How would an elephant correctly explain the existence of humans? How can humans explain the unexplainable? The unexplainable does exist and Myth, metaphor and conjectore are the only tools available.
Jack C.
JoinedPosts by Jack C.
-
269
The Hubble, Yahweh, the Bible, and faith.
by Nickolas inthere have been several threads in which the views of the universe provided by the hubble space telescope have been discussed.
i guess this will be another one.
there's a new series being broadcast here in canada on the oasis hd nature channel entitled hubble's canvas.
-
-
-
19
The Alpha and Omega-God has no beginning and no end /as opposed to the universe having no beginning and no end ?
by smiddy ini would like some more enlightened beings than me to thrash this out.. to start the ball rolling with my small intellect.
i was always taught from my jw days that nothing came from nothing,and i accepted that.. all of creation had a start,and reproduced itself according to it`s kind according to genesis.
and of course we now know their are life forms that are a-sexual that reproduce.
-
-
Jack C.
It's pretty well established in science that the universe we live in had a beginning. This of course begs the question who or what started it? Up until the last 10 -15 years the physics community would/could not publicly discuss the origin of the singularity or infinite point from which our universe arose. New theories such as Brane Theory and Multiverse are currently attempting to address this issue with some success. The original problem of eternal existence of the universe(s) vs. universe(s) with a beginning and originating from nothing is still in question. An eternaly existing multiverse from which our universe sprang seems to be the current thinking. The same question pops up when God is put into the mix. Did God have an origin or has He/She existed eternaly? If He/She had a beginning, who or what created God? The only sensible answer seems to be either an eternally existing multiverse or an eternally existing Creator. From this point on it becomes a matter of common sense and faith if you believe in a Creator or just an eternal multiverse. A Creator, who has existed eternally is the only reasonable answer for me. To others a Creator isn't necessary.
-
54
Testing, testing, testing.....Jehovah TESTS?
by Terry ina classroom teacher has to administer tests.
the teacher doesn't know who is learning and who isn't or how much.. a test pilot flys a new jet to determine what strengths and weaknesses correspond to the design because nobody knows how close.
the manufacture of it came to the ideal.. fire drills are a test: can everybody exit in an orderly fashion in a reasonable amount of time in case there is a fire.. if you think you may be pregant you take a pregnancy test because you won't know for sure otherwise (unless you wait 9 months!).
-
-
Jack C.
This is essentially a cut and paste of an answer I gave on the Yahoo questions forum that may apply to this discussion. The question was asked if God was fully involved in our day to day activities. My belief would probably be considered heretical by most Christians but it's what I honestly believe.
One of the principle concepts of Christian theology is that God is all knowing, all present and perfect. Why do we put God in such a neat little box where we expect and demand these absolutes? Does God not deserve a period of discovery and learning? What if God were not all knowing and perfect as we have come to expect? Perhaps all of creation is involved in a learning process along with God Him/Her self. Perhaps all sentient life can simply be described as eyes, ears and feelings for God, almost like our eyes were literal cameras and our ears microphones? Perhaps this is one of the mechanisms by which God observes, listens, accumilates knowledge and rectifies mistakes, albeit over long periods of time, (kind of like, dare I say it, witnesses ) learning through us as we learn; being involved through our intellect, thinking process and emotions. I sometimes think we as believers expect from our Creator that which is unreasonable and selfish. Maybe we need to give God a break instead of expecting and desiring it all for ourselves. Do we ever have concern for Gods feelings or do we feel that in His/Her perfection that lonelyness and a thirst for something new are not an issue for the Creator? I just can't get it my head around the idea that God has always had knowledge of anything and everything, even before it was created. Imagine existing alone throughout eons with no opportunity to learn or feel anything new because you already knew it. It would be a painfull and unfullfilling existance indeed.
It seems reasonable to me that both God and creation are involved together in an eternal learning curve. We as part of that creation share new knowledge and experience with God; He/She all along applying this knowledge to creation as a whole with perfection as a goal. At present the world and perhaps all of creation is a long way from it's intended goal. The world is definately not a pleasant to live for billions of people. Starvation, war and disease are rampant. It can at times be hell on earth even for the fortunate. Most people wouldn't want live eternally under the present conditions including myself. However if my Creator chooses to allow me eternal life in a better place somewhere in the cosmos after 70 or 80 years in this sometimes hellish place, then the pain and suffering of this education will be a bargain indeed.
As far as God testing us, all of life is a test for us as well as God.
Jack
-
30
Would you have left if b-days and blood were okay, and DF-ing was rare?
by respectful_observer in -
-
Jack C.
