hello true believers.
had jc meeting.
will be reinstated next meeting.
chopper
A year after leaving the JW i started attending an AOG church. I LEARNT THE TRUTH!!
If something has nearly killed you it is wise to avoid it. In this case religion in any of its forms.
After all you have been through it would be tragic to make the same mistake twice.
trev
has anyone here been involved or know anything about clinical drugs testing and trials?
i'd just like to gather as much information as i can before i go ahead.
am interested in info both sides of the atlantic.
Don't do it !
You might change from a crumpet into a hot cross bun...
i dare to say science and religion are two different animals.
they may try to explain similar things but in different ways.
i don't believe man will ever live without either religion or science nor would i want us too.
RAF
Just wanted to say that although I have not commented before on your posts, on this thread and other similar threads, I have read them all. It must be difficult to join in when you are using your second language which you are doing well with. We often disagree on this forum and it is through such argument that I have modified my thinking over the last 5 years. We all temper each other and hopefully arrive at a balanced viewpoint through intereaction. Without that our minds can lead us to extremes.
I think it is brave of you to express yourself so openly and press on in the face of opposition to your views. I hope you never give up feeling able to share who you are. The effort is never wasted.
trev
i dare to say science and religion are two different animals.
they may try to explain similar things but in different ways.
i don't believe man will ever live without either religion or science nor would i want us too.
SWraith
For someone new to debate you explained yourself very clearly. You actually asked what I had been thinking. I thought that Narkissos gave an acceptable and interesting answer that showed an understanding of the human condition.
In my last post on this thread I was trying to express the fact that religion, spirituality or whatever other name you give it, does play a part in how we function. We read fiction books and watch movies or listen to radio plays and get emotionally involved in them, knowing they are not real. We allow our imagination to do this because it fulfils a human need.
How far we will have to advance before we can live without illusion of any kind is anyone’s guess.
What I ask is - would such an existence be better than the balance that the world has arrived at now.
two books that i just finished reading come to conflicting conclusions.
the first one is by john mcgraw, brain and belief.
the second one is by dr. don morse, searching for eternity.
This is what it all comes down to in the end. Do we survive death in some form. Is the ‘sense of being,' that James refers to, possible without a physical body.
I have stopped trying to come to conclusions. I concentrate on the awesome reality that I, along with all humans, am here experiencing existence in the present moment. Being aware of that privilege gives me a sense of gratitude and humility.
It would not be true to say that I am waiting to find out what happens after death, because I am not waiting. I am enjoying existing now and if my awareness ends I will obviously not be aware of it. So why worry?
trevor
http://www.geocities.com/zpg1957/narcissists.htm i've had some narcissistic types in my life and boy, does this article ring true.
(this is not true of my mother but just like a mirror image of my sister.
also reminds me of the dynamics of the wt org.
Someone once called me, 'a son of a bitch.'
'Oh! you must have met my mother.' I replied
i dare to say science and religion are two different animals.
they may try to explain similar things but in different ways.
i don't believe man will ever live without either religion or science nor would i want us too.
Terry
Your posts are always worth reading and you have every right to feel angry. Your religion failed you big time and you lost something that you valued greatly. I understand because I too was chewed up by the Watchtower machine.
I left home at 17 to pioneer where the need was great in a prosperous congregation. Three years later I found myself alone in a bed-sit, cold, hungry, lonely, and forbidden the comfort of a girl friend. I was still trying to pioneer while everyone else in my congregation worked full time. It was the feeling of having been used and let down that caused me to rebel. It was to be some years before I finally broke free. There are many on this site that have shared similar experiences.
The thing is that many people don’t feel let down by religion. It still provides then with what they want. It works for them. The same as drugs work for some people, until they see the damage being done. Some found the Watchtower too strong but have found a milder medication that suits them. They don't want to wake up. It feels nice to doze and dream and feel sleepy believing that someone 'up there' will take care of everything.
Part of the anger you feel is due to the fact that other people have managed to keep hold of something that you too would have liked to have kept but failed because you were too bright to maintain the illusion. Why should others continue to gain comfort from such a destructive thing as religion when it is, to you, so obviously flawed? How come it is still legal? To hear them trying to defend such nonsense is just too much.
