science is a study of the material universe and is not able to study that which cannot be observed.
It's too late to edit, but "observed" should be "tested" in the above statement.
i remember when i was "in" the org.
had a ridiculous public talk outline defending the genesis flood myth.. do they have a current one doing that ?.
science is a study of the material universe and is not able to study that which cannot be observed.
It's too late to edit, but "observed" should be "tested" in the above statement.
i remember when i was "in" the org.
had a ridiculous public talk outline defending the genesis flood myth.. do they have a current one doing that ?.
PetrW: But of course science cannot consider the influence of God on world events.
The reason for this should give us pause. It is occasionally pointed out that science cannot intrude on the realm of religion, since science is a study of the material universe and is not able to study that which cannot be observed. If this is the case, then we also have to recognize that we have no reliable way to study the supernatural. Including gods, and their possible influence in our lives.
The scientific method is designed to minimize the effect of human biases. We cannot eliminate those, nor can we prevent scientists from doing very unscientific things. Over the long term, the scientific method gradually weeds out the bad stuff and we are left with a better understanding of how things work. There is no such process available for the supernatural. Even the first step --observation-- is highly unreliable. Not only is there no way to account for our biases, the supernatural is heavily dependent on them for 'interpretation.'
The supernatural is essentially a study done entirely on guesswork, at every stage. This is not an effective way to learn about or understand anything.
uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
A couple of thoughts:
1. Can someone confirm that, in Croatia, you can file a criminal lawsuit and request financial compensation for damages?
2. Keep in mind that there is a big difference between claiming that someone said something, and actually demonstrating it. There is a HUGE difference between arguing a case outside of a courtroom, and arguing a case inside of a courtroom. The loose way he plays with the truth won't fly in a courtroom. A courtroom is not an internet message board or Facebook group, Lloyd.
3. Also: if Croatian courts work like the ones in the USA, you cannot get away with shifty language, such as his contention in item 9: "Claims that I personally confirmed and admitted ALL allegations made by Kim Silvio." This would be a very dangerous approach if he actually expected that this will see the inside of a courtroom. Vague accusations like that are very easy to counter, and they make it seem as if you are desperate.
4. As others already pointed out, he's trying to slip a fast one past his supporters. He's saying that the court took its sweet time to request that he provide evidence to back his claims, and he had to scramble to get it done before the new deadline. Perhaps one of his supporters can ask the obvious question- why didn't you already have this evidence ready during the 15 months of waiting?
5. This will not see the inside of a courtroom. I think it's clear he is doing this for PR to his supporters, knowing that it will eventually be dismissed. But, as is his habit, he's managing to turn it into a PR disaster because he's an idiot.
6. Regarding the "impact to [his] health," remember that this is a man who puts his life online, including all of the vacations and traveling and nights out performing at clubs. Too bad he told everyone that he ran off to Thailand to "date a sex worker" and that his wife found photos of his "date" and threatened divorce. Oh, and that this was precipitated by his attempts to get his wife to agree to an open marriage. Again-- since the case will go nowhere, he doesn't have to worry about all of this being admitted into evidence. Nor will he ever have to face a cross-examination.
7. I am curious to see if the seven will really actually get copies of the evidence sent to them. Because that is when the real fun will begin. Day after day of videos picking his claims apart, one after another. Video after video mocking him for not knowing what he is doing. Video after video exposing him for what he really is. That is something that I am looking forward to.
rattigan350, whenever someone brings up the failings of the organisation we refer to as "the watchtower", tries to define the argument away by saying that the watchtower is a corporate entity and has very little to do with the kingdom halls, the christian congregation of jehovah's witnesses.. could someone who knows their stuff please explain if this is a false dichotomy, using the literature which is used by r&f jws, if possible?.
it gets kind of tiresome when someone makes a point about something that the watchtower said and mr. apologist comes along and tries to define away what is usually a very good point..
If I mention the society and someone asks for clarification, I might clarify. Most of the time, I assume people understand what I am referring to, but if they don't, it's no problem to explain.
governing body member jeffrey winder on jw dot org:“we are not embarrassed about ‘adjustments’ that are made; nor is an apology needed for not getting it ‘exactly right’ previously.
we understand: this is how jehovah operates.”
1952 no wt 6/1/52 p.338 1965 maybe they will be resurrected .
To the GB, Jehovah is that con artist on the street corner, asking you to try and pick the correct card.
GB: "Is it better to look bad by constantly going back-and-forth on doctrinal matters, or to look good by blaming Jehovah for being so bad at His job?"
Jehovah: "Wait, you prayed to me for guidance to discuss THIS?!?!"
the watchtower—study edition | december 2023. study article 52. young sisters—become mature christian women.
18 you may choose to get married.
the qualities and skills that we have discussed will help you to become a capable wife.
Oh, in terms of cleaning up the Kingdom Hall? I think everyone took part in that, where I was attending. I don't think there was any sort of official stance on it, so it was likely left up to the locality.
as soon as you see steve letts talk at the agm you think to yourself “oh my, what’s happened to him?.
his hand has plasters and his skin doesn’t look healthy, like he has inflammation or something serious going on.. he had put on weight and is all bloated and puffy .
his skin really doesn’t look good, the kind of inflammation many people notice after the experimental covid vaccines.. there have been very high numbers of people reported inflammation after the experimental covid vaccines.
And yet, you would think they would suffer from it the most, but they apparently do not. I knew some elders who were long-timers and 101% loyal, even though I later learned that they knew stuff that really should have given them pause. But I think they just walled it off in their mind and forgot about it.
uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
I think that 'woke' was originally meant to imply that someone was alert to social injustice (itself a very flexible and politicized term), especially in forms that may not be obvious. The potential for misusing the term and using it as a political weapon should be clear.
The problem with trying to use such malleable terminology is that it becomes easy for the word to be redefined so as to work against you. Now, a 'woke' person is one who is overly sensitive to what might offend others, and who has decided to be so on everyone else's account. And they also like to borrow the supposed grievances of others to use as a weapon, which ends up being an actual example of appropriation.
So, depending on which end of the political spectrum you are, it is either a badge or a label (or an albatross). I find it to be a meaningless term, pretty much from the beginning.
uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
He may have simply dipped his head in a paint bucket.
an announcement to all congregations those with legal experience please come and work for free to cover up child abusers.. i mean what else would it be for?.
the cheek of it.. so the direction was always don’t go for advanced education and careers but now they are looking for such ones to give if their time and education for free?.
I think that the initial feeling is one of pride and joy at being able to help Jehovah's organization. I did a lot of IT work for local brothers and sisters, and never charged a dime. Many of them actually offered payment, and some insisted on paying me. Even though what they offered was a small fraction compared to what I earned at my job, it did not worry me, as I was helping people who would also help us from time-to-time.
But yes, there were some brothers who found it very handy to have free tech support, and they wore me out after a while. When you know you have someone who will show up and work for free, suddenly you no longer try to fix things yourself, and you panic at every issue, no matter how minor. It's like having an auto-mechanic friend who will work on your car for free, and suddenly you need to report every noise or minor issue you think is happening, while also asking for monthly oil changes, and so on.