I hate to break this to you Perry but these are not facts they are opinions and theory.
Happy Guy,
I thought atheists only dealt in facts. Thanks for clearing that up.
FRAUD at the proper time: Watchtower swindle and GB nonsense
by Terry 30 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Perry
-
Nathan Natas
The subject of SANTONINE caught my fancy, so I thought I'd try to find out a bit more about what it is/was.
Google came through, as always!
SANTONINE is an alkaloid derived from the herb Atemesia pauciflora, and has been used as an antithelminthic (worming agent).
I especially enjoyed this: "Dose, from one-fourth to two grains... Five grains [about 324 mg] of santonine given to a child caused pain in the stomach, convulsions, insensibility and death..." see: http://www.henriettesherbal.com/eclectic/ellingwood/artemisia-pauc.html [1919]
This HAD to be C. J. "Crackpot" Woodworth at work again!
-
agonus
"Such simple math (i.e. the sheer amount of belief systems) should humble the most ardent theist. Believe as you will, but don't argue to strongly for what at best can be argued to a draw, due to the same amount of evidence that is in existence for all belief systems in the world."
Don't be so quick to write ALL of them off though... there are currents running through many major belief systems that are strikingly similar (i.e. cration myths) - so much so that coincidence doesn't seem to do them justice. SOMETHING happened thousands of years ago that caused the rapid development and civilization of humanity that doesn't quite add up in a purely fundamentalist Darwinian/naturalist framework - the same way many evolutionary scientists are still baffled by the Cambrian explosion. I think that there is a pre-theistic "proto-religion" that is probably pretty close to the truth... and may well indeed point to an INTERVENTION in the early development of humanity... take that for what you will... we weren't there so we can't say for sure... but the mythology remains...
-
Terry
Don't be so quick to write ALL of them off though... there are currents running through many major belief systems that are strikingly similar (i.e. cration myths) - so much so that coincidence doesn't seem to do them justice. SOMETHING happened thousands of years ago that caused the rapid development and civilization of humanity that doesn't quite add up in a purely fundamentalist Darwinian/naturalist framework - the same way many evolutionary scientists are still baffled by the Cambrian explosion. I think that there is a pre-theistic "proto-religion" that is probably pretty close to the truth... and may well indeed point to an INTERVENTION in the early development of humanity... take that for what you will... we weren't there so we can't say for sure... but the mythology remains...
We can't use what we DON'T KNOW as the basis for knowledge because it causes us to fall back on whatever superstitious explanation we have lying around that hasn't been wiped away by the ravages of science.
If you are superstitious and something bad happens, for example, you immediately use Bad Luck as the "cause".
If you don't yet know why something happened and you fill in the blank with a myth you postpone readiness to find the REAL explanation.
There is a fallacy called the Argument from Ignorance.
Argument from ignorance
The two most common forms of the argument from ignorance, both fallacious, can be reduced to the following form:
- Something is currently unexplained or insufficiently understood or explained, so it is not (or must not be) true.
- Because there appears to be a lack of evidence for one hypothesis, another chosen hypothesis is therefore considered proven.
Irving Copi writes that:
The argumentum ad ignorantiam [fallacy] is committed whenever it is argued that a proposition is true simply on the basis that it has not been proven false, or that it is false because it has not been proven true.[...] A qualification should be made at this point. In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of proof of its occurrence despite searching, as positive evidence towards its non-occurrence. (Copi 1953)
Argument from personal incredulity
The common version of the argument from personal incredulity are:
- "I can't believe this is possible, so it can't be true." (The person is asserting that a proposition must be wrong because he or she is incapable of accepting that it may be true.)
This terminology was introduced by Richard Dawkins [3] [4] , who used it to describe the Argument from Design. He summarizes this argument thus:
I personally cannot imagine a natural sequence of events whereby X could have come about. Therefore, it must have come about by supernatural means. [5]
Burden of proof
An important aspect of the ad ignorantiam argument is establishing the burden of proof. While this concept is discussed in the law section of this page, it is important to realize that establishing the burden of proof is important in other arenas as well.
