Posts by venus

49

How old's the human race?

by Freedom rocks in

hi does anyone know any good articles or videos about how old mankind and the earth are and carbon dating?

.

i've just started looking into it but there seems to be a lot of conflicting ideas over accuracy so i'm unsure what to think.

You wrote two small sentences in which you revealed your extremism three times—“never encountered a creationist who knew the first thing about evolution and I have debated dozens of them. Your own contributions betray a woeful ignorance of science.” This explains your own life—one leap into JW belief system where you could not find God which resulted in another leap into its opposite direction.

This happened to me also in my school days. Fully charged with evolutionist environment I too became a believer in the theory of evolution and believed great materialists such as David Hume, Greta Christina, Daniel Dennett, Christopher Hitchens, Bertrand Russell, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins … without knowing they were all parroting the famous question “Who designed the Designer?”, I too asked the same question to my professor who was a creationist. He asked me “Venus, do you know what you are asking about? Have you understood the meaning of your own question? Have you ever been a recipient of this sort of question yourself? If I ask you: “Venus, have you uttered an unutterable word? Have you comprehended the incomprehensible? Have you described the indescribable? …..” How would you rate myself?

I have never felt so ashamed of myself as that day—all because I believed all those world renowned evolutionists/materialists. Then I chanced to read Signature in the Cell (by Stephen C. Meyer) which was followed by some other books which go deep into molecular biology and design, all of which created in me a thirst for God and an awe like that of Bill Gates who exclaimed “DNA is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced than any software ever created” because it is the experience of all of us (including evolutionists) that specified information as contained in DNA always, always, “always arises from an intelligent source, from a mind and not a strictly material process.”

49

How old's the human race?

by Freedom rocks in

hi does anyone know any good articles or videos about how old mankind and the earth are and carbon dating?

.

i've just started looking into it but there seems to be a lot of conflicting ideas over accuracy so i'm unsure what to think.

venus

Hi WhatshallIcallmyself

It clearly shows you did not get the spirit of mere four paragraphs I wrote. This is typical of people who specializes in just one subject: "Wisdom alone is the science of all other sciences. The excessive increase of anything causes a reaction in the opposite direction. I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning." Plato

49

How old's the human race?

by Freedom rocks in

hi does anyone know any good articles or videos about how old mankind and the earth are and carbon dating?

.

i've just started looking into it but there seems to be a lot of conflicting ideas over accuracy so i'm unsure what to think.

venus

Hi Cofty,

Real problem is not that creationists have not studied evolution. Many of them have studied it, and some of them also have done their homework (like me) which means we have studied the philosophy of evolution and philosophy of science—something obviously you lack because of which you act like the one who takes a bulldozer to crush an egg. See the way you react using too big words such as “painfully ignorant” [which betrays your basis as emotion, rather than reason] to refer to any view which you don’t like. Your greatest reason for abandoning faith in God was 2004 Tsunami according to your own testimony. This is not at a reason because surviving victims of that Tsunami, and their close family members still continue to be believers in God which reveals their basis of believing in God as reason, not emotion.

In philosophy of science, science is neutral as it is just a study of laws of nature with a view to using them to benefit humanity, to bring comfort to us. “With regard to theological or metaphysical reality, science holds the agnostic position – it simply has no knowledge on this subject.” (Philip G Zimbardo and Floyd L Ruch, Psychologia I zycie, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, wyd III, Warszawa 1996, s 19) Yet, look at the current scenario: Science has not created any living being, not even a too tiny seed that can ensure all its future generations being protected in its memory [which if it had done, it would still not prove God doesn't exist]; instead it made the designs of factories and vehicles with their emission pipes to the air and drainage systems to the water sources which means water and air were treated as global garbage cans knowing very well that no life is possible without pure air and water. See how the globally acclaimed physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking himself testifies: “We are in danger of destroying ourselves ….. We cannot remain looking inwards at ourselves on a small and increasingly polluted and overcrowded planet.”

After polluting water and air, now science is thinking of various ways of removing the pollution which is not wisdom, not love of wisdom; but it amounts only to undoing the harm caused because of its own short-sightedness.

When an individual or nation becomes materially rich for first time, next question that comes is “where is God?” (Proverb 30:9) which implies we can get along without Him. But the longer you enjoy material abundance you begin to experience emptiness within from where you start searching for God, as happened in India. India experienced material abundance long back, before any other country became materially rich and it is only a well-known history that many Islamic rulers and some Christian nations became materially rich by plundering India. Its ancient stories are the reflections of the time they were written; and show that it was materially rich and also had well-grounded belief in God which even now continues with the number of materialists in that country being too minimal.

