Posts by Flat

may 27, 2012april 29, 2012. as readers of this site know, may 27, 2012, is the time that i have stated as being the date jesus christ will return as king of kings over all government on this earth.

for such an event to come to pass, the trumpets of revelation must all sound, the united states and dollar collapse, the ten nations of europe arise to fulfill the final revival of the holy roman empire, and russia with china must unite against europe in wwiii.. .... http://www.ronaldweinland.com/.

Flat_Accent

I'm not too disappointed. I didn't have much planned for June. And the weather would probably have been lousy.

20

If I gave you a poke at 3:30am how would you respond?

by usualusername in

jw
friends

discuss....

Flat_Accent

Didn't Enrique Iglesias discuss this in his song 'Hero'?

* If i poked you, at 3:30am

would you know? what would you do then?

now would you die, for the one you loved?

I don't care, you're here tonight.

I CAN BEE YOOO HEROO BABEH! . . . *

45

Jehovah's Witnesses And The Paranormal

by Cold Steel in

i understand that the jehovah's witnesses are paranoid when it comes to the paranormal.. how far do the roots of this paranoia go?

has anyone ever had any personal paranormal experiences or know of anyone who has (first hand)?.

and what are some of the more popular stories that get retold in jw circles?.

Flat_Accent

My dad says he's had several demon experiences. The first being the day before he got baptized, he was strangled in his sleep. The second was from a possessed antique doll my mum had bought from a charity shop. Apparently the demon came to him while he was half asleep and said "We're not that bad, you know. Let me show you." The demon then tried to 'possess' him.

Me, I've never had a demon experience, but maybe that's because i'm not overly paranoid about it. Or I'm in Satans hands and he doesn't need to scare me, because then I'd just go running back to mother Watchtower.

16

21 Unanswered Questions

by metatron in

jw
friends

http://www.yolohub.com/economy/21-unanswered-questions-that-they-dont-want-you-to-look-into.

if you're not disturbed by the bizarre nature of world events, you're not paying attention.

very weird stuff is happening - and it's not all 'tinfoil hat' conspiracies, either.

Flat_Accent

§• THE DAILY JW-NET •§

May 20th 2012 Now only 3 Cookies!

ALSO INSIDE: LEARN HOW TO TRIM THE WIBBLE IN 4 WEEKS OR LESS!

METATRON ADMITS

"IT'S ALL A JOKE"

Metatron speaking at a press conference 30 minutes ago

251

Evidence for God...

by tec in

jw
friends

life come from the living, and this is a universe of life.

his teachings are truth.

which is why i weight it against the truth of the teachings (and one other thing that i will get to).

Flat_Accent

Part 2.

Christ is the single most compelling testimonial evidence for God. But what grants strength to his testimony about God? His teachings are truth. Not because it is said/written that they are truth. But because I can clearly see the truth within them when I apply them in my life, or see others applying those teachings in their lives. If his teachings are true, if his deeds are true, then compelling weight is added to the truth of his testimony about God. As well, the corroborating and various written accounts both within and without the bible, giving testimony toward Christ, carry further weight to the validity of the existence of the man, as well as his teachings and his deeds and his testimony.

None of Jesus teachings are exclusive to him. The Golden Rule being the most obvious one, people like Confucius said the same thing hundreds of years before Jesus. Liking someone for their moral beliefs does not give credence to their theological ones. How many kind hearted, morally upright Muslims are there? Should I accept Muhammad as the true prophet, because I've seen a Muslim apply those principles in his life? I'm sure there's plenty of decent people out there that also believe Queen Elizabeth is a reptilian alien sent from another planet to rule over us. Do I have to accept both conclusions just because I agree with one of them? Jesus could have been speaking out of his hat when he described God and his qualities, but I guess you can just take his word for it. Or rather, the words someone else wrote down claiming they were said by him. The extra-biblical writings of Jesus do not attest to his divinity, they only suggest that the man may really have existed.

As for your personal revelation, this evidence will only ever be evidence to you so I won't go over it.

251

Evidence for God...

by tec in

jw
friends

life come from the living, and this is a universe of life.

his teachings are truth.

which is why i weight it against the truth of the teachings (and one other thing that i will get to).

Flat_Accent

- Humanity has shown a need or desire to seek out the spiritual. Every single culture that we know of, even those that develop in isolation, has had a belief in god/goddess/creator/spirit (s). From as far back as we can trace the beginning, this has been shown to be true. Explanations have been offered that mankind assigned to a 'god' what mankind could not explain. But I cannot see this as being possible. How can a purely natural species conceive of the spiritual/the supernatural?

