Posts by Island Man

6

The revolting morality underpinning martyrdom.

by Island Man in

the three hebrew boys chose death over bowing down to lifeless idols.

early christians refused to sacrifice to the emperor's genious.

jws in nazi germany refused to sign a document that will result in their release or spare them from execution.

Island Man

The three Hebrew boys chose death over bowing down to lifeless idols. Early christians refused to sacrifice to the Emperor's genious. JWs in nazi Germany refused to sign a document that will result in their release or spare them from execution. They are all praised as integrity keepers.

But what do these scenarios say about the morality of the god of the bible? How does putting a perfunctory signature to a piece of paper, change the love that a JW has for God in his heart? How does perfunctorily bowing down to a lifeless idol to save your life, change the fact that you know it's lifeless and you give your true worship only to God? Is it moral or loving for God to punish people for performing perfunctory acts to save their life and which do not truly reflect their feelings toward him in their heart? To illustrate my point consider other similar scenarios:

Imagine a scenario where a man's wife is given the ultimatum of being asked to put her signature to a document stating that she doesn't love her husband, or face a gruesome death. What would you think of this man if he wants his wife to refuse signing the document under any circumstances? It does not matter to him that she would not really mean it and that she really does love him in her heart. He would rather see her die than compromise her integrity to him by putting even a disingenuous signature at the end of the document. Is this a man who really loves his wife?

Consider a bank teller who complies with the demands of an armed robber pointing a gun at her. She fills his sack with wads of cash, fearing for her life if she does not comply. Does that make her a robber? Is she deserving of being charged for criminal conduct because of her actions? Should she be fired for compromising her integrity to the bank? What would people think of the bank if she was fired for her actions? Shouldn't we think the same of a god whose actions are comparable?

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

Island Man

"It always disturbed me though, as to where any matter came from to begin with. [the human idea that something doesn't come from nothing]"

That is understandable. Our intuitive perception of what is possible is based on our everyday life experiences at the macro-scale. But scientific observations show that what takes place at the quantum scale is very counter-intuitive. This is why common sense cannot be applied to the subject of the origin of matter and the universe. We have to apply unbiased Math and Physics - "exotic sense", if you will. When applied, Mathematically and Scientifically feasible explanations for the origin of life emerge, without the need for any gods.

Also think about this: if the origin of matter seems like an insurmountable incongruity, what about the origin of god? Which is more incongruous - the spontaneous origin of simple finite particles at the quantum level; or the notion of a complex ever-existing God without beginning or end? To me, using an unbeginning, ever-existing god to explain the incongruity of the universe's origin is comparable to someone borrowing 1 million dollars to pay off a 1 hundred dollar debt.

Here's something to ponder on to help you appreciate why you cannot use common sense to dismiss science that seems counter-intuitive. There are/were people living in remote jungle locations having no access to or knowledge of modern technology and science. When they are first contacted by people from the outside modern world, they are perplexed by things we take for granted. Their "common sense" is completely ignorant of modern science so the marvels of modern technology is invariably interpreted by them as magic and as a result they may even briefly think of their modern visitors as being gods.

The lesson in this is that we cannot put our own sense of what is possible or impossible above what scientific research and experimentation reveals. Our own sense of possibility is limited by our ignorance. Thus we cannot use common sense to guide us in understanding the exotic things that do not comprise everyday happenings. We cannot use common sense to determine the best explanation for the origin of the universe and life. We have to use science. If we limit ourselves to common sense, then in ignorance, we will find ourselves, like the scientifically primitive jungle dwellers, resorting to fallacious explanations that involve magic and gods.

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

Island Man

"Common sense leads towards a creator"

Wow! Thanks for validating a point I made on another thread where I said:

Many people believe in a supreme creator god because they use common sense. Common sense is acquired from our personal experiences of how the world works. Obviously our common sense is thus limited by our experiences - lived or learned. Common sense is good for common, every day life. But is it wise to use common sense to explain uncommon, exotic phenomena?
Theists know that complex machinery and human technology come about by human creators. Using common sense they project this principle of creation of the functional and complex unto the natural world. If a house needs a designer, then surely the universe does too, they reason.
But remember what we said about common sense being informed by human experience. We know from human experience that human technology needs a creator and it's possible to see human technology in the process of being made. What experience do we have of universes being made? None.

13

A cracking good JC! This is how it's done, folks.

by Island Man in

in this jc the couple accused of apostasy, lay down some inconvenient and incontestable truths about the organization's teachings that leave the elders speechless - as far as them mustering any efforts to refute them.

oh and by the way, do you remember what geoffrey jackson said at the australian royal commission when he was asked about an inactive jw being called to account if the elders stopped by and find him celebrating the holiday?

don't worry if you've forgotten because the couple mentions it to the elders, you know, seeing as it's the very same reason why they're being accused of apostasy, thus proving geoffrey jackson's statements to be false!.

Island Man

In this JC the couple accused of apostasy, lay down some inconvenient and incontestable truths about the organization's teachings that leave the elders speechless - as far as them mustering any efforts to refute them.