49

How old's the human race?

by Freedom rocks in

hi does anyone know any good articles or videos about how old mankind and the earth are and carbon dating?

.

i've just started looking into it but there seems to be a lot of conflicting ideas over accuracy so i'm unsure what to think.

venus

Hi WhatshallIcallmyself,

When an exaggerated view is expressed, someone else would present some facts that would make the exaggerated view to be viewed in low profile. But if you isolate one or two words from those facts, then subject gets diverted.

Even the intent of my last comment was that belief in God gives you balance using one example. Suddenly, some elements of that example are projected as the main subject. Such an approach would not bring any benefit to anyone.

I enjoy seeing things in their essence, not in their details. Hence all ism and religions are acceptable to me—Christianity says a virgin gave birth to a child; Hinduism says a virgin gave birth to 6 children; materialism says all life forms came from matter (which is also like a virgin).

49

How old's the human race?

by Freedom rocks in

hi does anyone know any good articles or videos about how old mankind and the earth are and carbon dating?

.

i've just started looking into it but there seems to be a lot of conflicting ideas over accuracy so i'm unsure what to think.

venus

Hi WhatshallIcallmyself

First of all, I did not make any conclusion which you feared I did which means you see things that do not exist. I just said—India’s population more than doubled in 50 years in spite of Governmental and non-governmental hard work and incentives against all possible increase. Even if we assume an exaggerated 500 (instead of 50) years for the world population to be doubled ..., it would still serve as a better indication as to the age of mankind.

From saying this much, there is nothing for any reader to get emotionally excited as to the point of using the word ignorance against the writer. Diverting the subject into another too vast subject of ignorance is the sign of blind adherence to one particular belief—exactly what you accuse of creationists doing. Getting nervous when there is no need for it underscores your need to have belief in God which would serve like earthing for your electricity connection at home. Belief in God gives groundedness to face the unpleasant with balance. Otherwise a slight unexpected/unpleasant happening would cause great convulsions in you, as happened to Richard Dawkins, the chief priest of New Atheist Movement. When an invitation “to speak at the Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism” was cancelled because of his some controversial statement about feminism, he took it too personally the distress of which was too much that his brain suffered a stroke within 13 days.

(https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/richard-dawkins-vdeo-twitter-necss-event-feminism-a6841161.html)

(https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/feb/12/richard-dawkins-has-stroke-on-eve-of-australia-and-new-zealand-tour) If he were a believer in God, he would have thought--people heap honor and dishonor even to God (both of which He considers to be inconsequential)--hence slight (real or perceived) is nothing to me; and I am focused on more important things. Thus he could have let it pass.

14

Special talk: "who is Jesus Christ?!

by nowwhat? in

apparently he no longer is our savior and the "way and the truth and the life" or our mediator between god and man .

the governing body took over that role.

.

venus

Hi nonjwspouse,

That's a great question: "Why was Jesus allowing himself to be worshiped if he was not God?"

Answer would surprise everyone because he is not interested in the silly debates of humans on earth.

What I like the most about God also is the same thing--He is not bothered about the honor or dishonor people shower upon Him because He doesn't gain anything by honor and he doesn't lose anything by dishonor. In other words, His attitude is that 'let people think of me whatever they like.' When I adopt this attitude, I feel instant freedom.

49

How old's the human race?

by Freedom rocks in

hi does anyone know any good articles or videos about how old mankind and the earth are and carbon dating?

.

i've just started looking into it but there seems to be a lot of conflicting ideas over accuracy so i'm unsure what to think.

venus

Hi shepherdless,

What you say [There has been a massive population explosion in the last couple of centuries due to modern health and sanitation, modern medicine, the Haber process, etc. Before that, population levels were relatively stable, even over millenia] is not correct.

It is just the other way around. In the ancient patriarchal society (like that of Jacob of OT) there had been many wives, concubines and many children in one family. Scriptures and stories are reflection of the society in which it is written. This is true of all epics and scriptures of the pagans. History books also support this: "The Ancient Egyptian Pharaoh Ramesses II had a large number of children: between 48 and 50 sons, and 40 to 53 daughters–whom he had depicted on several monuments." Some kings had even over 100 wives. (https://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/17/africa/the-king-with-100-wives-cameroon/index.html)

49

How old's the human race?

by Freedom rocks in

hi does anyone know any good articles or videos about how old mankind and the earth are and carbon dating?

.

i've just started looking into it but there seems to be a lot of conflicting ideas over accuracy so i'm unsure what to think.

venus

Here is an interesting clue: 50 years ago, India’s population was 550 Million, and now it is 1,324 million, in spite of all the Government-sponsored family planning programs and incentives. Forget about India, and instead of 50 years in which its population becomes more than double, assign a figure as big as 500 years for the world population to be doubled. You will get a rough idea as to the age of history.

