substituting the word "Lord" for it.
The word, "Lord" seems to imply respect. If someone addressed a person as "Lord", such as a judge in courtroom, it would seem to imply respect.
we have been taught that the name jehovah means “he causes to become.” it is interpreted that he causes himself to become whatever needed to accomplish his will—as happened in the case israelites to whom he “caused himself to become” a savior leading them from slavery in egypt.. but there is a problem with this definition.
nobody would use the phrase “cause to become” with regard to himself.
one may say: “i helped him,” (but he won’t say: “i caused myself to become a helper to him.”) “causing myself to become a helper to another person” obviously implies helping nature comes with effort as though it is not in my nature.
substituting the word "Lord" for it.
The word, "Lord" seems to imply respect. If someone addressed a person as "Lord", such as a judge in courtroom, it would seem to imply respect.
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.
various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.
i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
else one is simply deluding themselves.
We all delude ourselves in a way over the entire stretch of our lives. Specifically, in instances and events, we retain a measure of predictability and certainty. So it seems!
hey there.. if this point has been covered before please forgive me.. i have had the principles of noahs flood used by jw's to encourage me to attend meetings recently and this has got me musing about the flood....again.. genesis states that a river flowed from eden and branched out into four rivers, two of which being the tigris and the euphrates.. heres the baffling part; if it had never rained before, how is it that rivers existed before the flood?!!?.
a brief google search tells us that the euphrates begins its journey as snow melt and rain ( as most rivers do) in mountains in turkey.. ecc chapter 1 mentions the water cycle and describes the rivers flowing into the sea but the sea not becoming full.
how did it work pre-flood?
Thank you, Waton.
22 Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2 down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. 3 No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. 4 They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5 There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.
Is this the scenario you refer to?
Carrying the mythology of those swords into modern warfare is stretching it
Not so, I believe. The implications are very real, as George Bush proved by his decisions and actions. Ever since, based on a belief system from the "talking snake" book, trillions of real dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives have been affected in actual, physical reality.
And may I ask the same of you? Thanks.
I see, how this appears abrupt and awkward. No offense meant to anyone.
i often wonder if the current crop of witnesses, especially the youth and younger ones simply don't care about facts?.
i mean for some, even with knowledge of the past scandals, misleading teachings, mistruths, etc etc, they simply don't care.
"it is the truth after all".. they are so intertwined in the operations and activities of the society, that they cant see anything outside of it.
A question: If "facts" as basic as time, space, gravity, historical events, and international relations are open to question...what absolute facts does anyone have that can forever be unchallenged? For JWs or otherwise, it is merely an excuse for a temporary certainty. This, I opine.
hey there.. if this point has been covered before please forgive me.. i have had the principles of noahs flood used by jw's to encourage me to attend meetings recently and this has got me musing about the flood....again.. genesis states that a river flowed from eden and branched out into four rivers, two of which being the tigris and the euphrates.. heres the baffling part; if it had never rained before, how is it that rivers existed before the flood?!!?.
a brief google search tells us that the euphrates begins its journey as snow melt and rain ( as most rivers do) in mountains in turkey.. ecc chapter 1 mentions the water cycle and describes the rivers flowing into the sea but the sea not becoming full.
how did it work pre-flood?
after sailing around for one year Noah ends up in the same area.
Did he sail around? Perhaps he remained more-or-less in the same place, thankful for his existence and that of his family, as-well-as the animals with him. Quite similar to our existence on earth, actually, seen in the context of a vast universe or even the solar-system.
sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.
various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.
i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.
I think it's a common mistake to imagine that we can actually choose our beliefs. It's better to ask questions, study, debate and reflect. Our beliefs happen while we engage in that process.
Pardon me, Cofty. This response was lost in the avalanche of information. Hence, the delay. Thank you, for taking the time to respond. Besides, others have had so much to contribute. Sorry that, I have no specific arguments or counter-arguments for the OP or later. For that, it may simply be disregarded by you or any other.
Your response is fascinating. Hence the question(open to all, of course): Are beliefs merely a function of the intellect? For if they are, then those are understandably subject to changes. Else, they are impervious to external, transitory factors.
i think trump is an absolute idiot.
his tactics, however, are undeniably effective.
thought i'd just put together a short list of some of the things he does.
It's a link to a nice video. Trump, Marine LePen, Nigel Farage and similar opportunistic leaders expose weaknesses in an inherently flawed system.
i have always maintained that i hold nothing personally against individual witnesses, even those that have actively slandered our name and reputation based on the actions of some individuals.. i have often said that all these ones, (even the ones spreading gossip), are victims of the culture of the organization, and the directions of the gb.. but recently i have been rethinking this, and wonder if ignorance is really an acceptable excuse?.
i mean, with so much information now readily available about the society, its origins, its scandals, issues and conduct, is it simply ok for a witness to remain wilfully ignorant about the organization that dictates every aspect of their lives?.
is ignorance an excuse?.
Hope is a very powerful reason.
Muslim immigrants traveled rough seas by boat in hope of a better life in Greece, or Germany, or some other EU country. They were not ignorant of the possibility of rejection or death. Many were escaping war.
Individual JWs might nurture similar hopes, mistakenly believing that its fulfillment rests only within the walls of an organization.
I suppose, this makes some sense.
i was raised in the religion and for the most part believed that my religion was truth.
i recognized some mistakes were occasionally made but felt that nobody is perfect.
then i smartened up and realized how dumb so many of the beliefs are....was there ever a time that you truly believed you had the "truth"?.
step back and think.
claiming infallibility
Thank you for sharing these phrases of insight.