenghtened my perspective, but also showed me the dangers of 'certainty'. There really is no final solution (and shouldn't be). We're all just figuring it out as we go along.

107

Please someone, explain scientifically how an omnipotent,omniscience,omnipresent,almighty GOD came from nothing

by smiddy in

only scientific responses needed smiddy

mindseye

The question is "what is God?" How would you go about measuring this "God stuff"? I'm guessing we're talking about the creator God found in the Hebrew Bible, but the concept of God transcends culture.

I think in these debates we're stuck with the God 'image' as the craftsman who created everything ex nihilo. This is the God of alienation and exile, a God outside of nature. Other forms of theology suggest that God is in everything an everyone, not just some being who created the earth as an artifact.

The problem is that most of us were brought up with a very simplistic, undeveloped theology. And it's not just the JWs, much of western culture is stuck in a simplistic theistic/atheistic debate. Dawkins and fundamentalists are just flip-sides of the same coin. They're both stuck with the God image of 'creator', and as something concrete that can be proven or disproven.

The theologian Paul Tillich is an example of a more sophisticated examiner on the God question. He viewed God not as the 'creator', but as the 'ground of being' (our very state of existence, as I understand it). The widipedia entry about him sums this view up well:

Tillich is critical of [the] mode of discourse which he refers to as "theological theism," and argues that if God is a Being [das Seiende], even if the highest Being, God cannot be properly called the source of all being, and the question can of course then be posed as to why God exists, who created God, when God's beginning is, and so on. To put the issue in traditional language: if God is a being [das Seiende], then God is a creature, even if the highest one, and thus cannot be the Creator. Rather, God must be understood as the "ground of Being-Itself."

25

Do you now have a customized religion?

by losthobbit in

i was never a jw.

i was a member of the church of christ.

i didn't jump from christian to non-believer, but rather went through a transition period, and i'd guess that all of you did the same,... changing beliefs bit by bit until you believe what you do now.. when i first realized that there were logic problems in the bible i started to find excuses for those problems.

mindseye

losthobbit, I agree that labels can be restricting. Though there are certain "-isms" I identify with, I always try to rigourously examine different paths. Good quote by Lao Tzu.

Joey Jo Jo, I also remember learning that the sort of 'Bible worship' that permeates modern fundamentalism was a product of the reformation. The ritual and mystical elements of the earlier churches hold more appeal to me, something is lost with the over-literalization, book-deification of some post-reformation theology (though I do agree that everyone should be able to read and interpret the Bible for themselves).

364

New DVD "Become Jehovah's Friend"

by treadnh2o in

hey peeps,.

it's been a long while since i've posted (i am completely out - wife and kids still in) but thought you might this interesting.. they came home from the district convention yesterday with the new dvd intended for kids.

they popped it in right away and this is what happens:.

mindseye

LOL! WTF??? I thought this was a joke when I first saw it. They're becoming a caricature of themselves.

25

Do you now have a customized religion?

by losthobbit in

i was never a jw.

i was a member of the church of christ.

i didn't jump from christian to non-believer, but rather went through a transition period, and i'd guess that all of you did the same,... changing beliefs bit by bit until you believe what you do now.. when i first realized that there were logic problems in the bible i started to find excuses for those problems.

mindseye

Good post, losthobbit. 'Customized religion' describes my journey quite well. After leaving the Witnesses in my teens I rejected religion altogether, and called myself an agnostic. But religion remained an academic interest, and the more I read, I found that there was a whole world beyond theistic debates. Reading about the religions of the east was a real eye opener. Taoism and Buddhism remain the two traditions I most identify with. I have attended a Buddhist temple, and found the experience to be positive. Debate was allowed and even encouraged, and one did not have to self identify as a 'Buddhist' to be involved. Quite a departure from the religion of my youth.

I have also read some books by the mythologist Joseph Campbell, which caused me to think of religion and spirituality in a different way. Instead of getting bogged down in literalism and what 'really happened', I began to look at religious stories as poetic metaphors for deep existential 'truths'.

Most recently, I've began to read the Bible in this poetic way, and now find it a pretty enriching book. Stories that I thought were strange when taken literally now take on a new dimension. For instance, Jacob wrestling God is a metaphor for how we all grapple with difficult existential questions. I don't feel the need to identify as a 'Christian' or believe in concepts such as original sin to take value from some of the stories in the Bible.

So yeah, I have a belief system that's probably a hybrid of eastern thought, poetic reading of mythology, and insights into evolutionary psychology. I don't feel the 'need' for this religion, it's just a natural byproduct of exploration.

97

Scientific reasons for belief in God v moral arguments against belief

by yadda yadda 2 in

jw
friends

i have to admit that i do find it very very hard to believe there is no 'god' or higher intelligent power or cosmic force of some kind behind it all.

at the very last a non-personal einstein or spinoza version of god.

the articles here on this website sum up most of my reasons for belief: ww.godevidence.com/category/evidence.

mindseye

yadda yadda 2 wrote: I am troubled by the moral arguments against belief and find many of them compelling, ie, arguments springing from the existence of evil and suffering being incompatible with the existence of an all powerful, all knowing, all caring God.

