Posts by TheOldHippie

33

Counting the errors in one section of the Origin of Life brouchure

by bohm in

jw
friends

from page 12:.

the theory of evolution tries to account for the origin of life on earth without the necessity of divine intervention.. .

false: simply plain false on both accounts.. however, the more that scientists discover about life, the less likely it appears that it could arise by chance.. false: author state conclusion which is not supported by the text.

TheOldHippie

The theory of evolution tries to account for the origin of life on earth without the necessity of divine intervention.

CORRECT: That was Darwin’s strategy from the beginning, to show no God was needed..

However, the more that scientists discover about life, the less likely it appears that it could arise by chance.

CORRECT: Hence the extreme silence as to this first step. But once this step has been achieved, then the theories come into action.

To sidestep this dilemma

CORRECT: There is a huge dilemma..

to make a distinction between the theory of evolution and the Question of the origin of life.

CORRECT: There is a huge silence on the Origin question, but an equally huge literature on the Evolution question.

The theory of evolution rests on the notion that a long series of fortunate accidents produced life to start with.

CORRECT: That is what it is all about.

It then proposes that another series of undirected accidents produced the astonishing diversity and complexity of all living things.

CORRECT: That is what evolution says.

However, if the foundation of the theory is missing,

CORRECT: The step-by-step changes are not explained in detail..

what happens to the other theories that are built on this assumption?

CORRECT: They end up void.

Just as a skyscraper built without a foundation would collapse, a theory of evolution that cannot explain the origin of life will crumble.

CORRECT: Once a foundation is made, anything can be constructed, but they have no foundation.

After briefly considering the structure and function of a "simple" cell what do you see-evidence of many accidents or proof of brilliant design?

CORRECT: I see nothing but proof of brilliant design. A design that can be ascribed to a Creator or to Evolution – but not to Darwinism - but design is what I see.

3

Scarborough, UK JW Paedophile around 1999-2000?

by James_Slash in

i'm just looking to see if anyone was aware of this.. i was a jw at the time and me, my friend and my mother would often attend the scarborough, south bay congregation whenever we were on vacation - probably over a 3-year-period.. around 1999-2000 we went there and there was an american 'brother' present who had married a 'sister' who he had met at the new york bethel when she had visited.

both he and she were regular pioneers.

you could tell that the congregation held them in the very highest regard.. i remember on the thursday night during the service meeting they got him on the platform and he told the whole congregation how he emptied the bins at bethel but enjoyed doing it for jehovah.

TheOldHippie

"if you get disfellowshipped, please let me know so that I can take you out of my address book".

That's a new one. Important, though, that you gives the call BEFORE one is df'ed, as the other one shouldn't communicate with you afterwards ..........

14

1914 again

by inbetween in

there are a lot of thread s and arguments around the 587/607 issue, it can be a bit confusing, and for those of us still in, like me, to help others, it would not be a topic i would choose first.

it was something i found out, after i awakened, before i simply brushed it aside, as something like worldly chronology against biblical chronology.

imho to be ready for this issue, you have to be awake first, unless you are a real history buff... anyway, there may be another take on this matter:.

TheOldHippie

Interesting, inbetween. Next argument would be that God is not CAUSING it to happen, but KNOWS it is going to happen, and allows Satan to do it. But as you say, that gives Him a role in it. But, this damned free will of course is there and so each and every one has the chance of NOT following Satan. No. 2 I think is impossible, because Satan is bent upon havoc and not clever scheming like that one. On the other hand, he is clever enough at other times, according to the Scriptures. I feel sorry for the old prophet in old Israel who was told not to return the same way he had come, but then the other prophet tricked him to come home to him for a snack and he told him an angel from God had told him to invite the other one. And during the snack, God condemns the poor prophet. Goes hand in hand with NT warnings that even if a message comes from an angel, do not heed.

Inbetween - religion, and Christianity, as a tricky and risky business! Makes me, as often, wish I was far more ignorant than I (presumably) am, as I would then not have to ask myself and try to resolve all these questions!

14

1914 again

by inbetween in

there are a lot of thread s and arguments around the 587/607 issue, it can be a bit confusing, and for those of us still in, like me, to help others, it would not be a topic i would choose first.

it was something i found out, after i awakened, before i simply brushed it aside, as something like worldly chronology against biblical chronology.

imho to be ready for this issue, you have to be awake first, unless you are a real history buff... anyway, there may be another take on this matter:.

TheOldHippie

I think an argument against your line of thought would be that God is almighty, he is more powerful than Satan and can therefore restrict him, change his plans or intervene in them in such a way that his schemes or plans in fact end up following God's original plans. God intervened and made Balaam's planned denunciations of the Israelites be turned into blessings. Thus satan's planned actions for 1912 or 1916 could be hastened or prolonged into taking effect in 1914. That would be an argument against your sinister and wicked ideas

7

do they now they have to collest their magazines from Assembly Halls?

by alanv in

hi everyone i regularly go onto the topix website and on one thread this was said earlier today.. found on facebook this morning:.

"at our service meeting it was announced that there is a change in the manner in which magazines are now to be delivered to the congregations.. .

up until now, magazines were sent to each kingdom hall via ups.

TheOldHippie

It is not worldwide, and neither is the arrangement of "grab'em while they're there". In Europe, there have been no change in neither of these arrangements.

43

Observations since the book study arrangement finished

by truthseeker in

jw
friends

does anyone have any interesting observations since the book study arrangement in private homes finished?.

are jws happier with the extra night off?

do they miss the book study?

