whom do you trust?
according to apostates, god and his word can't be trusted because the bible is unreliable and jehovah god is a baby killer and murderer of innocent people.
trusting the watchtower is out of the question, because obviously, the whole thrust of the apostasy is aimed at discrediting the watchtower so as to create wicked suspicions and distrust in the minds of trusting ones, apparently with some success.
I take it you don't like it when I light a fire to the foxes' tail and send them like roman candles blazing through the apostate's weed patch?
In all the years I've been reading your posts, I haven't seen this happen yet. But if that makes you feel important, go ahead and keep thinking it.
In the meantime, please answer Farkel's question. It requires only a "Yes" or a "No."
whom do you trust?
according to apostates, god and his word can't be trusted because the bible is unreliable and jehovah god is a baby killer and murderer of innocent people.
trusting the watchtower is out of the question, because obviously, the whole thrust of the apostasy is aimed at discrediting the watchtower so as to create wicked suspicions and distrust in the minds of trusting ones, apparently with some success.
Where is all the anti YK venom?
We're all still waiting for your response to Farkel's offer in the "APOSTATES OF DOOM" thread.
as the last days wind down to their dramatic conclusion, prophecies that were heretofore obscure, over time have now come more sharply into focus.
one such prophecy that bears review is the oft-quoted verse concerning the "increasing of lawlessness.
" typically the watchtower has pointed to increasing criminal lawlessness in the world as evidence of the fulfillment of that particular feature of the sign of christ's imminent arrival.
Actually, TR, You Know responded to someone else, not me. He had steadfastly avoided my post, as well as Farkel's post.
He got scared earlier this week and I suspect he doesn't want to tangle with Farkel any more.
i was raised a poor white child in the deep south...ok, florida, where i still am.
i was the typical slightly self righteous witness, miss goody goody, left school at 16 to pioneer, which i did for 4 years, met a guy and married him.
he had 2 kids from a previous marriage and we had 2 kids of our own.
Thank you for posting your story, think. It gives me some insight into your background and personality. I've enjoyed chatting with you, and look forward to being friends.
i originally posed this question to jh in another thread, and now i'm wondering how other atheists -- especially the hardcore ones -- here would answer it.
this isn't about proving or disproving any particular viewpoint, but just an attempt to understand a mindset that seems... well... beyond my understanding.
<g> first, though, here are a couple of terms defined as used in the context of my inquiry.. science: the objective study of the natural world.. spirituality: an intangible aspect of nature/the universe (including humanity) that may or may not include belief in any deity, but which is merely a general sense that something more is out there, and also within us.
I'd really like to understand how people can see things as being so... separate
Don't think of them as separate, then. Think of science as not needing spirituality, but if you want to enjoy both go right ahead. As the saying among the ladies goes, science needs spirituality as a fish needs a bicycle.
For instance, your meditation example. If science can explain why meditation works, that's all it needs to do. It doesn't need spirituality.
Now, if you want both in your life, that's different. But science itself does not need it.
i originally posed this question to jh in another thread, and now i'm wondering how other atheists -- especially the hardcore ones -- here would answer it.
this isn't about proving or disproving any particular viewpoint, but just an attempt to understand a mindset that seems... well... beyond my understanding.
<g> first, though, here are a couple of terms defined as used in the context of my inquiry.. science: the objective study of the natural world.. spirituality: an intangible aspect of nature/the universe (including humanity) that may or may not include belief in any deity, but which is merely a general sense that something more is out there, and also within us.
What I'm asking is, do you think it's possible for scientific understanding to enhance spiritual perceptions, and/or is it possible that allowing for a spiritual factor in certain things -- like, for example, the good effects that spirituality can have on a person's mental and physical health -- might be helpful in some types of scientific research and application.
No, for once the cause is discovered it ceases to be spirituality and becomes solely silence. For example, there is some physical cause between the apparent link of spirituality and good health. Eventually science will discover what that physical cause is on the cellular or genetic level and then it won't be mysterious at all. It will be science, not spirituality.
Can spirituality guide science into the proper pathways. Perhaps. If a scientist notices, for instance, certain traditional means of medical cures, it could guide the scientist to investigate what is actually happening medically. But that's about all I can see for a connection.
i originally posed this question to jh in another thread, and now i'm wondering how other atheists -- especially the hardcore ones -- here would answer it.
this isn't about proving or disproving any particular viewpoint, but just an attempt to understand a mindset that seems... well... beyond my understanding.
<g> first, though, here are a couple of terms defined as used in the context of my inquiry.. science: the objective study of the natural world.. spirituality: an intangible aspect of nature/the universe (including humanity) that may or may not include belief in any deity, but which is merely a general sense that something more is out there, and also within us.
The way you describe spirituality, it sounds as if you are describing an emtion. "Sensing" something is out there, without being able to actually rely on your senses, is more of a yearning then a sensation. It "feels" right, or it "seems" right.
In that sense, science has no use for such spirituality. It brings nothing to the table other than the observer's own prejudice. A scientist can't decide something just because it "feels" right, or because she just "senses" this is the right answer. A decision has to be made on the basis of evidence, testable, falsifiable evidence.
If scientists went on the basis of what they sense to be correct, we'd be at the whim of their every emotional state. And how can you test that?
as the last days wind down to their dramatic conclusion, prophecies that were heretofore obscure, over time have now come more sharply into focus.
one such prophecy that bears review is the oft-quoted verse concerning the "increasing of lawlessness.
" typically the watchtower has pointed to increasing criminal lawlessness in the world as evidence of the fulfillment of that particular feature of the sign of christ's imminent arrival.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Society is going to disfellowship you for posting apostate nonsense
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------I don't think so. And I don't think you or any other apostate can excite them against me.
Nonsense. You are in their good graces right now solely due to the mercy of Farkel.
" "the birdies?
"one of the birdies came and got you.
"what did the birdies look like?
How very interesting! I had always heard that these near-death experiences were nothing more than just the minds way of interpreting some physical events. This story truly confirms that. No religious imagery, just what a little boy would imagine.
Non-Christians experience non-Christian imagery.
Christians experience Christian imagery.
And now I see that children too young for religion experience little children imagery.
Truly points to it all being a product of the mind.
warning: i am about to discuss a rather delicate subject.
if the words menstruation or period gross you out, please stop reading now.. i am going to attempt to keep names out of this discussion, as my thoughts are directed to the general population, not one individual.
i am fairly certain, however, that someone may take this personally and react with anger and insults.
Very well expressed; I agree completely.
I suspect one of the causes of this attitude on this board is due to our shared JW background. Women are routinely denigrated by the WTS, though sometimes in subtle ways. Thus the way is paved for insecure men to use whatever excuse comes to mind to shut women up. Instead of dealing with an inconvenient retort or argument, they can reach into their bag of excuses and pull out the one labeled "Hormonal."
LOL, as if many of the rabid arguments we see on this board between men aren't in some way influenced by testosterone! We are all subject to the chemical ebbs and flows within our body and mind. That doesn't detract from a well-reasoned argument, however, and should never be used as an excuse to dodge logic and truth.
