Posts by adamah

18

Today I received my first ever birthday gift!

by NVR2L8 in

jw
friends

i received a parcel at work from my daughter and her boyfriend.

it contained a birthday card in the shape of a motorcycle leather jacket and a book on rides you can take using the back roads in my part of the world!

my eyes filled with tears as i was reading the card.

Update on Ark Encounter (YEC theme park): creationist Ken Ham offering junk bonds

by adamah in

seems the ark encounter project is having a hard time raising funds, but ken ham doesn't miss a chance to bash obamacare to help raise funds.

ham is pushing junk bonds to help finance the project:.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/11/ark_encounter_finances_obamacare_sank_ken_ham_s_creationist_theme_park.html.

adamah

Seems the Ark Encounter project is having a hard time raising funds, but Ken Ham doesn't miss a chance to bash Obamacare to help raise funds. Ham is pushing junk bonds to help finance the project:

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/11/ark_encounter_finances_obamacare_sank_ken_ham_s_creationist_theme_park.html

The Sketchy Finances of the Noah’s Ark Theme Park

B uilding a full-scale wooden replica of Noah’s Ark forces one to confront a number of conceptual challenges. How, for instance, did Noah keep the ark from capsizing? How did he keep his wardrobe fresh? And how, during all that rain, did he and the animals avoid getting seasonal affective disorder?

Ken Ham believes he has the answers to all these questions and more—and he needs only $73 million to teach them to the world. As president of Answers in Genesis, Ham has already gifted us with a bizarre series of children’s books and an unforgettable creationist museum. The next stage of his quest to convert America to young-Earth creationism is Ark Encounter, a massive creationist amusement park centered around an alleged life-size reconstruction of Noah’s Ark.

Like most of Ham’s projects, Ark Encounter promises to be a heady combination of hands-on fun, perverse indoctrination, and apocalyptic terror. According to Ham’s fundraising newsletters, the ark itself will contain three levels of “edu-tainment” about Noah’s menagerie—which, as noted in his magnum opus Dinosaurs of Eden, included every species of dinosaur, even T. Rex. (How did they fit? As always, Ham has an answer: “When it came to the very few dinosaur kinds that grew to a very large size, God probably sent ‘teenagers,’ NOT ‘fully grown adults’ on the Ark.”) The ark’s exhibits will likely follow the lead of the Creation Museum, intertwining spectacularly weird animatronics, comically idiotic sophism, and menacing warnings of cultural decay.

(Read the rest of the article at the link provided above.)

25

atheist- Is there anything about born again christians you do like?

by unstopableravens in

a.

adamah

Hmmm, I'd say it's their stated desire to have "child-like humility" that I find most endearing and refreshing....

Matthew 18:

2 And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them 3 and said, “Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

The sweetener is knowing that it's all contrived and incentivized, so they're only likely putting on a false humility act to NOT go to Hell, but to win the Grand prize, thinking they're going to be "the greatest in Heaven"!

In small doses, I suppose false humility is better than no humility (esp if the person hasn't actually accomplished anything worthy of praise or recognition in their lives).

8

Attempt to get your mind around this-The Universe is just a hologram

by fulltimestudent in

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/physicists-discover-clearest-evidence-yet-that-the-universe-is-a-hologram-9000748.html.

physicists discover 'clearest evidence yet' that the universe is a hologram.

latest calculations chime with 1997 theory that reality is only perceived as 3d and is actually a 2d projection on the boundary of the universe.

adamah

ThisFellowCheap said-

Maybe the whole universe thing is just somebody's dream afterall! . Or some super extra-terrestrials PS4 game, who knows!!

Maybe, but how does it change anything, even if it WERE so?

You still need to feed yourself and family, etc.

Adam

340

Fallacies about Faith

by tec in

jw
friends

peace to you!.

this thread is about false things (some) atheists think theists believe.

this is not a thread about false things that atheists think about theists.

adamah

Jgnat said-

We do have an adversarial justice system where both sides prepare their best argument and the most persuasive wins. That may not always be just and it is rarely swift.

True, and what counts to many lawyers is not seeing that justice is delivered, but winning the case, which often means that their client gets off scot-free and justice ISN'T delivered. A lawyer pleads on behalf of guilty individuals, and seeks to avoid justice.

But the point is, God is claimed to offer 'perfect' justice AND 'perfect' mercy AND 'perfect' retribution for lawless ones and perfect this and that, etc..... Just don't think about it too hard!

340

Fallacies about Faith

by tec in

jw
friends

peace to you!.

this thread is about false things (some) atheists think theists believe.

this is not a thread about false things that atheists think about theists.

adamah

BOTR said-

Faith is not a synonym for empirical knowledge. Some atheists here love assumptions that are not valid.

