let's be clear: people have the right to like or dislike what they want - that is why the option is there.
as long as they are not doing it in a malicious way to retaliate or game the system, there is no policing the votes.
if you get a down-vote, live with it.
Simon, I was a member here 15 years ago, under a different name, and see things haven't changed all that much. (Hi Farkel, Tina, Prisca.) When people realize they've been in a destructive cult they react in different ways, and sometimes it's not pretty.
If I believed in Saints, I'd nominate you for canonization.
[Edit: If anybody downvotes this, you'll be hearing from my lawyer.]
your qualifications are way above mine so i'd love to hear more about the specifics of what you have researched and how that supports the existence of a deity.
k99, i am not really convinced that you're interested in my conclusions.
in nature amino acids formed to then form dna.
But I think Morris makes good points about convergence. Because if there is a plan there are still different ways of describing it. -- slimboyfat
What points does Morris make? I don't think Morris ever gets around to saying why we should think convergence is intentional or guided by God. Newton came up with a theory of gravitation which explained (most of) planetary orbits, etc. If someone came along afterward and said, "Gravitational forces explain the orbits of Mars, Jupiter, Venus, etc., but it's possible Mercury is being pushed around the sun by Planet Pixies--and it just happens to be the same orbit as if it was caused by only gravity." That's not very compelling, or interesting to consider.
they have made so many strategical mistakes it's hard to keep track.
some changes within the last decade or so that are contributing to declining numbers of jws:.
1. elimination of book study groups, the most informal, enjoyable and sociable of the jw meetings, contributed to loss of sense of community among jws.. 2. policy of consolidating kingdom halls.
For those of you that think the WT will be around forever... will eventually produce a situation they cannot control, and that will force their demise, or at least force them to take on a likeness that no one would recognize as JW.
Hate to be a wet blanket, but I think the WT will be around for a very long time. As you say, religions evolve and adapt to changing circumstances, and the WT will be no different. They're being more stubborn than some, and I doubt they'll "thrive" in the information age, but there will always be people who want and/or need religion, and so there will always be religions to give people what they want and/or need.
I think your last sentence is key--they won't be recognizable as what we've known as JWs, but the current WT would be barely recognizable to those who first joined in the late 1800s. What modern religion would be recognizable to those who were there in its formative years?
I wouldn't even be shocked if they adopted the Trinity, holidays... all of it. The only thing they really need to do to survive is to quietly drop all the Millennial stuff; become just another Christian group that's waiting for the Second Coming, without the hints that it's months-not-years away, and they'll survive.
i think we can say many of those laid off no longer trust the governing body because of being lied to repeatedly over so many things.
things are getting very explosive at the governing body's home location kind of ties right in with being moved to a seriously pcp contamined chemical dump site, in fact bad karma has come to rest where ever these stupid lying clowns go.
these gbs are a bunch of real ass holes and they treat the faithful shit and expect them to just take it like a bunch of dummy drones.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8kuldpksze.
My uncle was a Bethelite from his early 20s to mid 60s when he got "laid off" but AFAIK he presents it as a new opportunity.
now the majority of people nowadays do no go by the hope of old times.
now the reason for this is important and goes beyond mere words.
our culture sees ethics especially national or civil politics as the rules and standards by which we guide ourselves.
Yes looter l have great difficulty trying to understand how ex believers can so quickly turn their backs on god and outright deny gods existence.
Think about how this would sound coming from a JW. "I have great difficulty trying to understand how ex believers can so quickly turn their backs on God's One True Organization and outright deny The Truth.
being back in college after leaving the borg, one of the required classes for a degree at my college is ethics.
after learning a few things, i am curious where morality and ethics is heading for the future of humanity.
i wish i could find the source again, but several weeks ago i recalled reading a transcript of a very old document that talked about when christianity was being spread in europe, it brought civility and community.
Those who don't believe in any God/accountability, what are you teaching your kids? Especially before they can understand what is right and wrong?
Let's take stealing for example. How would you teach a 3 or 4 year old not to steal, and in a way in which if they were not being watched and could get away with it, that their conscience would kick in?
Before a child is old enough to understand ethics, you use the same method as when you were religious--you just exchange one phrase for another. As a religious parent you might have said, "Don't take that, God doesn't like stealing." As a non-religious parent you might say, "Don't take that, stealing isn't nice. (or I don't like stealing)"
Before they're old enough to understand, they're just following the rules you give them. After they're old enough to understand, you still don't have to get right into Locke and Aristotle and Kierkegaard and Kant. A simple version of the Golden Rule (which predated Jesus by at least 500 years in other cultures) will suffice in most situations.
You're making the mistake of equating God and acocuntability. Even under a religious system, we're all accountable to our family, friends, and communities.
not sure how many here have watched this... but make a coffee and make the time to do so.... its edutainment ;) .
.
http://youtu.be/e2zhldbmfdg.
I think someone who's already an atheist would find it funny, in a preaching to the choir kind of way. I certainly wouldn't expect a believer to be swayed by it.
As mentioned, the Horus stuff has been refuted by reputable historians and Egyptologists for ages, and a bonehead mistake like this is just going to make them write the whole thing off as further persecution.
we should set 3 topics.
1. creation and evolution (origins of life).
2. religion.
Is this thread dead? I'm still reading the book, but if there isn't going to be a discussion I can read faster
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:documentproperties> <o:revision>0</o:revision> <o:totaltime>0</o:totaltime> <o:pages>1</o:pages> <o:words>346</o:words> <o:characters>1974</o:characters> <o:company>othello productions</o:company> <o:lines>16</o:lines> <o:paragraphs>4</o:paragraphs> <o:characterswithspaces>2316</o:characterswithspaces> <o:version>14.0</o:version> </o:documentproperties> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-us</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>ja</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> <w:usefelayout /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 10]> <mce:style><!
I don't have the patience to read the thread. Can someone just tell me if he's talked about lizard men yet?
we should set 3 topics.
1. creation and evolution (origins of life).
2. religion.
This isn't the thread for it, but we simply do not know enough about the universal constants to say what their possible ranges are. Some of the constants (some say all but one of them) may be derived from other constants, or a single foundational constant, and would therefore not have any possible value other than what they have.
I searched your linked articles for a reference to 10^120, and found only one that said it is that much smaller than it was predicted to be under a certain model. That's not addressing the available range for the cosmological or any other constant
