Tuber

Joined

• started 5 topics
• posted 55 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Tuber

• 
  98

  New here

  by Tuber in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey all.. .

  thought i'd introduce myself.. .

  first, a disclaimer: i'm an athiest.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Tuber

  @Interested: I guess you are referring to Black Sheep's comment about not changing the subject unless it leads towards her shooting herself in the foot?
  
  Also, Yeah, I saw something very similar to that response she gave- on the watchtower website, so I know she was just parroting JW literature.
  
  As for going through that book for me, thanks a lot. I need to get round to obtaining a copy of the watchtower library, scans of the literature they no longer like to circulate etc...
• 
  98

  New here

  by Tuber in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey all.. .

  thought i'd introduce myself.. .

  first, a disclaimer: i'm an athiest.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Tuber

  Interested one, since both her and I were all over the place, we decided to stick to one subject.
  
  We chose, for the time being, to "study together" about whether or not Jehovah should be used to refer to God, as opposed to Yahweh, or LORD etc, and if that has any bearing on the accuracy of bible translations.
  
  This will probably not be a topic that will lead to her doubting the WTS, or help to get her out, but hopefully it will help me further strengthen the impression I am trying to put across, that I am curious and want to learn.
  
  At best I might be able to get her to realise the NWT is biased translation. Taking baby steps, like I said at the start of this thread, she knows I'm an atheist, so I am trying to make it seem like I'm slowly giving into curiousity.
  
  If anyone has any particularly interesting info on this particular topic, I'm all ears.
• 
  98

  New here

  by Tuber in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey all.. .

  thought i'd introduce myself.. .

  first, a disclaimer: i'm an athiest.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Tuber

  Thanks for all the info guys, especially Black Sheep- do you have any particularly difficult questions, or any that, without raising red flags, lead a JW down the path of researching all the things they'd rather not?
• 
  98

  New here

  by Tuber in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey all.. .

  thought i'd introduce myself.. .

  first, a disclaimer: i'm an athiest.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Tuber

  Trying to get her to do the research for herself, but it's a challenge, will take a look at that thread.
• 
  101

  Atheist Fascism

  by Band on the Run in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it is so draining for me to constantly read threads by atheists that assert that those of who are uncertain or have faith have irrational minds.

  god can not be proven or unproven.

  the harping is tedious.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Tuber

  Berengaria, thanks.
  
  You just read my story? Does this mean that there is somewhere you can see a history of posts?
  
  The way this forum puts the newest threads first, letting the older ones slowly get buried does my head in, and I find it hard to find my own threads/ posts.
• 
  101

  Atheist Fascism

  by Band on the Run in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it is so draining for me to constantly read threads by atheists that assert that those of who are uncertain or have faith have irrational minds.

  god can not be proven or unproven.

  the harping is tedious.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Tuber

  What Berengaria said is very relevant.
• 
  98

  New here

  by Tuber in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hey all.. .

  thought i'd introduce myself.. .

  first, a disclaimer: i'm an athiest.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Tuber

  Thanks guys.
  
  Never discuss doctrine?
  
  Not sure how to go about that, looks like I'm already having that conversation.
  
  Haven't been able to get a hold of Hassan's books yet, I live overseas, ordering an english book from the US or UK is going to be quite the wait.
• 
  101

  Atheist Fascism

  by Band on the Run in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it is so draining for me to constantly read threads by atheists that assert that those of who are uncertain or have faith have irrational minds.

  god can not be proven or unproven.

  the harping is tedious.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Tuber

  It is so draining for me to constantly read threads by atheists that assert that those of who are uncertain or have faith have irrational minds. God can not be proven or unproven. The harping is tedious. I understand that for you atheism works. It is good for you. Sometimes it feels as though you will impose atheism on me the way the Spanish Inquisition worked.

  Band,
  
  I'm still fairly new here, so I may not have run across many of these threads yet.
  
  Disclaimer: Avowed, baby eating atheist.
  
  There are atheists who are all butthurt and believe there's no god simply because they didn't get dealt the best hand in life. These are bitter atheists, and just plain old bitter people, and you can be sure if they were faithful they'd be just as passionate about the other side of the argument.
  
  What I'm trying to say is, people are dicks. There are christian dicks. Hindu dicks. Buddhist dicks. Atheist dicks. You, as one of faith, simply get more exposure to athiest dicks, since faith and athiesm are polar opposites, and who is a dick gonna go after, but someone who believes something completely opposite to him?
  
  For example, there are dicks who like public transport, and dicks who like using their own car. The dicks on the public transport side aren't going to start harping about public transport to people who ride the same bus as them, are they? Nor are they going to try and preach their message to random people in the street. These are dicks we are talking about, dicks, dude. They're looking for an argument, looking to make people feel bad so they can feel better about themselves. So obviously they're going to go after people who they can rile up the most, who they can hurt the most, and who's pet cause is the polar opposite of their own. In the transport case, the public transort zealots will go after the car drivers, and vice versa. Same is true with the atheism vs faith argument.
  
