How is it that Jw's can rationalize the end being always "just around the corner"
It's a really huge corner.
pomegranate
JoinedPosts by pomegranate
-
9
4th Generation Witnesses and Maybe more ?
by out4good3 injust read a thread about a guy being a forth generation witness and a question came to mind.
how is it that jw's can rationalize the end being always "just around the corner" when there is soon to be 4th, 5th, and maybe 6th generation witnesses?
just how is it that the previous generations can continue to follow so blindly after one failed prediction after another of never getting old in this "system of things"?.
-
-
pomegranate
-
22
What Would Jesus Say If He Came For Inspection?
by minimus inif jesus did come to inspect the faithful and discreet slave, what would he say?
-
-
-
64
Please convince me I'm wrong!
by StinkyPantz insince i have stopped attending the meetings, i have had a loss of faith in god.
i consider myself an agnostic teetering on being a full blown atheist.
while in school this last semester i have been taking courses that emphasize evolution.
-
-
pomegranate
It is apparent through various means that the Earth is millions of years old. One way we know this is because the various continents used to be one continent and has over the course of millions of years separated (over and over again). If you look on a map you can see how they used to fit together. Scientists have measured how far the continents move per year and it would have taken possibly hundreds of thousands of years to have separated this far. (But the Earth was created only a few thousand years ago, right?)
Well no. The earth is millions of years old. I believe what happens to most when reading the Bible is they read it through someone else's understanding (which, is OK), but rather than put that particular understanding thoroughly to the test, they just believe it hook line and sinker. Then when their present understanding IS tested, it sinks. Leaving doubt. I found that out for myself, as that's exactly what I did. (ie JW's)
The mainstreamers believe the "days" in Genesis are 24 hour divisions, or some like JW's believe in the 7 thousand year day hoopla. I don't believe either is true. "Days" to me are just divisions of the works done by God. These divisions are not divisions of equal time or time periods invented by man, but divisions of specific "work" events that took place by God, each taking differing amounts of time.Gen 1:9
9 And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear."
This small sentence above could uncompass many many years. I have accepted it as being a long time of geological cataclysmic events like massive large scale erupting volcanic activity, shifting tectonic plates, swelling and pooling waters. God, taking his time (afterall, God does have ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD, why rush it? ) , blasting away at this global ball with his power, carving the surface with bursts of magma flow and fracturing land masses, like an artist works at a sculpture. Pulling, pushing, lifting up, crushing down, blasting, seperating, tearing, fracturing then mending, God using the lava ooze from the center of the earth as his oils on canvas...Fine Art does take time, right? The earth took time and plenty of it.Also, fossil records have unearthed bones that are thousands of years old, some of which are similar to homo-sapiens (modern day humans), such as homo-erectus, home-habilis, and Neandertals. These show how weve evolved over millions of years (dont they?).
I believe the fossil record is quite naked and nude when it comes to supporting evolution. Transistions should be more plentiful than static species. As a matter of fact, there should be an overwhelming abundance of transitions. Afterall, evolution is all about transistion, not standing still. The fossil record in no way supports life in transistion. It supports static life re-creating same species of life. It supports fully formed life with all parts working and fully functional.
For a certainty, all the species before man, lived millions of years before the first man arrived, with amazing numbers being wiped out enmass. The layers of fossil record do prove this to be true. There's good SCIENTIFIC reason for it to be that way too.
With all of this evidence and much more, I still find myself wanting to believe in God (at least the Christian God), but most if not all evidence points against it. My biggest fear and the main reason I cant give up my belief in God is because I hate the idea that I will one day not exist.
Well, as you can see, I look at the evidence differently. I don't believe science undermines God's existence or the Bible, rather it reaffirms it for me. As far as your fears go...I don't believe there is any man that can help you in that regard. When I was young and fearful, I would run to my parents. Now, it's no different, just on a much grander scale. (Proverbs 2)
So, I wonder is there anyone out that that can: 1) intelligently and preferably scientifically refute that the Earth has been around for millions of years and that humans have evolved over millions of years and
I don't refute the earth being very very old so I can't do that for you, and I don't believe the Bible does either. It's people that say the Bible refutes it by their present understanding, when in fact it really doesn't. Humans, though, are fairly recent in relation to the age of the earth and the other species of procreators.
2) prove with only a reasonable doubt that there is a God. I want to believe but this whole college education thing is mixing everything up. I now see why the Society was so against it.
If GOD wants you to know He exists, He will make Himself known to you. If you want to believe, then I believe there is a reason for it.
Don't let college mix things up. Look through different eyes. I personally use these kind of eyes:
Rom 1:20
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 men are without excuse.I "see" God.
(My view, not to be construed as something that's for you, or anyone else.)
