i just had a thought of clarity regarding the jw explanation for this doctrine.
they explain that satan challenged god regarding his right to rule.
god failed to prove his right to rule.
Why assume this is the first, or only, universe to have existed?
This 'god must have started it' argument relies on too many 'just so' assumptions to even get it going; and that's ignoring the 'turtles all the way down' or special pleading required once those assumptions are up and running.
i just had a thought of clarity regarding the jw explanation for this doctrine.
they explain that satan challenged god regarding his right to rule.
god failed to prove his right to rule.
So our universe and it's laws cannot exist without a first causer causing it to be...
Yet this first causer had no problem popping into existence without an initial first causer causing this secondary first causer to pop into existence...
I think the problem here is that some people are assuming our universe had a beginning in the same sense that some people are defining it here i.e. before there was nothing and then everything came into being...
i cant seem to understand this text actually, can someone please explain it to me.
"Btw preymanchis come and study with futureLearn..."
Or the OU; assuming they don't go under any time soon.
tonight (sunday, 13th may) at 20:00 on bbc 2 ... for neanderthal believers, agnostics and deniers.. this first programme in a two-part series investigates what neanderthals looked like and and how they lived in their ice age world.
it turns out that almost everything we thought we knew about them is wrong.
they weren't hunched, grunting, knuckle-dragging ape-men at all.
"Oops, were were wrong but now we're right." - uselatinnametotrytoappearsmart
If you can't be bothered to educate yourself to a level that allows you to understand the rudimentary history of this topic then what do you think you are doing commenting on these threads?
This isn't a kingdom hall where that type of behaviour passes for educated reasoning...
i know their have been many posts dedicated to this subject already and i apologize if this aspect has been handled before.. apart from the many other absurdities relating to the flood of noah`s day being literal as jehovah`s witnesses believe and already thrashed out here by the many posts previous.. i was wondering if this aspect has been considered that the waters would have had to cover over active volcanoes with what result ?.
their are a number of" active and resting" volcanoes at any one time around the earth and i`m just wondering if anyone more knowledgeable than me about the subject would like to weigh in and give their 2 cents worth in what effect a global flood covering volcanoes would have ?.
i am aware their are fissures in the deep oceans where volcanic activity occurs ,but is this the same ?.
The amount of water 'released' in this story would release enough energy to melt the Earth.
However, silly stories aside, the effects of water on top of magma depends where this occurs. Along oceanic ridges the pressure at those depths keeps things rather muted. The lava that is released is flash cooled creating what is known as pillow lava. When this happens at the surface with little pressure to keep the energy in check the effects are going to get explosive with the water turning to steam and the surface of the lava solidifying before being explosively destroyed by the still molten lava underneath. You would not want to get too close.
For your question specifically, consider that the highest active volcano is 6893 m high whereas Everest is 8848 m high. With that in mind this flood would have covered that volcano with almost 2 km of water creating enough pressure to have calmed things down sufficiently that you could have focused better on the fact the entire Earth had melted...
https://nixlaw.com/news/judge-orders-jehovahs-witnesses-to-turn-over-internal-documents-related-to-childhood-sexual-abuse/.
judge orders jehovah’s witnesses to turn over internal documents related to childhood sexual abuse.
april 12, 2018. .
"Why accept a settlement and sign a gag order if you know you have a rock solid case and can “expose” WT" - Bobby
A life changing amount of money...
https://nixlaw.com/news/judge-orders-jehovahs-witnesses-to-turn-over-internal-documents-related-to-childhood-sexual-abuse/.
judge orders jehovah’s witnesses to turn over internal documents related to childhood sexual abuse.
april 12, 2018. .
"It is a FACT that 100% settlements are reached because the defendants think they are going to loose" - _M.
And they have something to hide.
Do we think the abused party goes to the watchtower and asks for money or do we think the watchtower offers the money for them to go away...?
The watchtower acts like it is guilty and has something to hide, the facts show that the policies of the watchtower have caused numerous 'incidents' to occur, we continue to see the watchtower lie about its policies and behaviours...
And then we have Bobby, who isn't happy unless he is defending this indefensible corporation.
https://nixlaw.com/news/judge-orders-jehovahs-witnesses-to-turn-over-internal-documents-related-to-childhood-sexual-abuse/.
judge orders jehovah’s witnesses to turn over internal documents related to childhood sexual abuse.
april 12, 2018. .
"Why do you think all these plaintiffs disappear when their cases are settled?" - Bobby
Legally binding agreements... 'lol'...'logic'...'fool'.
https://nixlaw.com/news/judge-orders-jehovahs-witnesses-to-turn-over-internal-documents-related-to-childhood-sexual-abuse/.
judge orders jehovah’s witnesses to turn over internal documents related to childhood sexual abuse.
april 12, 2018. .
"...Strange track record for an innocent organization." - _Morpheus
Exactly. No innocent person or organisation would hinder investigations or make undisclosed payouts for the silence of the person who is supposedly lying about that organisation or person.
https://nixlaw.com/news/judge-orders-jehovahs-witnesses-to-turn-over-internal-documents-related-to-childhood-sexual-abuse/.
judge orders jehovah’s witnesses to turn over internal documents related to childhood sexual abuse.
april 12, 2018. .
Bobby,
This organisation also has obligations to those who class themselves as members of this organisation. Withholding information of criminal activity is a crime and no amount of hand wringing about '2 witnesses' can shift that fact. The law is clear and that is why this organisation you like to support has to hide these facts because they have acted illegally.
However you seem to think this is all about money. Perhaps you are more 'watchtower' than you even think you are...
