Sea Breeze
JoinedPosts by Sea Breeze
-
8
JWs & Guilt Trips
by skeeter1 inthe watchtower is a manipulator.
one of the tools they use is guilt, and they use it via the "guilt trip.
" just so we are clear, a guilt trip is:.
-
-
-
11
Do You Remember This Speaker?
by Atlantis indo you remember this speaker?.
https://imgbox.com/no37wjiy.
how many people remember the old laurel race track where we had conventions back in the 60's?
-
-
Sea Breeze
Never went there
-
36
Treatment of Those Trying For Reinstatement
by Vanderhoven7 inwhat happens when a jehovah’s witness who has been disfellowshipped returns to attending the meetings again?.
mark jones writes:.
if it's the same congregation that they previously attended then, yes, the congregation will remember who they are and so continue to treat them as dead or invisible.. one of the identifying marks a cult is that it uses shame and humiliation to control members, to keep them from leaving and manipulating those who escaped into coming back.. a disfellowshipped person is never allowed to quietly leave with dignity.
-
-
Sea Breeze
Galatians 5:1. “Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.”
A lot of people are uncomfortable with freedom. They literally can't function without excessive domination and control of other men.
My advice is to read your bible, submit to God alone, do what you can to get along with everyone, tell the control freaks of all stripes to take a hike. -
14
Why didn't God create us to be obviously different?
by SydBarrett ina silly question since i'm an atheist but one i thought of as a kid jw.
why weren't human's created to be obviously different from animals?
among believers there is some sort of universal hierarchy.
-
-
Sea Breeze
Why didn't God create us to be obviously different?
If you were not different than an animal, you wouldn't be able to even ask this question.
I'm an atheist
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
Sea Breeze
@TonusOH
I didn't replace my presuppositions when I stopped believing in god. I dropped them. That means I have to admit that I don't have some of the answers, and I can't allow myself to cheat by making them up. But it also means I am not satisfied with accepting a starting point that I cannot determine is true.
There is no neutral ground here TonusOH. Face it or suppress it. So far on this thread, I have tried to establish that atheists take for granted a number of things that can only be attributed to the God of the Bible. Things like logic, compassion, reasoning, saving a child from being hit by a train etc. are reflections of God. We ONLY make sense in a biblical worldview....because:
God is immutable
God is Love
God is a Savior
God is the author of reason and logic ("God cannot deny himself")
This makes sense. And if not 100% proof, it is massively obvious that it is consistent.
You simply cannot function without utilizing some or all of these attributes. That is why I say there is no middle ground here. If you deny the God of the bible, you must utilize one or more of these qualities to form an excuse to do so. Like I said before: It is like a man arguing against the existence of air, all the while breathing air to form his aguments. It is self defeating, illogical, and this view blows itself up under its own weight.
To sumarize:
Laws of reason and logic - Atheists have no basis to assume that laws of reason and logic are the same everywhere in a chance universe. They have no explanation of why or who brought such laws into existence. Maybe in Africa contradictions exist.... its a chance universe. Anything could happen right? Wrong, atheists believe in their immutability anyway, in spite of their professed chaotic, happenstance worldview.Objective Morality - In an evolutionary world there is no sound reason to save a child from getting hit by a train. His death shouldn't cause the slightest blip of regret in our failure to save him. Animals don't care outside of their group. We're just animals right? Furthermore, his death is supposed to be a good thing according to evolutionists becasue it supposedly increases the gene pool of those not inclined to carelessly run into speeding trains. His death, increases the food supply for those not so foolishly inclined....or so the story goes.
But conversely, atheists do employ reason, logic and compassion in spite of their claimed worldview. This is inconsistent and is a very strong indicator of falsehood.
So far on this thread, atheists have only offered three explanations:* conventions
This doesn't explain anything because like driving on the right side of the road, a different convention of people could all decide to drive on the left side of the road. There is no immutability or consistency there to account for the atheists' acceptance and reliance on his god given attributes such as reason and objective morality.
* descriptions
Cofty offered something along the lines that these are just names or descriptions of how people treat each other or think.
