Thanks All, good stuff so far.
The "faithful slave" is infallible, period.
I think if you ask them, they don't believe this. They believe that they are the keepers of the current understanding of truth, but subject to error. THEY are responsible to be as truthful as possible, YOU are responsible to listen to THEM. (according to JW logic)
JWs believe that there is one true god Jehovah, but also believe that Jesus is a god, and that Jesus is not Jehovah.
I'm not sure I see the argument here. There are different kinds of "god" in their minds (and in most people's I've dealt with) and they believe Jesus is one of those lesser-deities. No contradiction as far as they are concerned.
1. Is the Watchtower inspired? (obvious answer is no)
2. Is the Bible inspired? (obvious answer yes)
3. Why are people removed who don't fully agree with the Watchtower but fully believe the Bible?
If you said that to them, they would likely say "it isn't in the Bible", now if you just whacked with the blood thing, you can say, "well neither is the ban on blood transfusions".
Or better yet, neither is the ban on "transplants", since they forbade that at one time, but no longer. The Bible didn't change. This is a sort of good point, but I don't see it jarring a JW.
INFINITY is a concept and not an actually existing something. It is a mental construct with a potential and ONLY that. That is why you can play with it and watch it recede into the distance, yet, cannot get your mind around it in actuality. A potential cannot ever be an actual. (Why? Because an actual is never a potential, dummy!)
Not that I understand, but I do more or less agree. Is infinity a description of what isn't? If there's a boundary, then there is. If there isn't a boundary, then it's infinite.
(If my room has two light bulbs and yours only has one, is my room more dark when I turn them out, or is yours?)
But the illustration stands as a way to show that you can hold a belief that forces you to inadvertantly hold another belief that at first blush you would think is wrong.
If you just stop for a moment and think about it clearly----if you don't KNOW something and have no evidence for it--yet INSIST it is true---what you are doing is idiotic and childish. Calling it "faith" doesn't improve what it is: stubborn and irrational preference for what cannot be proved.
But they HAVE evidence. I don't think it's very good evidence, and we could dismantle it point by point if allowed to, but they do have evidence. But faith is belief WITHOUT evidence. Hmmmm...
Children often have trouble identifying how things work and assign wild and fantastic "reasons" for ordinary things. They may hide under the covers for fear a monster is in the closet and assume the money under their pillow came from a tooth fairy. This may be cute and silly, but, it is mystical thought which is the opposite of rational thought.
This sort of thinking leads children to climb under their beds to escape a fire, which results in firefighters not being able to find them, thus ensuring that they DON'T escape the fire. Faith in adults serves a similar insidious purpose, allowing them to hide under the bed of prayer and scripture study. This way they never have to make the uncomfortable jump out the window of reason.
Have any of the ideas put forth so far struck anyone as genuinely "Aha!"-ish? I don't think I've seen one yet, but I'm not criticizing since I don't have one either. I don't doubt that one exists, though. I suppose I have "faith". :-)