Religion is only one of the illusions that enable people to find life bearable. Most of the things people spend their time and money on are illusionary, false and ultimately unsatisfying. Humans are generally irrational and contradictory in the way they behave.
To try to live in a totally rational way in an irrational world is not entirely possible or desirable and leads to frustration. That is why I said earlier that ‘I hang on to a few of my illusions in case that rainy day comes around.’ It also helps me to hang on to my friends.
trevor
i dare to say science and religion are two different animals.
they may try to explain similar things but in different ways.
i don't believe man will ever live without either religion or science nor would i want us too.
Funkyderek - You make some good points which I concur with.
There is no doubt that religion or spiritual beliefs have contributed something to the lives of humans who would otherwise have had nothing to look to - no guidance. They have inspired much art. Yet all these thousands of years later we have so much more information and knowledge about our world.
The advantages of intuitive guesses and attributing everything from the weather to volcanoes, to a collection of gods, has been largely lost. As humans move forward a choice is gradually being forced upon us a race of people.
Do we want to know the truth about life and this planet so we can become fully responsible for the future of our world?
Or would we rather take comfort in adopting a belief system that suits us and offers short term comfort?
At this point in time - the answer is crucial to the future of the world.
i dare to say science and religion are two different animals.
they may try to explain similar things but in different ways.
i don't believe man will ever live without either religion or science nor would i want us too.
Of course the question of whether we must choose between Science and religion is another way of asking - are we alone of does the ultimate scientist dwell in outer space?
If we believe we are alone, then we are more likely to try harder to sort out our own problems. But if we have a vague idea that a benevolent being is lurking in the sky, who will sort it all out at the end of the day, then we will be inclined to sit back and wait, hope and believe. The one thing we are less likely to do is act decisively.
To some people the comfort of believing that they are not alone is of more value to them than the benefit that honest and logical reasoning can offer them and holding on to their beliefs is of more value than holding on to life. Comfort is their greatest value. There is a human tendency to move towards comfort and pleasure even at the expense of a longer and more rewarding life.
I personally allow room for the possibility that there may be a pervading life force that exists outside of our physical world. I do not assume that it is benevolent or expect intervention in my life. I take on board Carl Jung’s idea of a collective conciseness but the jury is still out. I have had experiences that make it difficult to deny that there may be some truth in his concept. James Thomas has made some impressive posts and I have learned a lot from Terry and his ability to logically clarify the state of play. Little toe seems to have found a way to harmonise what appear to be conflicting approaches to this subject.
I see no need to know the meaning of life with absolute certainty. I rule nothing in and nothing out but I will not sacrifice my power of reasoning in return for the comfort of belief. We all have different needs, weaknesses and strengths and very few people live without the comfort of some form of illusion. I hang on to a few of mine just in case that rainy day comes around .
several weeks ago the issue of god's 'perfect nature' came up on a thread.
the concept of "perfection" is a persistent in vitually all faith traditions and theological constructs.. jws in particular, have an obsession with the concept of perfection and use it regularly in their propaganda: "live forever in a perfect paradise earth"; "live forever in perfect health"; "humans and animals will live together in perfect harmony", etc etc...... the point was raised about the possibility or impossibility of god being perfect.
if we begin with the basic judaeo-christian tenet that god created the universe from nothingness, then he is the designer and creator of every single entity, sentient or non-sentient, and object within reality.
The concept of God can only be experienced in the mind. Hence this thread is addressed to believers.
If one does not believe then the concept vanishes. Believers can conceive God to be anything they want. If they want him to perfect then he is. What we mean by perfect needs clarifying because perfection is also a concept. But if we are going to believe in God we might as well make him perfect. What one person considers perfect will differ from another - so a perfect God is, like all concepts - subjective.
The Old testament makes the mistake of making him in man’s image with all the accompanying emotions. It wouldn’t have cost the writers any more ink to have made him perfect. In the new testament they attempted to correct this.