Edited by - pomegranate on 23 October 2002 8:14:7
-
19
Did the Watchtower Society inspire you?
by kenpodragon inas i stepped onto the sand of the beach i looked to the west and saw waves crashing over the distant rocks.
they collided with the rocks with a mix of violence exploded into the beauty of white water, that burst into a mist that produced the colors of the rainbow as it disperse the light of our sun, all in the glimpse of one moment.
one moment in time, that i witnessed in only just this first step on to the beach, imagine what the other ones were going to find.
-
-
pomegranate
Replace inspire with stifle.
-
-
-
pomegranate
Cut the Cake.
-
145
Analyzing evolution through Laws of Probability
by pomegranate inany of you evolutionists ever crunch the numbers?
-
-
pomegranate
pomegranate, Perhaps you should read the book: Biology and Theory: RNA and the Origin of Life by Alan W. Schwartz (in addition to Morowitz's most recent book that I recommended ).
I'll read it. I read everything...
Basically, what Morowitz had speculated about the origin of life was incorrect. The DNA based genome that he wrote about at the time is way more complex a self replicator than scientist now know to be as the most "simple". Unfortunately, creationist continue to dishonestly expouse this falsehood and misquote the man (as are his works on the thermal equilibrium stuff). The book I recommended above ought to answer many questions you have on this topic.
Well, Morowitz still stands behind his postulations whether you (or other evolutionists) agree with them or not. His purpose in postulating was to get to the theoretical bottom of the free living self replicating organism. It is theory. Every scientists theory(including Mr Scwartz if he so THEORIZES) is hypothetical. Anything theoretical or hypothetical cannot be wrong, because it's only theory anyway. I have done nothing doshonest quoting him. But what is surely happening is, as scientists try to theorize a less and less complex entity, they find that the pieces they have now become more and more complex under closeer and closer scrutiny. As it should. The microcosm shall be as infinitely small as the macrocosm is infinitely large. They are both endless...
BTW, interesting theological speculation you make there on the post after the one addressed to me. Can't fault you for a lack of imagination. Personally, I always went with the "God had his reasons" excuse.
Funny thing is, I don't believe I'm speculating...
Edited by - pomegranate on 21 October 2002 21:18:41
-
145
Analyzing evolution through Laws of Probability
by pomegranate inany of you evolutionists ever crunch the numbers?
-
-
pomegranate
There was no Law.
-
56
Do you still call on God, by the name Jehovah?
by LyinEyes inthe other night i was upset and decided to pray to god.
i was outside looking at the stars and wondering if i was talking to myself or if he is really out there somewhere.. as i prayed i didnt know who to address, i have said jehovah, jesus, father, who ever is out there please hear me.
i don' t mean to be disrespectful in saying it that way , but just confused.. many of you know we havent been to a meeting in over a year .
-
-
pomegranate
Our Father who art in heaven, Harold be thy name...
Jehovah and Yahweh are both bogus man made traditions.
-
145
Analyzing evolution through Laws of Probability
by pomegranate inany of you evolutionists ever crunch the numbers?
-
-
pomegranate
The biggest threat to (the Christian) God isn't evolution... it's morality. Whether you're a special creationist or theistic evolutionist, why would God create carnivorous animals before sin was ever introduced into the universe?
Simple. He created the physical world in image and likeness of the very conditions the heavens were in.
UPHEAVAL.
In the image and likeness of God ruling over creatures above, Man was given the animals to rule over. But guess what...there were animals man couldn't rule over. THE WILD ONES. In heaven, there were "animals" that God could no longer rule over, the "WILD ONES."
But there were some He could rule over, DOMESTIC ONES. As on earth, man could rule over "domestic" animals...
Gen 3:1
3:1 Now the serpent (Satan) was more crafty than any of the wild animals (demons) the LORD God had made.Satan and the demons were ALREADY "wild" in heaven BEFORE God began creating the physical earth below IN IMAGE AND LIKENESS of the heavens above.
Which meant a physical world of GOOD and BAD, because the heavens was in a state of GOOD and BAD.
As in heaven so on earth...
Sin has NOTHING to do with wild killing animals. That's EXACTLY how he created them. They killed while Adam and Eve were alive...
Edited by - pomegranate on 21 October 2002 20:34:41
-
145
Analyzing evolution through Laws of Probability
by pomegranate inany of you evolutionists ever crunch the numbers?
-
-
pomegranate
You are absolutely INCORRECT.
This is what Morowitz WAS and IS all about:
From one of his more recent abstracts;
Biogenesis and Evolution are viewed from the perspective of the universality of the metabolic chart with respect to primary metabolism and the phylogenetic specificity of secondary metabolism. This analysis is developed within the context of the evolution of the universal ancestor through hierarchical networks of chemical reactions.
The reason behind his theoretical smallest biological entity WAS TO SUPPORT EVOLUTION. By theorizing a less complex free living thing makes it more possible.
That's horse biscuits.
