EdenOne

Joined

• started 155 topics
• posted 2,912 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by EdenOne

• 
  16

  not seeing the forest for the trees

  by El_Guapo in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  sometimes when you are in the borg, you miss the obvious.

  i recall a sheperding call around sept. 2001. i was a brand-new m.s.

  and went with an older elder.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  This is something that has been upsetting me for some time. After all, doesn't James 1:27 says that " Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you."

  To claim that our bible instruction helps people to live better lives is only a tiny bit of truth, but we should do so much more to help others. Even if we cannot help the entire community around us, at least be more effective and proactive in helping the members of the congregation.

  While there are indeed people who attend religious services only with the purpose of benefiting from their charity (and I find it very questionable), it shouldn't be so hard to determine who are the ones who have real needs and actually help them.

  Eden
• 
  169

  The "Tree of Life and its meaning"

  by EdenOne in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hi all.. just letting know that i've published a new article on my website, titled "the tree of life and its meaning".. you're welcome to visit, read and discuss it.. eden.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  cofty,

  I didn't know I had to fall into a certain cathegory, but if you insist - although Jehovahs Witnesses' interpretation of Genesis is predominantly adherent to Special Creation, with admission of Intelligent Design, I lean to thinking that there is logic in accepting all three.

  Naturally, deistic evolution is part of the grand sheme of things, but God can (and certainly did) certain things as "special creations" (if you don't believe in material creation, let's just consider the angels or Christ), and intelligent design was employed as well. To me, undoubly Adam and Eve qualify as special creations, although I believe there's room to equate that they weren't the first human beings to walk the earth. They were, however, the first to be created "in God's image", and therefore, the subjects of interest for the rest of the Bible.

  Edit: cantleave, i didn't mean to imply that the descendants of Adam and Eve merged with Neandertals. I stated as an hypothesis that thay could have merged with other previous human groups (Cro-Magnons, other Homo Sapiens, etc).

  This will be my last post for today, as I've run out of posts. See you soon, and wish we could all be sitting at a table, drinking some nice wine, and looking into a beautiful scenery, and once we finished our discussion, we could all go and enjoy a good meal together with our families. Best wishes for everyone.

  Eden
• 
  169

  The "Tree of Life and its meaning"

  by EdenOne in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hi all.. just letting know that i've published a new article on my website, titled "the tree of life and its meaning".. you're welcome to visit, read and discuss it.. eden.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  James Woods, you certainly don't understand what a "visitor", a "guest" is...? I only joined as a member weeks ago. What's your point? And why do I have to prove anything to you?

  cantleave,

  We are a cultural product for sure. If I wasn't raised a JW, in a western country, in a predominantly christian culture, for sure I would have a different starting point. But I am what I am and I see a nexus in what I believe. And I don't quite see a mutual exclusion between what I believe and what science says. As for God having a gender, I can accept that as a valid discussion, since apparently there isn't sexual gender in the spiritual realm. God has certain attributes that are identified with male traits (especially in what has to do with warfare) for easier grasp by human beings.

  Eden
• 
  169

  The "Tree of Life and its meaning"

  by EdenOne in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hi all.. just letting know that i've published a new article on my website, titled "the tree of life and its meaning".. you're welcome to visit, read and discuss it.. eden.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  Then I must have gotten something wrong about "atheism": " atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities" (Wiki) Since such a proposition demands empirical evidence, I wonder what empirical evidence is provided for the non-existance of God. To quote EP, " Faith is simply believing in something, sometimes without any evidence." Since you cannot provide evidence of the inexistence of God, then your atheism is a form of faith. But you are what you believe to be, and i won't argue against that anymore.

  You wrote that my belief that Adam and Eve were created by God "is 100% anti-scientific." Well, at best you can say that scientific evidence points elsewhere. But since you cannot disprove the existence of the operating subject of your opponent's hypothesis (God), then to use the term "anti-scientific" is a little too easy and ...uh ... unscientific.

  You wrote: We did not descend from an original pair. How do you accommodate that fact in your theology?

  Consider the two following hypothesis:

  a) During the late Pleistocene, circa 10.000 years ago, there were massive extinctions, possibly from climate change or some sort of cataclismic event. Could it be that human life also went extinct there? Could it be that God had to re-create human life, Adam and Eve, as well as replenish the planet with re-creations or reengineered species from previous ones, using DNA available from previous species?

  b) Adam and Eve were the first humans created "in God's image", but there have been other hominid and humanoids populating the Earth for long time. While they were created with a special purpose, because they fell, God allowed the descendants of Adam and Eve to merge with other previous human species (this would answer the question of Where Cain got his wife).

  Eden
• 
  169

  The "Tree of Life and its meaning"

  by EdenOne in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hi all.. just letting know that i've published a new article on my website, titled "the tree of life and its meaning".. you're welcome to visit, read and discuss it.. eden.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  James Woods, since you're so interested in my supposed "hypocrisy", it's rather interesting that you didn't have a word to say about your hypocrisy in being a member of a forum that deceptively takes the name of the Jehovah's Witnesses to lure the unaware Witnesses as if this were a friendly and "legit" Witness site. When I first found this forum, must have been 6 or 7 years ago, I came here thinking it was a site made by Jehovah's Witnesses. So I know what kind of hypocrisy and deception is involved in calling this "jehovahs-witnesses.net". What I'm surprised is that someone like you can accept being part of such "hypocrisy". But as I predicted, you don't have any issues with that. But you have issues with my standing as a JW? I think your Ferrari would be a better investment for your time, really...