This is close to the truth because reason is a description of how God thinks. It is not a description of a chance universe populated by chemical reactions and DNA copying mistakes and unguided explosions. People all think differently, so logic can't be describing that. Sometimes I don't think correctly. That is why I need the logic from God to correct my thinking.
* physiology
Immutable laws of logic, morality and logic can't be just functions of the brain, because we all have different brain chemistry. Yet, in spite of the vast differences of brain function, chemistry and electrical impulses, the God given attributes of reason, logic, compassion, objective morality ARE UNIVERSAL and atheists accept and use them as such even though their worldview cannot account for them.... breathing air while claiming it doesn't exist. It makes no sense.
On a personal note: Why would you replace a worldview that you believe you cannot sufficiently prove for one that is demonstratably inconsistent, and hence more than likely false?
-
168
Moral responsibility.
by nicolaou inno subtlety here, it's going to be obvious where i'm going with this.
please consider the following scenario.. you're seated on a railway platform bench waiting for your train.
a high speed intercity is about to hurtle through without stopping when you see a small child running to the platforms edge!
-
-
Sea Breeze
Doesn't the idea of God allowing bad things to happen by other humans make him responsible for them, going by the concept of willful inaction?
@Drearyweather
If God did nothing forever, then yes by default that makes him an enabler of sin at minimum.
God can either make sin impossible, or he can judge sin. All God has to do is take away our freewill, make us robots and immediately sin would stop.
The only problem with that is that robots can't love you back, which is what God desires. So, he decided to judge sin so that the possibility of love for him could be preserved as well as justice.
Futhermore, he incarnated himself and took our death-penalty punishment for each of us. He offered himself as a scapegoat for anyone who wanted it.... thus preserving both the possibility of love for him and our choice in the matter.
-
141
My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang
by Sea Breeze ina new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.
wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.
that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.
-
-
Sea Breeze
@SydBarrett
You have been indoctrinated by more than just the WT. We have eyewitness testimony in Genesis that all of the stars were created in one 24 hour earth day. Based on this testimony, I accurately predicted that the JWST would find huge fully formed galaxies for as far back as they could see.... and that secular scientists would be "surprised" "astonished" "shocked" etc.
All came true just as I predicted.
My scientific prediction went against 99% of the models describing the early universe form a MoY point of view and is repeatedly proving correct. Deal with it.The Watchtower also allowed for "millions of years" cosmology. Once again the WT is proved wrong.
-
42
God and Unicorns
by Sea Breeze inatheist scientists now agree that "elasmotherium sibiricu" lived with humans.
all they had to do was read their bible to know that.
job 39:9 “will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?”.
-
-
Sea Breeze
Cofty,
You have no idea how iron can preserve soft tissues, blood cells, DNA fragments and other biological stuctures for hundreds of millions of years, because there is no test for "Millions of Years." (MoY). The test only lasted a few weeks that you are referring to.
I'm sure there is something to the iron preservation hypothesis. But this stuff is everywhere it is not supposed to be. 6 out of 8 randomly selected dinosaur bones selected from thousands at the British museum produced original organic material. Are you going to tell me that all of these randomly bones selected had the exact conditions necessary for preservation of MoY? Ridiculous.
This is a nothing more than a rescue device for a failing model.... making a mountain out of a mole hill.Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell notes:
Catastrophic Burial Still Essential
Preservation of soft tissue of course requires more that the presence of iron in a dead animal. Rapid burial is needed, and the global Flood supplied the rapid burial beneath huge masses of mineral-laden water-borne sediment requisite for the large-scale fossilization we see in earth’s sedimentary rocks. Burial in porous sediment through which water can flow, such as the sandstone in which soft-tissue-containing dinosaur bones have been found, is a further help to preserving delicate soft tissue. The bones of the specimens in which Schweitzer has found soft tissue have been articulated rather than scattered, which is additional testimony to their rapid burial. Thus rapid burial plus the release of biologically bound iron may be the twin keys to keeping dinosaur soft tissue around long enough for paleontologists to find it.
