drwtsn32

Joined

• started 51 topics
• posted 6,436 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by drwtsn32

• 
  63

  I had a discussion with a JW sister today about miscarriage and the new WT

  by BonaFide in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  so this morning was the public talk and wt study.

  after, we did our usual and went to eat.

  the group was mixed ages.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  drwtsn32

  reniaa,

  you are missing our point. Our issue is not that you have leaders; it's that you have leaders that claim to be God's only channel of communication.
• 
  63

  I had a discussion with a JW sister today about miscarriage and the new WT

  by BonaFide in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  so this morning was the public talk and wt study.

  after, we did our usual and went to eat.

  the group was mixed ages.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  drwtsn32

  forgive me but I don't see perfection as a requirement of God's channel?

  Oh, so you can openly question any current teaching of the 'faithful slave', huh? You can come to a different understanding than them, since they're just imperfect, regular men..nothing more?

  Of course you can't. Because the 'current teaching' of the 'faithful slave' is viewed exactly as if God himself spoke it to the rank and file. You're right, the bible doesn't teach this type of behavior. It is definitely not a biblical teaching. It is a trait common among cults, however.
• 
  12

  2009 Global Peace Index: atheist nations are more peaceful

  by behemot in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  interesting .... http://mwcnews.net/content/view/31030&itemid=1.

  behemot.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  drwtsn32

  When you fish stats to find something that confirms what you already believe, you will tend to find it.

  You're proving your own point, aren't you? You have "no doubt" that other factors "map more strongly." Why don't you go fish the stats and see if you can find something that has a stronger correlation.
• 
  63

  I had a discussion with a JW sister today about miscarriage and the new WT

  by BonaFide in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  so this morning was the public talk and wt study.

  after, we did our usual and went to eat.

  the group was mixed ages.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  drwtsn32

  Reniaa,

  Here you go again with your rationalization.

  The "faithful slave" claims to be God's only channel of communication. What they print is taken as gospel and an ultimate authority by the rank and file. It's as good as God speaking directly to you. But when the "faithful slave" makes a mistake (which is often), excuses like "they're just imperfect men" or "the light gets brighter" are brought up.

  They can't have it both ways. If they are God's channel, they shouldn't be making mistakes. If they are making mistakes, they aren't God's channel.
• 
  11

  I was an atheist before I became one of JW's, now I'm an agnostic...

  by gubberningbody in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i know that people here have gone on and joined other religious groups for community.. if that makes them happy, then fine.. it wouldn't make me happy, because i don't care about religious community.. i have yet to find any religious group of people who are willing to challenge, examine, evaluate and publish in a kind-of "peer-reviewed" fashion what they believe, why they believe it, what's potentially wrong about the various beliefs and what would constitute a necessary and sufficient evidence for rejecting or accepting a given belief.. everything should be on the table for questioning or rejecting.. it's been my experience that most people and groups get together to homogenize and reject, and further that these do so in an illegitimate and morally self-inconsistent manner.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  drwtsn32

  The usage of the term suggests that the person has taken up an unassailable position, and that he or she is not open to discussion.

  Perhaps some are this way, but certainly not all atheists. I know in my case I am open to discussion. I will hear what others feel are evidence for their deity. Also my position is open to change if objective evidence is presented.

  What then follows is an affirmation of your suspicions as to the rigid mindset, with a flippant, emotional snarl "Why should I have to prove X? The default position is X."

  I understand what you're saying here. It is certainly the case that some atheists or theists are "touchy" and may "snarl" when confronted about their beliefs. But the response is not unreasonable. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." The default position should be disbelief until objective evidence is presented. This approach in itself does not make someone closed-minded.