I'll put it another way: Humanity has a desire for answers. Based upon the knowledge of the time, good and bad answers have been given. The idea of God has been around for eons, and it was by no means exclusive to the bronze age Palestinians. There were countless gods BEFORE those original 'Jews' left Canaan and built their own towns and cities. You're also suggesting that it was only at this point that God in his true form presented himself, after 90,000 years of human existence, during which countless other Gods (most of which we'll never know about) must have been spoken of. Humans do have a vast imagination, and it comes into play when something happens that they can't explain. There's an evolutionary explanation for the development of religion. Dawkins talks about it in God Delusion, but i'll leave that for someone else like Cofty to cover. Think about all the fairy tales and tall stories that have been told throughout the centuries. Would you apply the same logic to them as you are to God? There are also multiple supernatural explanations, and not all of them are right, as you'd agree. The Hindu's version of heaven and the divine is very different from yours. So by that logic, yes, humans CAN concieve of the supernatural by their own imagination. You're also begging the question by saying 'if the supernatural didn't exist we couldn't have thought of it'.

- Humans have a fantastic imagination. This is true. But I have never known a single person who can conceive of something that has not been built upon previous knowledge, or observation of the physical world. For instance, conceiving of aliens is easy. There are many planets with various conditions; we know that life exists on planets because we exist upon this one; so there could also be various forms of life suited to the environments of other planets. That is a simple leap built upon established knowledge; it is not a new conception.

God is no different. What do you think the Cosmological Argument is centered around? Or Paley's Watch? The structure is different but the conclusions are the same - "That which looks designed must have a designer/ That which exists has been caused to exist" This supposition is based entirely on our own understanding of creation. Humans 'create' complicated tools and weapons, so some greater being must have created the Sun and Lions and Daffodils and everything else. It's also the argument used by the Apostle Paul:

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. - Romans 1:20

- Life does not come from nothing (or death, which is a form nothing). Life come from the living, and this is a universe of life. Not a universe of inanimate, lifeless, things. I can imagine that 'objects' -inanimate and lifeless - might, possibly, come from nothing. But living things must come from something living. There is no life in nothing, to spark life in something lifeless. To animate the object, so to speak... so that it becomes life.

If you had said this to an astrophysicist, he might reply that there is 'no such thing as 'Nothing''. You say life can only come from pre-existing life. I ask, how do you know? If the universe is full of life as you suggest, then perhaps life is the normal state of the universe, and so the conundrum of life coming from nothing is void, as there is no 'nothing'. As you said in your second point, life is also contingent upon certain factors. If the conditions are right, life can appear. There is way too much we DON'T know about the universe for your argument to be valid. I also see you have no qualms with positing a highy complex, uncaused, infinite being as the creator of everything, despite your argument that all living things must have a creator.

48

Video to Promote e-Petition re: UK Charitable Status of JW's

by cantleave in

jw
friends

Flat_Accent

Just sent this over to Atheism UK, National Secular Society and British Humanist Association. < This is something anyone can do, no matter what country you live in. But getting one of those organizations behind the petition would really boost the numbers.

239

The Great Debate: "Has Science Refuted Religion?

by dark angle in

just want to share this amazing debate!

caltech cosmologist and physicist sean carroll teams up with skeptic magazine publisher and science historian michael shermer in this epic debate with noted conservative author and king's college president dinesh d'souza and mit physicist ian hutchinson as they go head-to-head over one of the most controversial issues of our age.

as science pushes deeper into territory once the province of religion, with questions such as why there is something rather than nothing?, where did the universe come from?, how did life arise?, what was the origin of morality?, and others, inevitable conflicts arise over the best approach to answer them.

Flat_Accent

Let's just wait for james and everyone else from the Atheism thread to see this baby. I reckon we'll be off topic by. . . page 4?

Now how should I play this one. Hmm.

Agnosticism, I choose you!!!

Anyway, the problem with this question is Religion can be whatever you want it to be. With so many variants you can't really rule out 'Religion' in it's entirety. They might all believe in a God or Gods, but the differences in doctrine across the board are vast. And with such difference, there are probably religions out there that do not conflict with modern science. If a religion bases its teachings on a 2000 year old tome, say, then they might have some difficulty trying to fit ancient world mythology and morality with our modern understanding. But at the core, it's just the worship of a deity. And science cannot refute God because it is an unfalsifiable hypothesis.

Having said that, trying to prove a million different gods with a million different characteristics isn't really the best use of a Scientists time.

Flat_Accent

Posts by Flat_Accent