The question of evil used to bother me until I read the Bible with blinders off, then it all became clear.

Isaiah 45:7: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”

2 Kings 6:33: "Behold, this evil is of the Lord."

Makes sense, if everything comes from God, then evil comes from God.

I think ultimately Blaise Pascal was rather right, that we cannot deduce the answer by reason alone and the safest bet is to err on the side of a form of religious belief.

It think Pascal's wager is the most simplistic theistic argument. Why is the safest bet to err on the side of a form of religious belief? And if so, what form of religious belief? What if you attend a Christian church all of your life, get to the gates of heaven, and find out that Zeus is on the other side?

I think this is the best solution. Do not take a hard position on either side of the atheism v religious fundamentalism question. Don't be a militant atheist and religion basher and don't be a religious fanatic.

I generally agree. Complete certainty is always a dead end. According to a strict materialist view, atheists have the edge, as the evidence (or lack thereof) is on their side. But hard atheists tend to reduce religion to fundamentalism, and often underestimate the integral part myth and ritual played in human development.

13

Belief in evolution begets belief in God

by yadda yadda 2 in

jw
friends

a strange statement i know.

but consider.... if humans evolved, and humans are a relatively recent evolution, then would it not make sense to believe there might be other far more ancient intelligent beings (who would appear to humans to be like gods/a god) who began evolving long before humans?

in a sense, to believe in human evolution hardly refutes god's existence, unless you believe that us humans are the only thing in the entire universe that has evolved into a salient, intelligent, self-aware being.

mindseye

The Gladiator wrote: Why do humans feel a need to believe?

Because that is what humans do. Ritual and mythopoeic thought evolved along with humans.

We can take in facts, knowledge and then just say uh-hu.

I agree that questions of God and 'belief' are not empirical and should be regulated to domains such as theology (except for anthropological and biological arguments for the basis of such beliefs). To me, religion is like aesthetics or philosophical metaphysics. In other words, you can't put it in a lab and take measurements.

Yadda yadda, I would call the sort of ancient beings that you describe extraterrestrials or super-beings. I don't think they have the all-encompassing attributes of what humans commonly call 'God'. But that would depend on how we would further define 'God'.

17

How can everything weve learned be a lie?

by bats in the belfry in

a reporter tracks down the remnants of harold campings apocalyptic movement and finds out you dont have to be crazy to believe something nuts.. .

an excerpt of his write-up:.

another engineer i came to know had spent most of his retirement savings, well over a half-million dollars, taking out full-page newspaper ads and buying an rv that he had custom-painted with doomsday warnings.

mindseye

Terry wrote: Desire is our most powerful motive force because the deepest roots of it come from our Values.

Good point. When I finally broke free of the monotheistic stranglehold, the Buddhist notion of getting rid of desire came in handy (tried not to fall into the trap of desiring to get rid of desire).

One of the most destructive things about high-control religions like the JWs is that they prey so intently on desires. Some desires can be healthy in moderation, like sex or food. Our desires are evolutionarily built in for a reason, primarily survival. This desire for survival is what these high-control groups prey upon the most, with enticements of immortality or surviving some 'tribulation'.

The immediate association between survival and the high control group in the victim's mind creates the "Where else will we go?" syndrome. This, along with social ties, has the victim associate leaving the group with death itself.

10

Why are some scientists more comfortable with Shamanism than Religion?

by Fernando in

jw
friends

i'm thinking of shamanic physicist dr fred alan wolf as an example.. i'd love to read your thoughts and opinions, especially if you are a member of the seemingly large and usually silent audience on jwn..

mindseye

Shamanism, mysticism, and eastern spirituality hold less ideological opposition to science. For instance, Buddhists poll highest in accepting evolution. A mystic or shaman is more concerned about the spiritual experience rather than some literalist narrative that conflicts with the scientific account. Some point to parallels between eastern mysticism and modern physics (see Fritjof Capra's The Tao of Physics). The psychological benefits of meditation are seriously being studied at universities, and the mystic experience is similar to what Freud described as the 'oceanic experience'. The shaman fascinates anthropologists and psychologists because he/she represents a spiritual guide before religion was codified in groups (and is a good example for altered states of consciousness).

267

The true, unsung hero of the Bible....

by Unlearn in

my undisputed hero of the bible is known by several names, depending on who you talk to...devil, satan, lucifer, etc.. read it, and you'll find that he was the only one who really stood up for you.. he asserted that you could make decisions for yourself...and told you the very real truth that, just because the piece of meat in your chest stops thumping, you positively do not 'die'.. he was your hero.

he stood up to a daddy-maniac and said, 'just because you made us doesnt mean you have the right to tell us what to do.

i thought we were free?'.

mindseye

Interesting thread. I agree with the premise. I would argue that Satan is part of the Godhead, allowing us to gain knowledge (gnosis). A quaternity makes more sense than the trinity.