Uh, no kidding? Now, show me where an atheist in this thread suggested it WAS?

It's clear you're confusing Qcmbr's summary of TEC's claim for Qcmbr's position; TEC has asserted that faith can be based on experiential evidence, even above, where she said this:

TEC said- I suspect that you are still unable to understand that faith IS based upon evidence. Faith is based upon what is heard.

In TEC's case, she claims that hearing the voice of Jesus is the basis of faith; hearing voices and experiencing visions in the Bible are considered as 'signs', and hence are related to performing miracles which are similarly called 'signs' (eg Saul's conversion after experiencing a vision of Jesus and hearing his voice telling him to stop persecuting Xians, or Jesus' feeding the crowds with bread and fish). The Bible indicates that signs DON'T build faith, which is why Jesus justified NOT performing miracles, at times.

TEC claims that her experiencing hearing the voice of Jesus build her faith, but that claim suggests TEC either doesn't understand the Bible's definition of 'faith', or seemingly doesn't feel the need to confine herself to the Bible's definition.

She doesn't understand that per the Bible, perceptible experiences contribute to belief via knowledge (gnosis), whereas faith supports belief in the absence of ANY perceptible evidence, eg the Bible says that believers need to ASK for faith as a gift from God.

TEC said- Truth is truth... regardless of if you and others want to label some as a 'wisdom saying'... or some about His coming Kingdom.

Holy Hades, TEC: are you still struggling with the Law of Identity (which most people learned as children), since you seemingly feel the need to constantly confirm it?

In logic, the law of identity is the first of the three classical laws of thought. It states that: “each thing is the same with itself and different from another”: “A is A and not ~A”. By this it is meant that each thing (be it a universal or a particular) is composed of its own unique set of characteristic qualities or features, which the ancient Greeks called its essence.

Worse, you seem to think it actually somehow constitutes a valid argument, when anyone can clearly see it's patently obvious, a law of identity, which arguably only constitutes an attempt at circular logic.

So please promise me that next time you feel the urge to repeat silly meaningless phrases like, "the truth is the truth", you'll catch yourself and refrain, rather than simply repeating an utterly unnecessary statement that only fills dead air, since YES, we all KNOW that things ARE in fact what they ARE: a dog is a dog, a car is a car, a house is a house, etc. That's by way of agreement, which is accepted.

However, I asked for an example of a TRUTH offered by Jesus.

Darlin', you are not HEARING what I said, or at least you are reading "truth is truth"... and NOT reading the rest of what I wrote, and so are missing the point. Truth is truth... regardless of what category you place it under: wisdom truth, about the Kingdom truth, about God truth, about science truth, etc. Different categories, but all truth. Same as... a dog is a dog, regardless of the breed. Same as... a car is a car, regardless of the make.

Do you understand my meaning a little better now?

TEC, I'm hearing you loud and clear, just as I always have, all along.

That's exactly WHY I carefully-defined and requested a VERY SPECIFIC example of "truth" upfront, since you continue to claim that Jesus IS "truth".

Now you seemingly want to back-pedal, since you seemingly know you cannot meet that requested burden of proof.

Should I repeat my request (slightly-reworded), to give you another shot at it?

Adam asked:

Give ONE example of a "truth" spoken of by Jesus?

I don't mean a generic WISDOM saying, or a reference to the promise of the Kingdom of God, etc, but a useful CONCRETE truth that was later verified by man to be a FACT (knowledge), i.e. something spoken by Jesus which advanced the general knowledge of mankind, and which suggested Jesus enjoyed the Divine vantage point which could ONLY result from his association in Heaven with God, the Intelligent Designer.

IN FACT, I can provide plenty of examples from the Bible which indicates the EXACT OPPOSITE: Jesus didn't know even BASIC FACTS that are now commonly accepted as "truths".

Adam

340

Fallacies about Faith

by tec in

jw
friends

peace to you!.

this thread is about false things (some) atheists think theists believe.

this is not a thread about false things that atheists think about theists.

adamah

BOTR said- I never suggested it was about me. Society runs without either one of us. No one deserves vomit. It is such an ugly statement.

LOL! It's an expression taken from the OT? Is it any less offensive there, or are you engaging in more "special pleading"?

BOTR said-

(non-sequiturial stream of consciousness comments removed)

Agressively shoving atheism down people's throats is not going to stop one person from joining the Witnesses. Calling people names is not instructive. Educating people with critical thinking skills is more likely to achieve results. You are waging a military campaign here.