  Eden
• 
  169

  The "Tree of Life and its meaning"

  by EdenOne in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hi all.. just letting know that i've published a new article on my website, titled "the tree of life and its meaning".. you're welcome to visit, read and discuss it.. eden.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  cofty,

  Then, for clarity of discussion, you're not an atheist, you're an agnostic. You don't know if God exists or not, but in the absence of empirical evidence, you choose to not have faith and refuse that notion to impact your life. Is this you? Then we're clear and can move on.

  While I didn't study Biology, I've studied Anthropology. Therefore, you're making a wrong assumption that I haven't read a book apologetic of human evolution. I'm looking at a bookshelf with a few of them, actually. I haven't read those you've suggested but I promise you I'll get one of them and read it.

  This may surprise you, but I actually accept that there was evolution, as much as there were creation. Perhaps the difference between you and me is that I believe in a guided, controlled evolution, while you will probably say that there aren't any lab tests that demonstrate that is possible. But an ancient real world example, the doog breed improvement, shows that is possible to proactively manipulate genetics to guide the development of a species. Sure, there are environmental adaptations and genetic accidents happening all the time. But why can't you at least give room to the possibility that evolution could have been used as a tool by a supernatural powerful being?

  That being said, I believe that the Bible depicts Adam and Eve as the first human beings created "in the image of God"; To my understanding, that doesn't rule out the pre-existence of hominids, or other human species. The way I see it, the difference is that Adam and Eve were homo sapiens created directly by God with a special purpose that set them apart from whatever might exist on Earth at that time, (assuming that there hasn't been a mass extinction before Adam and Eve - hence my interest in the "Gap Theory") and made them subjects of interest for the bible theology.

  Eden
• 
  169

  The "Tree of Life and its meaning"

  by EdenOne in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hi all.. just letting know that i've published a new article on my website, titled "the tree of life and its meaning".. you're welcome to visit, read and discuss it.. eden.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  Marvin,

  Just because I am still a Jehovah's Witness doesn't mean I endorse everything the WTS does or pursuits. Pretty much like when you're a citizen of a certain country doesn't mean you endorse everything your country's government does. Or does it? To say "I agree with many teachings conveyed by the WTS" doesn't make me a WTS apologist to the point that you have to try to persuade me that the WTS is in error and has been dishonest about themselves, or to project into my persona the wrongdoings that you credit to the WTS.

  Now, about your first question, in your earlier post, I'm not sure I understood. Can you clarify it for me?

  (I'm sorry but I've still not grasped how to quote from another post)

  Eden
• 
  169

  The "Tree of Life and its meaning"

  by EdenOne in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hi all.. just letting know that i've published a new article on my website, titled "the tree of life and its meaning".. you're welcome to visit, read and discuss it.. eden.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  cofty,

  100 years ago, the atom was the smallest particle in the universe and that was considered the definitive truth about the matter. Within 100 years, the Higgs Boson particle may well not be the smallest particle in the universe. You consider this "constant refining of understanding" ? Well, so do I. But you're willing to bet your life that the current state of the art of science is "THE truth". As if your current perception of the universe and reallity is the only one possible. Even you, as a man who enjoys science, should be ready to admit that science accomodates the notion of other possible realities and paralell dimentions that we don't perceive. In true honesty, you cannot be an atheist without an element of faith. In true honesty you cannot prove that something doesn't exist. At best you can say that since you don't have tangible empirical evidence of the existence of X, then you cannot assert that X exists. That is the intellectually honest answer. When someone emphatically claims that God doesn't exist, that is a declaration of belief, of faith. Your faith is therefore as good as mine. You have faith in reason, I have faith in God. The advantage of believing in God is that I can also enjoy reason, while you cannot enjoy God.

  Now, I can live with your faith. Why is it difficult for you to tolerate mine? Because religion has hurt people? Well, hasn't science hurt people as well? Or maybe you think that only the ignorant unintelligent folk believe in God? Then you may well go ahead and call me that. And the mirror will then point back right at you.

  Another thing: Why does an article about a subject of faith needs to be filtered by science to get a certificate of asepticism? Is this the thought police?

  Eden
• 
  169

  The "Tree of Life and its meaning"

  by EdenOne in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hi all.. just letting know that i've published a new article on my website, titled "the tree of life and its meaning".. you're welcome to visit, read and discuss it.. eden.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  Gladiator,

  I'm not a creationist, and I don't have any problems accepting that trees converted carbon dioxide into oxygen for millions of years, before other life forms who depended on oxygen could could come to existance and thrive.

  Eden
• 
  169

  The "Tree of Life and its meaning"

  by EdenOne in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hi all.. just letting know that i've published a new article on my website, titled "the tree of life and its meaning".. you're welcome to visit, read and discuss it.. eden.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  EdenOne

  cofty and cantleave,

  Science has a lot going for it, but as you also must honestly admit, it's not error-free, and it's not fraud-free. Science also has a lot of "new light" that causes some "truths" (AKA scientific facts) to be replaced by "new understandings" (AKA new studies, newer technology, correction of mistakes). If we lived 100 years ago you would still believe that the smallest particle in the universe was the atom. And yet, now we know there are all sorts exotic tiny particles, much much smaller than atoms. The "state of the art" in science is constantly changing, and it's certainly not static. I'm coming from a background in social sciences and history, so I'm not very qualified to discuss physics, biology or mathematics. If that's your expertise, I'm sure you could crush me on those subjects.

  Still, I don't see why wouldn't it be possible for God to use processes of creation and processes of evolution simultaneously. I really don't think there's an impossibility, at least in concept, for that.

  Eden