23

Jesus Christ—The Greatest Scientist (and Psychologist) who ever lived on earth!

by Ireneus in

if we eliminate all the controversial and confusing verses attributed to jesus we will get the crystal clear truth from him because his source was (1) god which can be seen from his habit of early morning talking to god in prayer (mark 1:35; john 8:1, 2) which would not have been for material blessings (mathew 6:8; 16:24), and (2) also observance of people.. 1) jesus who said judgment is based on whether we acted humanely or not (mathew 25:31-46) would not have spoken about god’s people and pagans (which means bulk of the things found in gospel had not been spoken/done by jesus).. 2) another important truth he said was about the real key to our happiness which he said is with each one of us.

(luke 17:21).

from his observance of history, he knew there are people from adversities who made great contribution to the world; and there are people from all abundance who lived a life of wastage accomplishing nothing; and there are people who are mixed in varying degree.

venus

Ireneus,

I am going to experiment this.

I think Denis Waitley understood Jesus perfectly when he wrote: “Happiness cannot be traveled to, owned, earned, worn or consumed. Happiness is the spiritual experience of living every minute with love, grace and gratitude.”

Interestingly, my professor used to say ‘there is no way to happiness, happiness is the way.’ During College Anniversary celebration he sang a song composed by himself: I still remember one line from it: ‘God is the music of his life.’ He had no ill-feeling towards his unknown mother who threw him in the trash when he was born to her (may be because she was not married at that time). He grew in an orphanage.

18

Scholarly interview on the existence of Jesus

by careful in

perhaps this has been linked here before.

if that's the case, i'm sorry.

however, new people join, others miss things, some forget, so i thought it was worth posting, especially since this issue comes up from time to time and some here have never worked it out or are in the process of trying to do so.

venus

Hi jws, I would divide your questions into three:

1) “And people say it is the inerrant word of god.”

You are true “People say it is inerrant word of God” whereas Bible writers themselves do not believe so. For example, most of the OT prophets are unaware about parallel account of creation involving Adam and Eve and its attendant teaching of original sin which means we sin by simply being alive. Habakkuk even flatly rejected such concepts. (Habkkuk 2:4) Jeremiah rejected considerable portions of the Bible (Jeremiah 7:22; 8:8)

2)We know, Jesus was misquoted on everything. Did he really say "he is the way and the truth and the life. no one comes to the father except through me."?

Prima facie, Jesus did not say this verse because it is like saying “unmarried husbands” which makes no sense. Jesus taught we are all children of God whom he called “our heavenly Father” which inherently means it is inconceivable for Father to elevate one son over others and to imply that others have access to Him only through one son. Most of John’s gospel is fiction. For example, if Jesus really performed miracles, at least Mathew should remember what his first miracle (changing the water into wine) and last miracle (resurrection of Lazarus) were; yet we find it is John who reports it—that too in his senility, signs of which are seen from the beginning of his gospel. For example, he says Jesus ascended into heaven in the beginning of his ministry by making him say: “no one has ascended into heaven except him” while talking to Nicodemus. (John 3:13) Most famous incomprehensible verse is John 1:1 (Was there no other better way to convey what he wanted to convey? If one’s very first verse gives rise to over 2000 years of debate which has not yet reached a conclusion, it defeats the very purpose of communication. John also forgot Jesus had already declared that prophet Elijah has now appeared John the Baptist. (Mathew 11:14 contrast John 1:21)

3) And if it were god's testimony to the world, and he is all that people think he is, wouldn't he have the power to make sure everybody got every story correct? So that there would be no reason to doubt the message?

The very fact that God did not prevent the interpolations shows that scriptures do not belong to Him. Yet this does not mean some of the characters in the Bible are not historical. Some may be historical, and others may be symbolic figure representing the whole humanity like Adam (a word used for both mankind and an individual). Whether somebody is historical or not is not important because what they teach is that every action (good or bad) is responded to sooner or later which is the very basis of science, all the stories, all our experiences …

Like pure water available in the deep wild forest, Bible also contains certain truths here and there. For example, if you remember one verse of the Bible it is more than enough: “He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” (Micah 6:8) We see that everyone’s thinking creates his reality which means we are all free to choose to do whatever we like to do which means God respects our individuality. We all love mercy shown by others which gives us reason to love mercy. God Himself shows humility by not doing any favor to theists and by not punishing atheists which means He is least bothered of honor or dishonor people shower on Him.