Stretching Back Through Deep Time
But can iron chelation preserve soft tissue and even keep it soft for millions of years? While a 200-fold delay in the decay of ostrich blood vessels is certainly impressive, even that level of preservation can’t hold a candle to the 99,800,000-fold10 increase in chemical stability needed in the millions-of-years evolutionary scenario. Schweitzer quite reasonably makes a comparison to the fixation properties of formaldehyde. Many variables influence the degree and duration of the decay-delaying properties of formaldehyde. But specimens preserved in formaldehyde are not preserved perfectly or permanently. While burial conditions likely influence the efficacy of iron as a preservative in any given bone, there is certainly no reason to propose that iron could preserve the molecular structure of soft tissue for millions of years any more than formaldehyde could.
Regardless of what anyone thinks is likely, the fact is it is impossible to scientifically test and observe the answer to this question. No scientist has ever observed the effects of millions of years on anything. The millions-of-years age assigned to the strata containing dinosaur fossils is derived from a number of worldview-based unverifiable assumptions. Therefore, the fact that dinosaur soft tissue is preserved in some fossils does not mean that iron or anything else has preserved it for millions of years. Iron chelation may be the (or a) key to preservation, a conclusion supported by Schweitzer’s work, but nothing in the discovery demonstrates how long such preservation could be effective.
-
141
My Prediction Regarding New Space Telescope That Will See Back to 100 Million Years From the Big Bang
by Sea Breeze ina new space telescope launched a few days age that will supposedly be able to see to within 100 million years of the big bang.
wow... only 100 million years from the big bang.
that is pretty early given the 12 billion year age of the universe assigned by scholars who adhere to naturalism.
-
-
Sea Breeze
The James Webb Space Telescope continues to support a Creation model
Webb Telescope Makes a Surprising Galactic Discovery in the Distant Universe
“These objects are way more massive than anyone expected,” said study coauthor Joel Leja, assistant professor of astronomy and astrophysics at Penn State University, in a statement. “We expected only to find tiny, young, baby galaxies at this point in time, but we’ve discovered galaxies as mature as our own in what was previously understood to be the dawn of the universe.”
The telescope observes the universe in infrared light, which is invisible to the human eye, and is capable of detecting the faint light from ancient stars and galaxies. By peering into the distant universe, the observatory can essentially see back in time up to about 13.5 billion years ago. (Scientists have determined the universe is about 13.7 billion years old.)
“The revelation that massive galaxy formation began extremely early in the history of the universe upends what many of us had thought was settled science,” Leja said. “We’ve been informally calling these objects ‘universe breakers’ — and they have been living up to their name so far.”
The galaxies are so massive that they conflict with 99% of models representing early galaxies in the universe, which means scientists need to rethink how galaxies formed and evolved. The current theory suggests that galaxies began as small clouds of stars and dust that grew over time.
“We looked into the very early universe for the first time and had no idea what we were going to find,” Leja said. “It turns out we found something so unexpected it actually creates problems for science. It calls the whole picture of early galaxy formation into question.”
It wasn't unexpected at all for people who believe God. The OP on this thread is proof.
They know what they were expecting to find. And, all they found was evidence that support the Genesis account. That's the "problem" they are talking about. Notice how evidence that supports a created universe is described as a "problem". I thought science was about facts.
Pretty big blow to Atheists, Materialists, Old Earth Creationists, Theistic Evolutionists
-
42
God and Unicorns
by Sea Breeze inatheist scientists now agree that "elasmotherium sibiricu" lived with humans.
all they had to do was read their bible to know that.
job 39:9 “will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib?”.
-
-
Sea Breeze
@ Anony Mous
C14 has a half life on only 5700 years or so. Geophysicist Dr John Baumgardner, part of the RATE research group,6 investigated 14C in a number of diamonds.7 There should be no 14C at all if they really were over a billion years old, yet the radiocarbon lab reported that there was over 10 times the detection limit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yBIXxuyAOM&t=56s&ab_channel=CMIVideo
