Seraphim23

Joined

• started 21 topics
• posted 850 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Seraphim23

• 
  69

  Calling all materialists and non-materialists

  by willmarite in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  read this comment by bertrand russell:.

  that man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought or feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system; and the whole temple of mans achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy that rejects them can hope to stand.

  only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the souls habitation henceforth be safely built.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seraphim23

  Well a pure materialism view of love is that is it a chemical reaction only for procreation or evolution relative purposes that will come to an end along with evolution. In fact its end will be infinite and certainly outweigh the time it existed if indeed anything can exist and come to an end to an infinite degree. Or, can something that is infinitely non-existing ever have a history? To put it another way!

  My view is that things that exist don’t come to a complete end, in that some part of them always has to exist thus avoiding this logical paradox. It’s like the idea of a soul that seems to be applied to people or sometimes animals, but being applied to everything. As if the universe and everything in it has a soul. I guess I think it’s a bit like mathematics. All numbers have their negative counterparts. 1 has -1 and so on. No one ever saw a minus physical object though, despite the fact that the universe is most accurately described by mathematics than anything else. There seems to be a nonphysical counterpart to the universe that that gives it cohesion yet both are parts of each other and when one goes the other continues. In practical terms and if I am right, there is room for hope and for love to not die.
• 
  69

  Calling all materialists and non-materialists

  by willmarite in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  read this comment by bertrand russell:.

  that man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought or feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system; and the whole temple of mans achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy that rejects them can hope to stand.

  only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the souls habitation henceforth be safely built.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seraphim23

  As one who both accepts the statement as true and not true at the same time, it’s hard to answer. If I accepted it as fully true it would not affect me in any significant way because I would either commit suicide or just get on with things until the inevitable end. I would get a laugh along the way at the way atheists and theists would be arguing all the time through the respective points of view as though it mattered at all. I would also have to accept the corollary to the statement as well that good and bad have no meaning or point either. From Hitler to Ghandi both are just as dead forever being ultimately equals in achieving nothing of value or shame. Even my own thoughts on anything are as good as nothing. I certainly would not entertain the values of humanism as an alternative to faith or religion as that to would have to be considered meaningless and pointless also. Its attempt to create purpose relative to itself falls by the observation that it itself has no purpose in the face of the infinite nothingness about to engulf it. It is just religion under a different name in spinning purpose out of a web of gossamer.

  I think I would prefer a toxic spiritual environment over nothingness because at least hope springs eternal. It’s like the choice and question between freedom or no freedom? A middle ground seems better than the other fullness of the other two extremes.
• 
  26

  Do you believe in a literal Christ?

  by Monsieur in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  do you believe in a literal christ?.

  someone that walked the earth and did the things the bible states he did?

  (miracles, etc.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seraphim23

  Is there a copy of this lecture anywhere, I would be interested to see or read it?
• 
  26

  Do you believe in a literal Christ?

  by Monsieur in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  do you believe in a literal christ?.

  someone that walked the earth and did the things the bible states he did?

  (miracles, etc.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seraphim23

  Adamah, it’s compelling to me. It is the first ever photograph in human history, whatever else one might say.
• 
  26

  Do you believe in a literal Christ?

  by Monsieur in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  do you believe in a literal christ?.

  someone that walked the earth and did the things the bible states he did?

  (miracles, etc.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seraphim23

  Jgnat, I’m being serious. It’s so much more interesting than burnt toast.
• 
  26

  Do you believe in a literal Christ?

  by Monsieur in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  do you believe in a literal christ?.

  someone that walked the earth and did the things the bible states he did?

  (miracles, etc.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seraphim23

  I do because of the Turin shroud, the first photo in history, which is a good place to look.
• 
  43

  Jesus sacrifice and animal sacrifice contradiction

  by trackregister99 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  romans 3:25 says that jesus sacrifice was applied to the past for sins forgives.. then why god request animals sacrifice like "shadow of the good things to come" (hebrews 10:1) if the jesus sacrifice forgive sins to the past.. the animal blood not have none value, because jesus sacrifice was applied to the past.. why sacrificies for forgive of sins was requested by god if romans 3:25 says that jesus forgive the sins to the past?..

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seraphim23

  Well it is because I don’t believe in inherited sin. So the contradiction comes about through taking Paul too literally without seeing the deeper points he makes. He picks his audience and says what makes sense to them with the deeper points coming out in other texts. One can call it a contradiction if one wants to which is fine, or one can see other ways to understand it.
• 
  43

  Jesus sacrifice and animal sacrifice contradiction

  by trackregister99 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  romans 3:25 says that jesus sacrifice was applied to the past for sins forgives.. then why god request animals sacrifice like "shadow of the good things to come" (hebrews 10:1) if the jesus sacrifice forgive sins to the past.. the animal blood not have none value, because jesus sacrifice was applied to the past.. why sacrificies for forgive of sins was requested by god if romans 3:25 says that jesus forgive the sins to the past?..

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seraphim23

  Paul is using legalistic ways of explaining Jesus` sacrifice to those who still thought legalistically and in black and white about God. The more accurate and deeper meaning of Jesus death has nothing to do with sin payments in reality but to do with the human issue of being able to love oneself, via an ultimate demonstration. The contradiction arises because law is thought to achieve righteousness but it doesn’t but it is needed for obvious reasons, so legalistic ways of thinking serve as a beginning of understanding to hopefully lead to more mature level of comprehension. I.e a child will often be told to obey some rule in the house for its safety. A black and white understanding is all that required for a child, but as it gets older it is hoped that maturity will lead to the child becoming a person who does good and does sensible things, not because it is told to or has a black and white legalistic understanding still, but because it wants to do so because it cares about itself and others. Love is the key to this, and unless one loves oneself one cannot love others. So Paul is feeding theological milk but wants to feed solid food. So there is not really a contradiction here.
• 
  47

  "you're pretty compassionate for an atheist"

  by Hortensia in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my favorite compliment of the day.

  what a lot of assumptions people have about what makes an atheist tick..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seraphim23

  I’m a Christian but evolution is true and a fact that atheists are largely correct on. That said it is also true that the denial of evolution is of a minority in the Christian world if all Christians in all denominations are looked at together, a fact lost in the rhetoric.
• 
  120

  In general, the people on this forum have a poor outlook spiritually speaking.

  by Stand for Pure Worship in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so i waz reading the august 15 wt study article, elisha saw fiery chariots, do you?

  and it made me think about this forum.

  if you remember, syria was hunting god's prophet, elisha.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Seraphim23

  Dear Stand for Pure Worship, I admire your faith. My concern is that other faiths in the world are growing faster than the JWs and the idea that growth is evidence of God’s blessings is at odds with the facts on the ground. Also imagining angelic armies doesn’t mean they are actually there, otherwise all faiths could do that but surly they wouldn’t all be true at the same time. Faith needs to be based on more than imagination; otherwise it rightly can be classified as blind faith. If you actually see angelic armies supporting JWs that would be one thing but it would also raise more questions that would need an answer. Why use humans to preach a particular interpretation of a particular holy book when an angelic army would answer all such issues pertaining to credentials and credibility? Do you have a spiritual outlook of sufficient quality to give satisfactory or at least reasonable answers to such questions?