You know what ELSE isn't going to "help"? Straw-manning others by accusing them of calling others names (point it out, IF you can: you cannot, as I understand it's silly to call anyone names vs directly challenging the ideas they present).

You know what ELSE isn't going to help?

Labeling others as "zealots", or "militant atheists" who "shove atheism down believers throats" with "military campaigns", etc. That's SUCH a tired hackneyed Xian stereotype of atheists, that you should be ashamed to repeat it.

Simply put, you're engaging in 'ad hominem' attacks, and you of ALL people should know better than to attack the other person, rather than to challenge their IDEAS (and unfortunately, many people take their beliefs being challenged as a personal attack, since their ego is so entertwined with their beliefs they cannot discern where their beliefs end and they begin, AKA complete loss of a sense of internal boundaries).

BOTR, you DO realize that threads aren't on any 'required reading' list, and no one forces you to read (much less post) on threads which are trying to encourage "critical thinking", right? If you stopped and thought about it, you'd realize that's EXACTLY what myself and others (Cofty, OTWO, Qcmbr, etc) are trying to encourage.

BOTR said- We live in a diverse society. WOW- I thought I hated the Witnesses. If individual Witnesses were exposed to better public schools, I believe we would have fewer Witnesses. The WTBTS is very different, IMO. It deliberately misconstrues and lies.

BOTR, you're straw-manning the WT now, creating a phantom bogeyman; that is rarely helpful, and it actually conflicts with the more-mundane depiction offered by Ray Franz in his book, 'Crisis of Conscience'.

You seemingly believe there are "evul" (sic) people on the GB who are deliberately lying; instead, Ray Franz describes utterly mundane organizational dynamics at play, where most of the people are conformists ('yes men') who are afriad to speak their real opinions so they 'go with the flow', 'go along to get along'. He describes middle-level bureaucrats who are mostly sheep, with a few senior board members who have played the GB game long enough to actually set the agenda to get things done. The current organizational structure is designed to prevent a megalomaniacal president to take control (as in the past), since the GB theoretically has to reach a consensus now (which ironically is reached by vote, not 'Holy Spirit').

BOTR said- Of course, you are so much smarter and swift-footed than anyone else on this forum. It is hard for me to take you seriously. Pound. Pound. Pound. Autocrats dont't travel well, whether they are fundamentalists or atheists. We are human. I imagine I have done for my community, large and small, than you. Civility is good. I can tell you one human trait. People are more likely to listen to a civil person than a fist pounding zealot, imposing their will.

Flip-flop much?

Look, if you find reading my or anyone else's posts is triggering psychological stress, or making you think too much for your own comfort, then again, you're not required to read. Myself or anyone else cannot FORCE you to think, or MAKE you be reasonable. No one should HAVE to force you against your will to rely on reason and logic: that should be self-evident (esp for anyone who went to law school).

BOTR said- Perhaps something extraordinary happened to you with the Witnesses. This is a discussion forum. It would be boring if we all agreed.

Seriously, this is not about you or I.

From here on out, I will try to side-step your OT ramblings, since they have NOTHING to do with the topic at hand: in fact, your posts could be condensed down into a single phrase: "tone trolling" (a not-uncommonly encountered strategy used by theists against atheists to get them to shut up, since they cannot defeat their arguments with any evidence or logic).

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tone_troll

A tone troll is someone who, in the course of a debate, dismisses an opponent's argument based on perceived crassness, hysteria, or anger. [1] It's a particularly slimy form of ad hominem attack beloved of Very Serious People, and its sliminess comes of it being quite commonly deployed against opponents lower on the privilege ladder.

Present an argument based on evidence, and we can proceed. But spare us the incessant 'tone trolling', as I for one won't be biting, but ignoring it.

FHN said-

So justice can be merciful.

Yeah, that's "moving goalposts", i.e. changing your position to something completely different than the original.

You changed the words to "can be", and dropped the superfluous "perfect" adjectives, thus entirely changing the meaning of the statement to something more reasonable. In fact, I would completely agree with that, since sure, justice can be merciful; however, that wasn't the claim you originally objected to:

Cofty said- God cannot be perfectly just and perfectly merciful.

As I explained on pg 7:

'Perfect justice' implies rendering punishment in accord with prescribed legal procedure, with no room for lenience; 'perfect mercy' requires showing lenience from justice, so the two are fundamentally at odds.

The contradictory nature depends on what is actually meant by the adjective "perfect": it's not contradictory, if it's only meant to imply that a "perfect balance" can be struck between justice and mercy. But on their own, 'perfect justice' and 'perfect mercy' are fundamentally incompatible.