TheOldHippie

I have made two observations, one the same as YNOT stated, "We feel less close, less like a brethern, more like people who attend the same church , but don't really associate outside of theocratic duties...." I always liked the BS the most, we were like a family group, had snacks, the children loved it, it was easy to comment, someone had found an interesting point or article to show or discuss afterwards, I loved it when the grandchildren did not want to leave untill they had received food (because we used to have food or snacks almost every time and so they got used to it), it was easy to make field service appointments. Now - it is all gone, and the book study is ruined because only studying seven or eight paragraphs makes it too abrupt, the context is lost and before one has gotten into the context, then it is over.

Second observation is very strange: Earlier, when we had meetings Tuesdays and Thursdays, I never could take part in any evening classes (like apinting or photography or languages or whatever), because they always were held either Tuesdays or Thursdays. OK, so the meeting day was changed and now it is Wednesday evening. I look for evening classes, and guess when those of interest are held? Exactly - now they are no more held Tuesdays or Thursdays, but always Wednesdays! Annoying!

33

Blatant misquote in the Origin of Life booklet

by bohm in

jw
friends

i am trying to review the "origin of life" booklet, and i got to say that the more i look into it the worse it look.

this particular quote puzzled me a lot (p. 28).

one group of researchers used brain size to speculate which extinct creatures were more closely related to man admitted that in doing so, they often feel on shaky ground.. they took the quote from the preface of the "the human fossil record - volume 3" from 2004. .

TheOldHippie

OK. Thanks. :-)

33

Blatant misquote in the Origin of Life booklet

by bohm in

jw
friends

i am trying to review the "origin of life" booklet, and i got to say that the more i look into it the worse it look.

this particular quote puzzled me a lot (p. 28).

one group of researchers used brain size to speculate which extinct creatures were more closely related to man admitted that in doing so, they often feel on shaky ground.. they took the quote from the preface of the "the human fossil record - volume 3" from 2004. .

TheOldHippie

Excuse me, but where in the brochure does it sound as if "the author on the booklet try to make it look like the size of the brain is the only thing they are interested in,"

25

Are the Watchtower numbers right for membership?

by yalbmert99 in

according to what appeared in written newspapers and that we can add up, the real number of people who assisted the summer district assemblies in the province of quebec, canada is : 13 500.. .

assembly at quebec city: 7000.

1st assembly at sherbrooke : 3500.

TheOldHippie

Exactly. You shouldn't make too much out of the numbers given for one province; people are a bit mobile these days. Adding the attendance for the country after all the conventions have been held, gives a better picture. Over here, total attendance is always higher than the average number of publishers. Some visit two conventions, but on the other hand some live on such remote places or are aged / have health problems and no not attend. If that roughly would even each other out, then a higher attendance than average publishers is what I "feel" to be correct by own observation, as relatives, interested, a neighbour or two also attend.

As always, making worldwide conclusions based on a limited area or a limited time period is risky business. "Two youths committed suicide in my congregation = majority of JW youths commit suicide" .......... no no. "Three JWs in my area were admitted to mental hospital = most JWs are mentally ill" ....... no no. Extrapolation and intrapolation - risky business.

61

Overpopulation in the "Paradise" Earth!

by Leolaia in

jw doctrine teaches that the 1,000 years of christ corresponds to "judgment day," and everyone who has not already been judged will be resurrected from the dead.

the exceptions would be those who died during the flood, the destruction of sodom and gomorrah, and a few odd individuals.

but that's only the people living today.

TheOldHippie

The growth in the first hundreds of years after the Flood has always created a problem for me, since nations so soon afterwards existed also according to the Bible. Leo points out the problem excellently here.

Just a quick note as to the problem of how many have ever live, I quote from Wikipedia (I know, I know, but it refers to the problems encountered in figuruing out the number):

Number of humans who have ever lived

Further information: Paleodemography

Estimates of "the total number of people who have ever lived" published in the 2000s range approximately from 100 to 115 billion (1 E11).

An estimate of the total number of people who have ever lived was prepared by Carl Haub of the Population Reference Bureau in 1995 and subsequently updated in 2002; the updated figure was approximately 106 billion. [ 96 ] [ 97 ] Haub characterized this figure as an estimate that required "selecting population sizes for different points from antiquity to the present and applying assumed birth rates to each period". [ 97 ] Given an estimated global population of 6.2 billion in 2002, it could be inferred that about 6% of all people who had ever existed were alive in 2002. [ 96 ]

In the 1970s it was a popular belief that 75% of all the people who had ever lived were alive in the 1970s, which would have put the total number of people who ever lived as of the 1970s as less than the number of people alive today. This view was eventually debunked. [ 98 ]

The number is difficult to estimate for the following reasons:

The set of specific characteristics that define a human is a matter of definition, and it is open to debate which members of early Homo sapiens and earlier or related species of Homo to include. See in this regard also Sorites paradox. Even if the scientific community reached wide consensus regarding which characteristics distinguished human beings, it would be nearly impossible to pinpoint the time of their first appearance to even the nearest millennium because the fossil record is simply too sparse. However, the limited size of population in early times compared to its recent size makes this source of uncertainty of limited importance.
Robust statistical data only exist for the last two or three centuries. Until the late 18th century, few governments had ever performed an accurate census. In many early attempts, such as Ancient Egypt and in the Persian Empire the focus was on counting merely a subset of the people for purposes of taxation or military service. [ 99 ] All claims of population sizes preceding the 18th century are estimates, and thus the margin of error for the total number of humans who have ever lived should be in the billions, or even tens of billions of people.
A critical item for the estimation is life expectancy. Using a figure of twenty years and the population estimates above, one can compute about fifty-eight billion. Using a figure of forty yields half of that. Life expectancy varies greatly when taking into account children who died within the first year of birth, a number very difficult to estimate for earlier times. Haub states that "life expectancy at birth probably averaged only about ten years for most of human history" [ 97 ] His estimates for infant mortality suggest that around 40% of those who have ever lived did not survive beyond one year.