Oh and by the way, do you remember what Geoffrey Jackson said at the Australian Royal Commission when he was asked about an inactive JW being called to account if the elders stopped by and find him celebrating the holiday? Don't worry if you've forgotten because the couple mentions it to the elders, you know, seeing as it's the very same reason why they're being accused of apostasy, thus proving Geoffrey Jackson's statements to be false!

Damn! These elders got a lifetime worth of cognitive dissonance. Remember to be nice to them when they finally visit us here on JWN.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eu6MJ817wc

12

JWs and New Year's Resolutions

by JW_Rogue in

anyone else find it odd that jws don't do new year's resolutions?

i have never read anything about it in any wt publication.

yet, it is like some unwritten rule.

Island Man

I think many inactive JWs and never-baptized born-ins make new years resolutions. Why? I notice that many of them start attending meetings early in January every year. They start attending regularly for a week or two then they fade out and disappear again. I get the feeling that "returning to Jehovah" was a new years resolution that they made.

7

Daniel 12:4, A Watchtower's tactic for the naive and unlearned readers who need to believe in some thing

by opusdei1972 in

"but you, daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, until the time of the end.

many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.

(daniel 12:4).

Island Man

In any case, Daniel 12:4 is talking about knowledge of the sealed up portion of the book of Daniel which he, Daniel could not understand. To apply it to true knowledge of the whole bible is to misapply the verse.

Also, the verse says that many shall run to and fro. That is not the situation with JWs. With JWs very few - specifically, the Governing Body - are running to and fro, coming up with one false speculative teaching after another, and feeding it to JWs who all blindly accept it.

So JWs misapply Daniel 12:4 on three counts!

35

I almost died laughing at the meeting last night. OMG WTF is going on? Have I been away this long?

by macys in

ok so most of you guys know already that i am going through the reinstatement process for my parents but i do have a partially sinister plan which i will not mention here since someone told me that there are b-lites that read boards like this.

last night and it was the funniest experience i have ever seen.

besides that the brother doing the sound and video screwed up the whole thing when showing the videos and it took 3 brothers to fix it after 10 minutes, the whole thing was a joke.

Island Man

The silhouette presentations were very tacky. Several times during the presentation the publisher's shadow was not only different to the publisher's profile but was also out of sync. It was real laughable to watchtower the publisher's shadow reach into the bag before the publisher did. lol.

35

I almost died laughing at the meeting last night. OMG WTF is going on? Have I been away this long?

by macys in

ok so most of you guys know already that i am going through the reinstatement process for my parents but i do have a partially sinister plan which i will not mention here since someone told me that there are b-lites that read boards like this.

last night and it was the funniest experience i have ever seen.

besides that the brother doing the sound and video screwed up the whole thing when showing the videos and it took 3 brothers to fix it after 10 minutes, the whole thing was a joke.

Island Man

"It is as if Jurassic Park and an airport calypso band made a song together!"

Hey! Don't be dissing my culture!!!

556

The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

by cofty in

... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

they take pride in obedience.

Island Man

I understand TD. But I'm sure that the JWs will concede that a person's use of his own blood in his veins is also a legitimate use of blood that does not infringe on the command to abstain from blood. And once that is conceded it can then be shown logically that transfusions involve the use of blood in the same way, with the only difference being the source of the blood - which is irrelevant as demonstrated by the fact that JWs make no distinction between transfusing foreign blood and transfusing your own pre-donated blood.

556

The Watchtower are Right About Blood...

by cofty in

... but, they fail to take note of one important detail.. i believe that if we are going to have any chance of reasoning with a jw about blood, this is the place we need to begin.. don't try to convince them that it was only a dietary law.

it wasn't, and they will never go along with it.. don't tell them that saving a life is more important than obeying a law, even a seemingly trivial one.

they take pride in obedience.

Island Man

3. It was a capital offense to use blood for any purpose other than to offer it as a sacrifice on the altar.

This is actually not entirely correct. You forgot another permissible use of blood outside of the sacrificial process - a use of blood that exposes the JWs' ban on blood transfusions as being illogical. I'm talking about the primary function of blood - the function for which it was created by Jehovah. The prohibition on blood obviously does not apply to our use of our own blood in our veins.

So there are actually two permissible uses of blood: (1) on the altar (explicitly stated in scripture) and (2) in our veins (not explicitly stated in scripture but obviously implied by the fact that the Law did not instruct or require the Israelites to slit their throats and bleed themselves to death).

Do not quickly ignore this second, permissible use of blood because it has a direct bearing on the blood transfusion issue!

Given that using our own blood in our veins does not constitute a violation of the command to abstain from blood; and given further, that the command to abstain from blood says nothing about the source of the blood ("any kind of blood", to wit JWs aren't to be transfused even with their own pre-donated blood); we can logically deduce that using donated blood in our veins would also be permissible.Why?

Transfused blood is used by the body in the same way and for the same purpose as native blood. Thus we can see logically that the command to abstain from blood - really, abstain from the eating of blood - cannot be applied to transfusions since transfusions involve use blood for a permissible purpose - the same purpose we use our own native blood.

Eating blood is different by virtue of the fact that it involves equating the soul with food, which has the effect of undermining blood's spiritual value to atone for the life of the sinner on the altar. For "the soul is worth more than food". (Matthew 6:25b)