if your wife does not know TTATT she will benefit also.
My wife left years ago. It is the in-laws that cause me grief.
i have a genuine question for the jw apologist.
.
what is your scriptural justification for your unquestioning obedience to the governing body and your unwillingness to question their intepretation of scripture?.
if your wife does not know TTATT she will benefit also.
My wife left years ago. It is the in-laws that cause me grief.
the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
Too many points to address and too little time. I am spending too much time on this thread.
(1) I concur that blind unquestioning faith is not a virtue. Quite the opposite, it can be very bad. Unquestioning faith makes us vulnerable to cults etc.
(2) I do not believe that "good" Christians are required not to ask questions. Quite the opposite, the great Christian thinkers through out history asked hard questions. I believe that asking questions of yourself and others is a critical part of maturing as a Christian.
(3) While there may reach a point where endless circular questions can become disruptive, I would generally advise somebody to leave a church or any organization that discourages questions.
(4) Actually, I am a scientist by both formal training and practice. The questions of uncertainty and risk are very practical technical and business issues that I confront daily.
(5) My definition of faith is actually rather general. It is the belief in the unknown. That can range from specific to abstract. When I place my faith in friends and family, I accept that you can never be completely confident what is going on inside someone's head. As an example, I will probably understand the mysteries of God before I understand my wife. [Tongue in cheek.] When I place my faith in God, I am placing my faith in something that I will probably never understand and is sufficiently abstract that it is difficult to test hypothesis in a meaningful fashion.
(6) Why do I believe? Based on my personal experience, it works in my life.
(7) Having said that, I am a member of denomination (Methodist) that allows and even encourages questions. If they did not, my faith would have suffered. If someone told me that it was wrong to ask questions, it would have raised a big red flag.
(8) Examples of the practical and theorectical limitations of science. That could fill a book. Reasonable question. No time.
the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
Not if he can prove his point.
Yes, especially if they start proving their point.
Obviously, you have no experience in the practical mechanisms of how "science" really works. To re-iterate a point made in a previous thread, we worship the religion of science without understanding it.
I am not opposed to science. I just recognize its practical, and even theorecticaly, limitations.
[... we really need a spell checker on this...]
the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
Oubliette,
You have made good points in past posts. This was not one of them.
I prefer seeking knowledge knowing full well I may never get it. Nevertheless, I enjoy the process.
As do I, I just refuse to limit myself to the strict confines of science knowing its limitations in answering the really important questions in life.
Proving my point. The people with the power were the ones that did the firing.
Depending on the church, it can either be a direct vote by the members of the church or a church council that was elected by the church. My apologies if you have issues with "power" resting in the general church population. Then yes, I misunderstood your original statement.
Challenging false or unprovably beliefs or ideas with rational inquiry is not the same as resorting to violence to "settle" your differences. It's disturbing you don't see the difference.
Actually in this case, a known gossip created trouble for a youth and her family. A young inexperienced pastor made a dumb decision and waded into the matter. He inadverently walked all over her and her family, and when I respectfully challenged him on it, he just kept digging a deeper hole. Yes, it makes me mad when good people get hurt. It stops being an academic debate about theology or doctrine, when good people start getting hurt. I make no apologies for making a firm stand.
the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
Its interesting that MrHome and Villagegirl feel the need to change the meaning of faith I described in my OP.
... Neither am I talking about mrhome's pedantic definition of faith that equates faith with everything short of mathematical proof.
Thanks Cofty. I learned a new work today. Pedantic. An intellectual put down. I like it. I think that I will use it more often myself.
To address your point, you state that I changed the meaning of the word "faith" from that described in your OP. Yes and No, I did change from your definition, because I do not believe that your definition is what was intended in the scripture. Your definition of faith appears to require a blind, unquestioning allegiance to an organization that serves the ends of its human leaders at the expense of its followers.
That is certainly not my faith, nor do I believe that that is the faith expected by Jesus.
the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
Oubliette,
- Science: Question everything. No cow is sacred.
- Religion: Question nothing, especially the people in power.
This statement is flawed for several reasons. Addressing them in reverse order.
(1) "Religion: Question nothing, especially the people in power."
(2) "Science: Question everything. No cow is sacred."
the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
Villagegirl... you made an eloquent point. Consider edited out the personal attack before this turns into mud slinging contest.
the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
to commit to and act in accord with teachings on the basis of others' claims and little else
Children do in school all the time. You are placing faith in your teachers. When most of us quote science, we are placing our faith that the scientist did their job correctly. Honestly, how many of us go back and re-verify science?
the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
Crofty,
Faith in the context of the OP is nothing like that at all.
I am not sure that it that far from it.
the unknown writer of the gospel of john put the following words in jesus' mouth, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.".
persuading countless generations that it is a virtue to believe incredible things on insufficient evidence, is one of religion's cleverest tricks.. the more incredible the claim; the more flimsy the evidence; the stronger the belief; the greater the virtue.. this is the exact opposite of how we operate in every other aspect of our lives.. rational people must demand objective evidence for everything they are asked to believe.
"extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence".. leaving the dogmatic claims of the watchtower is only a first step.
Cofty,
Surely the honest and mature way to deal with questions for which we don't have sufficient evidence is to say "I don't know". Pretending to ourselves and others to now things we cannot know is not a virtue.
Yes and no. I would argue that blind, unquestioning faith can be dangerous. As an example, the JW willingness to shun family based on a twisted interpretation of scripture. In this case, they have suspended their natural sense of morality to satisfy blind faith. In such circumstances, acknowledging some uncertainty would obviously be a good thing.
On the other hand, you need a working model in your head of how the universe operates as you face each day. Some of it is based on my own personal experience. Some of it is based on that taught to me by others. Would you have me ignore 3000+ years of wisdom on how to interact with my neighbors and the universe around me?
[Sorry for all the edits.]