while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
"In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets"
I can possibly speak for most of us when I say that if I were being a dick and expressing ludicrous beliefs as reality then I would expect to be given a verbal slapping as well. In that respect we are doing exactly what your god demands of you. The question is why you are not following that commandment when you are the one who, apparently, believes all that crap.
while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
"Now if I was promoting mass murder or other atrocities"
You are, you are promoting the Judeo-Christian god and therefore, by extension of that, you are promoting mass murder and a variety of other atrocities.
Your belief is not worthy of respect and your attitude is not either. Perhaps one day you may finally recognise what most of us can already see in you.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Where is Cofty wrong Ruby?
arguing with those who reject scientific evidence can be like arguing about football; just as angry and passionate, but the goalposts keep moving, and one team doesn't exist.. read more here....
Vidqun -
You have to be a troll or a Poe. I cannot imagine that what you are writing is the real you...
arguing with those who reject scientific evidence can be like arguing about football; just as angry and passionate, but the goalposts keep moving, and one team doesn't exist.. read more here....
"If Somebody claimed to be a cosmologist and wrote that the moon is made of cheddar cheese we would not be wrong to doubt his claim would we?"
Of course they would be wrong, it's Wensleydale. Wallace himself has been there and as his view is a equal as an earthworm (or a scientist, they are both very similar) my assertion is true.
http://www.tcpalm.com/news/crime/st-lucie-county/man-27-faces-charges-of-six-counts-sexual-battery-on-child-37eef916-9fe8-7596-e053-0100007f3f9d-387317751.html.
https://jail.stluciesheriff.com/inmateprofile.php?inmate_id=241566.
biggs, george calvin dob: 11-26-1978.
Has this guy been tried and found guilty? If not, why the photo?
all us creationists try to do is offer true evidence that the one and only god is out there watching and looking down on us.
we present that certain scientists know the truth about god and that he is everything that we see from trees, life, weather, the air we breath, and even the most simple molecules.
but of course you atheists reject it because it is your nature to not be humble and see god because you want to rule your own life.
myelaine -
If a belief is so shallow it cannot stand up to criticism then that belief is not worthy of continuing to exist. The problem theists have isn't the criticism they rightly attract, it is their inability to logically or empirically substantiate their position.
If certain topics were off limits then this would become an echo chamber. However every topic on here seems to be open to criticism. This can only be good for how else would a reader be able to weigh up a subject if there were only people participating who agreed with each other. Now, what a reader will see is that some subjects are backed up with evidence and some subjects exist only because people know how to string a sentence together. The ability to critically analyse a topic is something that ex-JWs need to learn, having spent most of their lives being taught not to do just that by the entire organisation.
Visitors to this site don't have to post. In fact, the best thing to do at first is just read and get to know the personalities of the main posters. If anyone were to read the topics on this site about theism I am sure they would quickly see that the aggression and personal attacks come from theists in the main and that there is a common theme in these topics i.e. the position of theism is not rational or logical or backed up with anything more than a wish for something to be.
If people are put off by the tone of this site then I feel that they are not yet ready for the real world. However I would be surprised if any visitor to this site would be so thin skinned. Yes they may complain like a child that has been told they have to share their favourite toy but they would still come back and read. And who knows, maybe they will follow a link, do some reading and get a taste of what real learning feels like.
...
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
I get it. you guys just don't want to say "I don't know" - Hadriel
I think more than one person has already told you they don't know what you are talking about.
You can't blame us for not answering your poorly structured questions...
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
"What proof do you have that supports an evolutionary happenstance that is the origin of life"
That is nothing more than a poorly put together word salad. You should be thankful you got link to a video instead of eggs and salad cream thrown at you...
"evolutionary happenstance...origin of life"
How can you keep mixing up to completely different scientific fields? Considering the amount of times you (and others) have been corrected on this thread alone this should not still be happening.
"What proof"
I'll fix that for you: What evidence. Consider why you were wrong to say proof...
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
Hadriel,
It is quite clear that you do not understand the subjects of abiogenesis and evolution. It is quite clear based on what you have written on this thread alone. Stating the obvious to you(i.e. you do not understand these subjects) is not insulting your intelligence, it is stating the obvious. That you do not accept that what you have written is, in essence, nonsense further adds to the initial observation that you do not understand these subjects.
Finally, you wrote:
What caused the biochemical event which made life and evolution even possible? Simple question but you've never even tried to answer it
We can't answer a question that is, again, in essence nonsense. This is yet one more observation that demonstrates your utter lack of knowledge in these subjects.
Perhaps it is time for you to go away and reflect on what you actually know rather than asking "clever" gotcha questions that you think are appropriate to a discourse of this nature.
