BTTP
Someon'e gotta have the July KM!!
can someone give me the title of an article on the front of this month's km?
i need it for, um, something.
BTTP
Someon'e gotta have the July KM!!
for those of you who believe in god, and i know this may sound like a silly question, but what was he doing before he created jesus, the first thing he ever made.
we're talking an eternity here.
zillions upon zillions of years.
Now what do you think would be a better question than the one you asked?
Perhaps "Why do humans seem to have this uncontrollable urge to believe in supernatural beings?"
i got the first one, and thought it was pretty good.
hell, i even understood mulholand drive.
but the matrix sequel is just bullcrap.
Hell, I even understood Mulholand drive.
How in the world you understood that movie I will never know. I've seen it twice and I'm stumped!
In any case, here's my take on the Matrix. The architect's first attempt at designing a Matrix was a failure. Yes, it was perfect in design but humans did not accept this utopian world. So the architect redesigned the matrix so that it included human's true past: all of the wars, problems, etc. This resulted in a matrix which produced a world that we would recognize as "normal."
Unfortunately, the way he programmed the matrix made it inevitable that some would recognize the matrix for what it is and "leave." The refugees would collect in the city Zion. Ultimately Zion would be distroyed. After Zion's destruction, a small group would be chosen to rebuild Zion and start the process over. This cycle has happened 5 or 6 times according to the architect.
What is also weird is that Agent Smith was able to "leave" the Matrix. Also, how was Neo able to stop those sentinels while outside of the Matrix? His "special powers" should only work inside the Matrix. My guess is that Zion and everything that appears to be outside the Matrix is actually still in the Matrix. It is just a place designed to hold people that discovered the Matrix and wanted out. Maybe there's a way to get out of the Matrix that contains Zion?
Very odd, yes, but I think it will be fully revealed in the next movie.
Please tell me your take on Mulholland Drive.
.
are the jws to be counted as a "christian religion?
bradley
Yes, of course they are Christian. I think any religion that believes in Christ can be considered Christian.
I don't agree with the "they're false Christians" viewpoint. Each Christian religion considers all others to be false. It's such a joke. There probably isn't a single "Christian" religion today that would be familiar to the Christians that lived in the first couple centuries after Christ supposedly lived.
i spoke to my father this afternoon and received some bad news.
the daughter of a woman who was one of my childhood friends at the kh died today from leukemia.
she was 16 years old.
Truly disgusting... the old guys in the GB have 6 million people's lives in the palm of their hand.
What I hope for is that the WTS will eventually reverse their stand on blood, just for the sake of those still trapped in the org. They almost made a big change, but reverted according to this site:
http://www.watchtowerinformationservice.org/bloodcard.htm
For a while there it looked like non-allogeneic blood transfusions were going to be ok!
can someone give me the title of an article on the front of this month's km?
i need it for, um, something.
Can someone give me the title of an article on the front of this month's KM? I need it for, um, something.
i finally decided after being here for over two years now, that i would finally get down in writing my jw history.
i've posted it in my new profile, but since there are so many new people here i thought i'd go ahead and post it too.
i do this to encourage you to pen your jw history.
Billygoat, that was very touching. Thanks so much for sharing!!
for those of you who believe in god, and i know this may sound like a silly question, but what was he doing before he created jesus, the first thing he ever made.
we're talking an eternity here.
zillions upon zillions of years.
I personally find it more believable to accept that the working universe was designed and created by a purposeful intelligence, who exists outside of space and time, and is therefore not bound by their constraints.
Is that not a bit convenient? God is not bound by the constraints of our universe... is that how you rationalize God (who is infinitely complex) not ever having a beginning and never being created? If you can argue that about god, why not consider something else having existed before the laws of space and time were created moments after the big bang?
Such a position explains in a much more satisfying manner the very existence of matter, energy, and the physical laws that regulate their behavior.
Not at all, IMO. You are ignoring the even more difficult question about where God came from. I repeat that if God didn't need a creator, then why did our even simpler universe demand it? God is by definition superior and more complex than our universe which you say demands a creator.
If what existed from eternity was merely, say, subatomic particles (setting aside for a moment why subatomic particles should exist at all), then what impetus would there have been for them ever to have assembled themselves into anything other than subatomic particles?
Laws of physics cause particles to interact. Other physical laws, such as gravity, cause particles to collect and form heavier and heavier elements. The laws of physics in our universe were created moments after the big bang, but there is no reason to conclude that before the big bang other physical laws did not exist at all.
Under your theory, one must ask, why? at every step in the process, from the very existence of matter itself, through every stage in its development into a viable universe. That's why I find option #1 more appealing. If we accept the concept of intelligent design in the universe, we don't need a rationale for every step of the process - we can understand that the universe came to be a certain way because that's the way that the One who designed it wanted it to be and made it so.
By believing option 1, you are simply putting your head in the sand and deciding you'd rather not think about it. Saying "God did it" only pushes the real problem out further: who created God? Concluding that "God exists outside of our universe and is not bound by its laws" is a convenient cop out.
In effect you make your position much more difficult. Now instead of trying to explain where the universe comes from, you have to explain where an even more complex and even more impressive being came from. Perhaps it is too difficult so people just come to the convenient conclusion that he didn't need creation. Oh well...
i just got back from my convention yesterday evening.
i'll be trying to catch up on the posts as time allows, but there is a very large volume; so if i miss any personal replies, please forgive me.. this was my first convention since i became mentally free, and it was just painful to sit through.
i used to be one of those dubs who actually enjoyed conventions.
Excellent summary... thank you for taking the time! I'm so glad I didn't have to sit through it this year.
for those of you who believe in god, and i know this may sound like a silly question, but what was he doing before he created jesus, the first thing he ever made.
we're talking an eternity here.
zillions upon zillions of years.
So of the two options, to many of us, #1 seems much more plausible than #2, because it at least posits that some intelligence directed things, and not that things started to happen on their own for no reason.
Interesting, but we have examples of things growing in complexity with no intelligence "guiding" them. A snowflake or any other crystal seems to grow with complexity as it forms.
Also, are you not simply pushing the "problem" farther away? How do you still dismiss that god had no creator? Or do you just not worry about it at that point?