since the days of da judge, dub leaders have scorned education and science.
to, victims, predators, moral degenerate, selfish, liar, anarchist, pawn of satan, materialistic, drug addicted, fetus-killing, promiscuous slut we can now add homosexual, marriage wrecker, juvenile and adult delinquent with venereal disease.. see what getting a genuine education or reading works by those who have one can do to you?
to victims, predators, moral degenerate, selfish, liar, anarchist, pawn of satan, materialistic, drug addicted, fetus-killing, promiscuous slut, homosexual, marriage wrecker, juvenile and adult delinquent with venereal disease, worship of the wild beast, we add spiritist, atheist, and communist.. *** w55 1/1 8 part 1: early voices (1870-1878) ***.
Great editorializing! It was long, but well worth the read. Higher criticism: the most dangerous of threats known to dubs. What paranoia! However, they ARE correct that if you ventura out of the strait jacket they provide, you'll end up 'in the world!'
I don't understand how you could have been so active as a JW and not know the answers to the death of animals, where Cain got his wife, and--on your other thread--Jesus being God, hellfire, etc. Were you really a JW--and why don't you know the JW answers to those questions?
Your post was very entertaining and clever. Most of the points were valid. Also, Larc's.
I have two more things to say about it, though; not that you asked for critiques.
One is that it doesn't accurately reflect JWs' beliefs on the point of hell, Jesus being God, and the stoning of the adulterous woman (that portion is not in all ancient mss).
Second point is that it is polemic and angers people who may listen to rationale, but not ridicule.
Please don't get me wrong as I am pretty atheistic and evolutionist. It's just understandable how you drew blood with some of the religionists on the board.
i mentioned that the dc in our area featured a talk where the speaker, as an illustration of endurance, mentioned methusaleh, the bristlecone pine that had lived for 4700+ years.
i asked here for some possible explanations of this that allow for the wt flood dating.
i had assumed that the standard response would be that the dating of the tree was wrong, that the rings had gotten doubled a few times or something.
This thread shows such a lack of faith. "Ours is not to reason WHY, but to do or die." You weren't there, so how can you question what happened. It was written down by some very ancient people who were much closer to the event of The Flood.
If you doubt such fundymental cornerstones of the Bible, then how ya gonna accept that the pre-flood folks didn't father children until over 100?
I tell you, you folks are gonna fall right outta Truth with all this silly questioning. Where's your faith? Of course, it can't be explained and goes contrary to the facts of history and geology and paleontology and biology, etc. Why else would you need faith.
One more point: Amazing, that was on-point about what a theory is and is not.
Even if evolution were to become out-of-date as the working theory, it by no means that creation would be true. There may be other explanations that will prove plausible one day. Just because 'B' may be wrong, doesn't prove 'A' theory; there may be 'C,' 'D,' and so on later.
I hesitate to enter this discussion with such erudite participants as AlanF, JanH, and Amazing, et al. But 'fools rush in. . . '
To begin with, I can't find the reference now, but Dawkins or Jared Diamond has stated that something like 98% of biologists believe that evolution has happened. They are the scientists who know. How can anyone seriously propose that they are conspiring against the Bible?
Secondly, the creationists' arguments are mostly just attacks on the evolutionists. They don't present much on the positive side, except the like of 'God did it and we don't know everything.'
Thirdly, creationists are wont to use the term 'random chance.' As Dawkins states repeatedly in 'The Blind Watchmaker,' it is anything BUT random. Natural selection thru the environment makes it very SELECTIVE. It is correctly called 'non-random.'
Ahem, thank you for your attention. That's all I have to say for now.