-
thetrueone
The only known evidence of theism in human history that has ever appeared, is human ignorance itself of the world of which we live in,
with the imaginative desire to channel this spiritual deity down to select individuals.
The WTS. themselves say they are tuned in to the correct channel to receive this divine spirituality.
I say they aren't tuned in on the right channel at all, but they're cashing in irregardless $ .
-
AllTimeJeff
Agonus
Surely if there was a strikingly similar vein of belief (other then an invisible personality in the heavens to worship) that would actually prove something, then it would have been pieced together by now.
The fact that man has in its history always worshipped something they created in their imagination doesn't prove anything. So far, none of those gods have been proven right? Isn't it a bit of hubris for this generations gods to be considered to their heretofore failed counterparts of the past?
It isn't the belief in something or someone greater then yourself that really disturbs me. It is that it is argued as though it should be accepted fact, using faulty premises, disingenuous arguments, and at times, downright falsehoods.
That is why I am a big proponent of seperating the quality of "spirituality" (semantics aside on the word) from the groups that claim it as their property, organized religion. One's personal path shouldn't be dictated by the superstitious agenda of any particular group.
-
Nathan Natas
I can't help it.
to paraphrase the advice of Steven Stills,
"If you're down and confused,
and you don't remember who you're prayin' to.
Concentration slips away, ‘cause your diety is so far away.
Well there's a rose in the fisted glove
and the eagle flies with the dove,
and if you can't be with the one you love, honey,
love the one you're with,
love the one you're with,
love the one you're with,
love the one you're with."
-
Chalam
Would that not be fraud?
Forget fraud, let us remember the correct charge is heresy!
Would that not make the teacher of such fraud a liar and brand them even Anti-Christ?
The WT are clearly antichrist. Look at how they have serially demoted and sidelined Christ for the last 100 years or so.
- He used to be God in their eyes but now He is "a god".
- They used to worship Him but now they just "do obeisance" to Him.
- They use to baptise in His name but now they baptise in theirs.
And so it continues...
The more astute will not be surprised at all, this sort of thing has been going on for 2000 years and even longer.
Also we have all been warned about them and their M.O.
1 John 2:18-27 (New International Version)
Warning Against Antichrists
18 Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.20 But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth. 21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth. 22 Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
24 See that what you have heard from the beginning remains in you. If it does, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. 25 And this is what he promised us—even eternal life.
26 I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. 27 As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.
Blessings,
Stephen
-
reslight2
Below a list is culled from various publications by C.T. Russell who was the mouthpiece of the Lord.
Charles Taze Russell, who was never a member of any governing body for the Jehovah's Witnesses, referred to himself and all Christians as mouthpieces for God. In other words, anyone who gives testimony concerning Jesus and God's kingdom is a mouthpiece for God.
http://ctr.reslight.net/2010/01/01/mouthpiece.html
Ronald R.
-
Terry
The word "mouthpiece" may seem a bit odd as a word choice to modern ears.
The telephone became available after 1876 as a two piece gizmo which included an Earpiece and a Mouthpiece.
You spoke into the Mouthpiece and it was that selfsame Mouthpiece that amplified and transmitted your message across
the telephone wires to the Earpiece of the persons you called.
So, you might say Pastor Russell was using the latest technological neologism!
He was implying that his role as a transmitter of God's spoken/written message was as merely a conduit and not as one who might interject himself in any way.
Not so, of course.
The longer Russell preached, wrote and taught the more prominent his ego became. His Studies in the Scriptures were advertised in such a way as to seem superior to mere bible study!
We can thank Maria, his virginal wife, for the doctrine of Faithful and Wise Servant (Governing Body prototype) which she applied to THE TWAIN. The Twain was BOTH herself and Charles, by the way!