In most churches, if you are good you go to heaven, if you are not....you go to hell....
Legacy, you probably shouldn't pay too much attention to what the Watchtower tells you those churches teach.
it's obvious the bible is very clear on a actual hell of fire.
"cursed into the eternal fire with the devil and his angels", rev.20:15.
"lake of fire", rev.21:8 "fire and brimstone".
In most churches, if you are good you go to heaven, if you are not....you go to hell....
Legacy, you probably shouldn't pay too much attention to what the Watchtower tells you those churches teach.
has anyone offered the theory that wts membership in the un was fulfilling matt.
24:15, and that consequently the fds began to turn into the evil slave?.
I think I've heard this one before but it seems a little far fetched to me.
even tho i grew up in the org, so much that once seemed normal behavior now seems so bizarre and even cruel.
i have run into at least 3 people from our old cong since the memorial (i didnt attend) anyhow i have noticed how each time they go out of their way to say hello and flash me a big bright smile, only to immediately avert their eyes and end any possible commitment to a conversation.
i dont really care as i dont have anything to say to them anyhow.
If xanthippe had reacted violently the elder would have claimed persecution and used it as an example of demonic apostates forevermore. He'd have probably got a convention part out of it.
i've read a little bit of work from the field of evolutionary psychology, but nearly all of this stuff comes across as pseudo-scientific bs to me.
much of this stuff just seems to me to be a case of preferring a particular human behaviour over another one, and then saying that this is what nature intended with a story about how it 'evolved'.
a lot of evolutionary psychologists also seem to use evolutionary psychology as cover for their misogyny or racism.. i think most of our behaviours are socialised rather than genetic.. i am hardly an expert here however so could, of course, be completely wrong.
Oubliette, I agree, thanks.
Bohm, I admitted in my op I didn't know much about the field, which is why I asked the question, I don't think I had a bias. Thanks for your post.
Some incident in a lift at a conference led to a huge online battle that became farcical.
I think I found this story, couldn't work out the fuss at all, but seems old news now.
it's obvious the bible is very clear on a actual hell of fire.
"cursed into the eternal fire with the devil and his angels", rev.20:15.
"lake of fire", rev.21:8 "fire and brimstone".
Can there really be paradise whilst there are people suffering outside?
New hope and happiness, I did not understand your post at all, could you clarify?
christianity (including jehovahs witnesses) is the rejection of christ.
take one of the most important teachings of jesus:.
1) he says one can even love his enemies and do good to them, and can tolerate anything (luke 6:27-32).
If your interpretation of Jesus way is so simple why do you keep sinning ExWTslave?
i've read a little bit of work from the field of evolutionary psychology, but nearly all of this stuff comes across as pseudo-scientific bs to me.
much of this stuff just seems to me to be a case of preferring a particular human behaviour over another one, and then saying that this is what nature intended with a story about how it 'evolved'.
a lot of evolutionary psychologists also seem to use evolutionary psychology as cover for their misogyny or racism.. i think most of our behaviours are socialised rather than genetic.. i am hardly an expert here however so could, of course, be completely wrong.
Here are some articles that I think demonstrate some of the problems with evolutionary psychology:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/may/18/satoshi-kanazawa-black-women-psychology-today
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2011/01/darwins_rape_whistle.html
It would be unfair to tar all evolutionary psychologists with the same brush of course, but as a field it does seem to attract people who want to claim scientific support for their bigotry, unfortunately.
true believers, whether christian, muslim or whatever, want to convert you, they want you to believe what they do, and they're willing to go to extremes to make it happen.
atheists don't really care what you believe, and don't go out of their way to convert someone.. http://ow.ly/vn1jz an example of what believers in power do to suppress any difference in thought.
http://ow.ly/vraeo an example of why believers want to suppress different ideas (because they can't win in a fair fight, that's why).
Cofty, I think you misunderstood me. All I did was point out that non theists were doing most (not all) of the complaining about tone on this thread in response to the complaints about whiny theists. I never said I agreed with their comments, I actually defended the board's atheists in my post 961 on this thread.
true believers, whether christian, muslim or whatever, want to convert you, they want you to believe what they do, and they're willing to go to extremes to make it happen.
atheists don't really care what you believe, and don't go out of their way to convert someone.. http://ow.ly/vn1jz an example of what believers in power do to suppress any difference in thought.
http://ow.ly/vraeo an example of why believers want to suppress different ideas (because they can't win in a fair fight, that's why).
Viviane, why so dismissive? apognophos, frazzled, xanthippe, talesin and sammie were all non-theists who criticised the tone of some atheists on this thread.
i've read a little bit of work from the field of evolutionary psychology, but nearly all of this stuff comes across as pseudo-scientific bs to me.
much of this stuff just seems to me to be a case of preferring a particular human behaviour over another one, and then saying that this is what nature intended with a story about how it 'evolved'.
a lot of evolutionary psychologists also seem to use evolutionary psychology as cover for their misogyny or racism.. i think most of our behaviours are socialised rather than genetic.. i am hardly an expert here however so could, of course, be completely wrong.
DS, I have discovered that the biologist PZ Myers is also skeptical of evolutionary psychology: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/category/bad-science/evolutionary-psychology/ so I am not yet convinced that I have to accept evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology as a package deal, though of course I recognise that our brains were subject to evolutionary processes as well.
Cofty, thanks for your response, I was hoping you would contribute to this thread, I will try to come back with some examples for you tomorrow.