For me the the independent thinking issue was the final straw. Without the ability to think for yourself the rest of the policys and restrictions were moot. If they would completely change the format of the Org. to one that strongly encouraged spiritual and related scientific research, critical thinking and free sharing of ideas and discussion it would very much interest me. I don't know of a religious organization anywhere like that. As far as the shunning policy it seems to me that rational adults have the capacity to recognize and avoid a truely evil person. A congregation wide policy of avoiding truely dangerous or evil people (child predators etc.) would probably be valid. This would necessarily be an organization that would require a nearly 180 degree reversal of format from the current one.
-
28
But, isn't it a "Wicked System of Things?"
by PenelopePaige ini am not a jw but one thing that they really get me on is when they call the outside world a "wicked system of things" and say it is run by the devil.
i know the world can be great and people can be wonderful but on the flip side, the bad seems to be getting worse and morals seem to be flying out the window.
i don't know, what do you guys think?
-
-
Jack C.
This observation is certainly no unique to Jehovah's Witnesses. Most fundamental sects incorporate this idea into their doctrine, alibet with somewhat different doctrines and rules to escape the wickedness. One bible verse that comes to mind along the lines of a wicked system of things and the last days is the one about lovers of money in the last days. The current financial crisis in the west is indicative of the selfishness and corruption of capitolism. Communism and fascism didn't work. Now capitolism is beginning to show it's soft underbelly. Western society is quickly returning to the peasant and ruling class oliarchy of the middle ages.
-
2
Johnny and six screens question
by Jack C. inwhat is the concensus of the board as to credability of the six screens and jtb site?
i've read only one of the johnny reports and don't know enough about it to form an opinion.
waste of time or credable?.
-
-
Jack C.
What is the concensus of the board as to credability of the six screens and JTB site? I've read only one of the Johnny reports and don't know enough about it to form an opinion. Waste of time or credable?
-
19
Stop CONFUTING Physics with METAphysics Watchtower !
by Terry indescartes uttered the famous dictum: i think therefore i am.. thinking, however, is metaphysical and existing is physical.. now stop right there!.
let us define our words, shall we?.
physics deals with our sensory proofs of actual things (hearing, seeing, smelling, touching, tasting).
-
-
Jack C.
I realize (sic) this kind of discussion usually ends up as an endless mind f**K and accomplishes nothing. Reduced to it's inevitable conclusion the question of a universal concsienceness becomes the final point of contention. Either view requires a personal consideration of available facts and an individual truth aquired. Facts are always facts; truth is subjective, in the eye of the beholder.
later
Jack
-
19
Stop CONFUTING Physics with METAphysics Watchtower !
by Terry indescartes uttered the famous dictum: i think therefore i am.. thinking, however, is metaphysical and existing is physical.. now stop right there!.
let us define our words, shall we?.
physics deals with our sensory proofs of actual things (hearing, seeing, smelling, touching, tasting).
-
-
Jack C.
Metaphysical reality is not THE reality.
Hmm... JW religious arguments aside, please define/explain reality without metaphysics? What is the Real or primary reality? I posit that there is no reality in a purely physical world, ie reality does not exist without the metaphysical. While I can easily comprehend a purely metaphysical world in which you and I exist, it is impossible to comprehend a purely physical world including myself. If it is impossible to imagine, it's impossible to explain. Imagine you don't exist, then reply. Can you do so?
-
20
Attention Governor Perry: Evolution is a fact - R. Dawkins
by unshackled inthe washington post published this richard dawkins response to perry's evolution is "just a theory" comment.
refers to him as an "uneducated ignoramus" and doesn't spare the republican party much either.... http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/post/attention-governor-perry-evolution-is-a-fact/2011/08/23/giqauifuyj_blog.html.
q. texas governor and gop candidate rick perry, at a campaign event this week, told a boy that evolution is just a theory with gaps and that in texas they teach both creationism and evolution.
-
-
Jack C.
The problem with Dawkins isn't his stand on evolution it's that his rediculous reductionist philosophy isn't really believed by anyone, himself included. His idea of first cause (ie god to us commoners) is the unseen, unknowable, unfathomable singularity that originates nowhere and ends up nowhere. His church is of the Pathagorean number cult who worship and offer holy sacrements to the almighty number as creator and manager of all that is known (look it up for yourself.) Dawkins reductionism has even sliced the number one into the singularity, the almighty nothing.
-
68
Interracial Marriage
by Quendi inhere is a question i want to pose because i do not know the correct answer.
i have seen many interracial married couples among jehovah's witnesses--moreso than i have seen in other religions.
however, i have been told that once upon a time, interracial marriage was frowned upon by the wts hierarchy.
-
-
Jack C.
Newchapter, that's precisly what I mean. "The book claims it's inspired?" The book is just a book! You certainly don't believe everything a book "says" do you? the book "says whatever the translator, preacher, priest or any dubius charactor want's it to say. I'm not trying to be a smart ass, it's just that there is SO much more to evaluate than one ancient book of dubius origin. The book is the bathwater, don't throw in the baby too. THAT God is not the one all tell all.