That religions are a snare and a racket.
That is the only thing that jws got spot on.
Religion and its teachings are there to control manipulate and coerce people to believe in fictional characters and events and to take people's time and money.
(apologies for the typo in the title.
"teaching" should read "teachings".
i misread vanderhoven7's most recent post as being the above.
That religions are a snare and a racket.
That is the only thing that jws got spot on.
Religion and its teachings are there to control manipulate and coerce people to believe in fictional characters and events and to take people's time and money.
i’m still an elder and i consider myself jw light.
as my fellow elders are.
we don’t throw our weight around like elders used to in the past, it’s all very easy going these days.
Jw lite seems to be a modern day version of Pascal's wager, just in case they are right and also that they maybe they are wrong, so I will edge my bet.
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.
Halcon
No first cause ,a monk aquinas who used it to reason to point to the existence of a god.
Prof Brian cox was questioned about this when he was explaining what that the James Webb telescope was able to look back to about 300 million years after the inflation event and stars etc were starting to form, his reply to the question was "we don't know "" but they do have theories eg that theirs a multiverse, you can't disprove that theory, but you also can't admit that we just don't know, but experts in that field can admit that they don't know yet. So no evidence of a first cause.
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.
A inflation event some 13:9 billion years ago.
And what was responsible for that event?
Above my pay grade
Astrophysicist can provide a explanation for the inflation event.
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Professor Brian cox
Also Lawrence Krauss a theoretical physicist and cosmologist
Other physicists are available.
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.
A inflation event some 13:9 billion years ago.
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, what’s the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, it’s a willingness that the other should be.
Love was not the fundamental thing that caused our solar system to come into existence, but rather the collapse of a star ,a supernova which led to the evolution of our solar system including the earth some 4.6 billion years ago, then the bombardment of the earth with asteroids bringing water etc to the earth and then the earth went under a violent time with volcanoes and earthquakes and the movement of the tectonic plates.
And even after that there has been 5 mass extinctions events the last one some 65 million years ago which wiped out the dinosaurs and almost all life forms.
But thankfully life forms did survive and led to the evolution and humans.
Love was not responsible for any of these things and neither was any of the 3 to 5 thousand major gods that were invented by humans ,not even the trinitys of god that existed before the Christian one evolved.
early christianity was every bit, if not more, diverse than christianity today.
one of the very early sects was named the ebionites.
we have unfortunately nothing left of their own writings apart from a few quotes from what epiphanius believed was their recension of matthew.
Thanks peacefulpete
Always enjoy the reading your posts.
Phizzy, I used to get dragged along to the meetings in whitstable over 50 years ago.
since i faded i've told a few people at work about having been raised in this organization but i found that most people don't really get what it is like at all.
they just focus on not celebrating holidays as if that is the worst thing about growing up jw.
i didn't explain much because it's too much for most people to handle.
We are all victims/ survivors of a high control group and deal with it the best we can individually.
Depending on the situation I will let people know that I used to be a jw ,often people will sympathise as they know or knew someone who has had a bad experience with jws eg someone who has been disowned by their family etc.
Occasionally someone will try and preach to me about their beliefs I just make them aware that I am a atheist now ,there reply is generally that I never really believed.
those new to ancient near east paleography may find it interesting that all cultures have struggled with the seeming injustice of suffering.
the story of job (persecuted/attacked) is one of a number of surviving poetic and prose tales with the theme of the innocent suffering despite entreaties to their gods.
this one often called "poem of the righteous sufferer" is sometimes referred to as the babylonian job.
Thanks peacefulpete
So this predates the bible's version of job by about a 1000 years, is that correct .
https://youtu.be/lpwusxk8ckc?si=d4nb1ciwccql8dox.
a man, like new gb member jody jodele, dripping in wealth—$20,000 rolex, freemasonry ring, cushy life in upstate new york—pontificating about job’s suffering.
it’s a fair jab to question how someone so detached from hardship might approach a story of utter loss.