  But yes, we can find intellectually lazy people on any side of an issue.
• 
  11

  I was an atheist before I became one of JW's, now I'm an agnostic...

  by gubberningbody in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i know that people here have gone on and joined other religious groups for community.. if that makes them happy, then fine.. it wouldn't make me happy, because i don't care about religious community.. i have yet to find any religious group of people who are willing to challenge, examine, evaluate and publish in a kind-of "peer-reviewed" fashion what they believe, why they believe it, what's potentially wrong about the various beliefs and what would constitute a necessary and sufficient evidence for rejecting or accepting a given belief.. everything should be on the table for questioning or rejecting.. it's been my experience that most people and groups get together to homogenize and reject, and further that these do so in an illegitimate and morally self-inconsistent manner.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  drwtsn32

  I define an atheist as a person who claims to have definitive knowledge of the non-existence/possibilities of these entities.
  
  I define an agnostic as one who is quite certain for the moment that he/she lacks the ability to acquire definitive knowledge of the existence/non-existence of such beings.

  By those defintions most who claim to be atheist should call themselves agnostic.

  I completely agree with you that it is not possible to have proof of the non-existence of any gods. In my experience, however, most atheists (myself included) do not feel they have such evidence.

  Strong atheism = gnostic atheism = atheism how you define it.

  Weak atheism = agnostic atheism = atheism how I define it.

  I agree with others who believe atheism/theism and agnostic/gnostic are two dimensions of belief, and are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, both words help define the exact nature of belief:

  The reason I asked how you define those words is because there are several viewpoints on what those words actually mean. Without asking someone to clarify, we can easily misunderstand their position.
• 
  72

  Christians risk rejection and discrimination for their faith in Britain.

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the first poll of britain's churchgoers, carried out for the sunday telegraph, found that thousands of them believe they are being turned down for promotion because of their faith.. one in five said that they had faced opposition at work because of their beliefs.. more than half of them revealed that they had suffered some form of persecution for being a christian.. the findings suggest a growing hostility towards religion in this country, which has been highlighted by a series of clashes between churchgoers and their employers.. and so on.

  more at the link.. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/5413311/christians-risk-rejection-and-discrimination-for-their-faith-a-study-claims.html.

  silver lining: there are still christians in gb!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  drwtsn32

  What amazes me more is that the abortionists here are more scandalized by a graphic display of this abhorrent practice than they are by the practice itself--which is what creates these horrible images.

  I think it's ok for everyone to take a shit -- doesn't mean I want to see pictures of it.
• 
  72

  Christians risk rejection and discrimination for their faith in Britain.

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the first poll of britain's churchgoers, carried out for the sunday telegraph, found that thousands of them believe they are being turned down for promotion because of their faith.. one in five said that they had faced opposition at work because of their beliefs.. more than half of them revealed that they had suffered some form of persecution for being a christian.. the findings suggest a growing hostility towards religion in this country, which has been highlighted by a series of clashes between churchgoers and their employers.. and so on.

  more at the link.. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/5413311/christians-risk-rejection-and-discrimination-for-their-faith-a-study-claims.html.

  silver lining: there are still christians in gb!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  drwtsn32

  
• 
  11

  I was an atheist before I became one of JW's, now I'm an agnostic...

  by gubberningbody in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i know that people here have gone on and joined other religious groups for community.. if that makes them happy, then fine.. it wouldn't make me happy, because i don't care about religious community.. i have yet to find any religious group of people who are willing to challenge, examine, evaluate and publish in a kind-of "peer-reviewed" fashion what they believe, why they believe it, what's potentially wrong about the various beliefs and what would constitute a necessary and sufficient evidence for rejecting or accepting a given belief.. everything should be on the table for questioning or rejecting.. it's been my experience that most people and groups get together to homogenize and reject, and further that these do so in an illegitimate and morally self-inconsistent manner.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  drwtsn32

  Everything should be on the table for questioning or rejecting.

  Absolutely. No sacred cows.

  How do you define atheist and agnostic?
• 
  151

  God, Morals, and Atheists

  by UnDisfellowshipped in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  my version of the "moral argument for god": .

  (i have derived the following arguments after studying c.s.

  lewis', norman geisler's, and victor reppert's arguments, and i want to give credit where credit is due).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  drwtsn32

  Here we go....

  How can you theists claim your view of reality is any better than ours?