  You may not be a dick, in fact, I don't know you, so my default assumption, until I know better, is that you're not. But let me tell you, among your fellow faithful, there are a metric shit ton of dicks. It's the same for atheists, we have just as many.
  
  You may not be a dick, but you're still a prime target for atheist dicks. I'm not a dick, but I'm a prime target for faithful dicks.
  
  If there are 100 athiests and 10 are dicks, chances are far higher you'll run across those 10 dicks than you will the 90 non-dicks. Because the dicks seek you out, it's not just blind chance.
  
  So when you see a bunch of athiest dicks doing what they do best, don't start thinking "damn it,atheists are dicks". Just think "wow, these guys are dicks".
  
  In summary: dick dick dicks dick dick.

  I respect atheism. My choice and it is very personal is to have faith. Certainly, it is shaky. My bottom line is to believe.

  People seem to think atheism is a religion, or a belief system, it isn't. It's a lack thereof. We don't have a holy book, we don't have churches or temples, priests or rabbis. We differ in our morals and values. The only thing that unites us is a lack of belief, and for the majority of us, that lack of belief is caused by science, and a respect for the scientific method.
  
  This is why us athiests find you faithful to be so hard to understand. Evolution and Natural Selection have been scientifically proven. The age of the Earth and the universe have been determined, and they're measured in millions, billions of years. We may be off by a few million years, later discoveries may refine our understanding. But we know the earth wasn't created in 7 days. We know all the animals and plants of the world didn't suddenly spring into being over the course of a week. We know diseases are caused by germs, not demons.
  
  The more we learn and discover, the more unreliable the assertions of faith become. And the faithful react in one of three ways. Either they reinterpret their holy books to fit with science, they ignore science (and by doing so spit on the incredible amount of hard work and effort put in by people who have done things such as cure disease, eradicate famine etc), or they admit defeat on one point, and regroup at a point science has yet to touch. This last one is known as the God of the Gaps phenomenon, and from our side of the fence, it's actually pretty funny.
  
  Most of us (excluding dicks), respect your right TO BELIEVE what you want- but that comes with conditions- being that you don't hamper science, and don't let your beliefs harm anyone else (for example, the JW blood issue).
  
  This doesn't mean we respect WHAT YOU BELIEVE. For us, respecting your beliefs is no different to respecting belief in fairies and unicorns. We respect your right to believe what you believe, but we still think it's fucking stupid, and if we're honest, we'll probably tell you. But only dicks will go out of their way to find you, tell you, and then let you know what they think that means about you as a person.
  
  

  How is atheism imposed on me by an outsider any different from having JWs imposed on me by my abusive parents?

  See what I said about dicks.
• 
  25

  Watchtower 2011 July 15 Study Edition: Are all study editions like this?

  by Tuber in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  so during my research on the wts, i stubled across a link to the july 15th watchtower.. .

  http://download.jw.org/files/media_magazines/w_e_20110715.pdf.

  i'm assuming that the study editions are the ones that they only give to members/ those who attend meetings.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Tuber

  The not believing in hell thing is one plus, I'll agree.
  
  But when you think about it...
  
  They discourage higher education.
  
  They do not tolerate any opinion that differs from WTS doctrine.
  
  They discourage independant thinking.
  
  They ban life saving medical procedures.
  
  They encourage members to snitch on each other.
  
  They encourage women to stay in violent marriages, allowing divorce only in the case of adultery.
  
  They impose the penalty of disfellowshipment for a great number of offences...
  
  It's like they've taken hell out of the afterlife, and set it up in the here and now instead.
  
  I'm not arguing with you about which is worse... Both are horrible in their own ways and teach horrible things.
  
  It's just that mainstream christianity tends to allow a bit more wiggle room, people are allowed to think, allowed to differ in what they percieve a verse of the bible means, and although they believe in hell, they have salvation through grace not works, rather than salvation by how many copies of a magazine you manage to distribute (works).
• 
  25

  Watchtower 2011 July 15 Study Edition: Are all study editions like this?

  by Tuber in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  so during my research on the wts, i stubled across a link to the july 15th watchtower.. .

  http://download.jw.org/files/media_magazines/w_e_20110715.pdf.

  i'm assuming that the study editions are the ones that they only give to members/ those who attend meetings.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Tuber

  Glad some of you got something out of it.
  
  Nice to be able to let you guys know the type of things being written without you having to read the whole thing (it was torturous).
  
  And to think that I used to get all angsty and angry about some of the things mainstream Christianity teaches.
  
  The stuff JWs believe make Christianity seem downright tame in comparison.