I implied that the adjective "perfect" is a 'weasel word', since 'perfect' is a matter of opinion, rendering the saying as meaningless fluff (more "Deepity"). It's absolutely meaningless in a World where the freedom to have a differing opinions exists (which may not apply when living under God's "perfect" theocracy).

Here's a pictorial depiction which says it all, with a statue named "Justice tempered by Mercy" (located in the Cumberland School of Law). The statue reflects the somewhat biasing influence existing between the two traits, since the blindfolded "Lady Justice" holds the 'scales of justice' which are supposed to balance the claims, based on the merits of the evidence; Lady Mercy is seen begging for leniency on behalf of the accused in the case, thus biasing the results away from "perfect justice"):

But as I say, it's not my argument of first-choice to demonstrate the contradictory claims for God found in the Bible, since the use of 'weasel words' renders it as a 'flipper'; there's easier examples to point to in the Bible of contradictory claims made for the traits of God.

Oh, and here's an in-depth analysis of the antagonistic nature of justice and mercy, if you prefer reading a more in-depth explanation (which applies all the moreso when one claims "perfect" justice and "perfect" mercy are possible):

http://new.exchristian.net/2012/08/why-mercy-and-justice-contradict-each.html

Adam

14

The Right Religion Demonstrates True Faith In Jesus Christ

by pronomono in

the week of december 9th, i have the talk "the right religion demonstrates true faith in jesus christ" base on the reasoning book rs p329.

the following is the suggested material.. istruefaithinjesuschristbeingdemonstrated?

this involves appreciation of the value of the sacrifice of jesus human life and of his position today as heavenly king.

adamah

Pronomo said- Thanks to you all, I nailed it, and the School Overseer even said it was great and that he was having to nitpick to find something to counsel me on.

The problem is, JWs don't do subtle or read sub-text. And if the SO gave you praise, it means you failed in preaching TTATT, since the SO likely was one of the few paying close attention (the rest of the audience were daydreaming, thinking about what they're going to do after meeting, etc, just like you do when you're sitting in the audience).

Pronomo said- I don't want to be hypocritical by recommending this as what faith in Jesus involves, epecially when I know it to be wrong.

If you don't want to be hypocritical, a GREAT PLACE to start would be to quit!

I understand you want to alleviate a guilty conscience for being a JW who repeats the BS propaganda while knowing TTATT, but YOU are going to have to put your money where your mouth is and vote with your feet, fleeing to save yourself and others.

Thousands of others before you have done so, and you can, too, but ONLY if you manage to work up the courage to vote with your feet.

Adam

7

Good News! Electricity to go WIRELESS!

by abiather in

jw
friends

the days of wires powering electronic devices could soon be at an end, with the development of a new system that will allow laptops, mobile phones and televisions to be left unplugged in the home while being recharged.

the new technology exploits a recent breakthrough in physics, according to the us company witricity.

it has shown that it can send electricity wirelessly through the air and can switch on a light bulb or keep a computer running.

adamah

Yeah, this is hardly new or a "breakthrough"? Wireless charging has been pretty common in the States for what, a decade or two?

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2013/10/wireless-charging-pad-reviews/index.htm

I suspect the "breakthrough" here is the idea of tuning the magnets (resonant frequency) deal that allows for greater efficiency.

The problem with power transmission via induction is that by definition, it's very inefficent ('lossy'), and hence not suitable for power transmission for anything but small hand-held electronic devices in the home which don't have large power requirements while in use and/or infrequent duty cycles (a toothbrush is a good example: it's used once or twice a day for 4 minutes at a time).

Inductive chargers aren't likely going to win any Energy Star energy-efficiency labels, so it's a step in the wrong direction as far as using up resources due to the 'gee whiz' factor and a desire to get rid of one cord (which you'll still need for use when away from home).

57

Are Evolution & Morality Mutually Exclusive?

by shadow in

there are a couple of long threads going right now about evolution & abortion.. .

if evolution were true, how could there be any basis for morality?.

adamah

Oh Gawd said-

The underlying theme to Jefferson's point is that no society can exist without laws, but it's easier to get people to obey the laws if they think some higher power will send them to Hell or worse.

Yeah, I can see that being perhaps a valid argument before Darwin, but we're living in 2013 where atheism (blasphemy) is NOT considered a criminal offense, and God's non-existence is the worst-kept 'secret' out there.

Being that studies have shown a much lower rate of atheists vs theists in prison, I can't imagine the deterrence value of a fear of Hell is compelling, since sociopaths and murderers aren't deterred by a fear of God (esp if they think they can repent at the last minute before execution and go to heaven, as Xian convert Jeffrey Dahmer apparently had a conversion in prison before his execution).