Why aren't you an Atheist? (page 36)

Satanus

'But if you don't share that enlightenment with as many people possible then aren't you holding back progress for everyone? It's like discovering how to conserve a charge and keeping that information to yourself. That would be a huge mistake and an act of evil.'

If you say so. Afterall, that is your job.

S

tec

Here's something to consider, for those who left JWs behind:

Do you STILL believe the JW message that we're in the "Last Days", and that Armageddon will soon occur?

I will answer, no... because armageddon does not occur until after the thousand years; which does not occur until AFTER Christ returns.

But if you change your question to say Christ's return in place of last days/armageddon, then my answer is: Unknown.

Do you KNOW that it won't, or do you FEEL that there's just not enough information to decide?

(still with Christ returning, over armageddon)

Christ said that no one knows; therefore, it fails to make sense how one could know that it is 'soon'. People have been thinking that for a long time, and they have never been right. It could happen any time.

(The point is to live each day as you SHOULD (or at least as best as you can) because it is the right thing to do, not because Christ might return tomorrow.)

Flip-side: do JWs KNOW that it WILL occur, or do some of them feel there's not just enough information to decide?

I imagine the answer varies depending upon the JW.

So, should you BELIEVE that "Armageddon will occur" is the default assumption that we all should accept (and rejected, only if it's disproven)? Or, should we NOT BELIEVE in Armageddon as the default belief, and place the burden of proving that it will on the JWs?

I think I see where you are going.

And no... no one should believe that just because someone else states it. If you are interested in it, then look for the proof yourself, or ask them to show you their proof, then do with that what you will.

What about the Flood? Do you KNOW that it didn't occur, or do you feel there's not just enough evidence to decide, so you remain neutral?

I do not know. I do not think it occurred as literally as described, but that something along those lines occurred. However, I remain neutral, until further evidence presents itself.

JWs believe the Flood occurred: they believe that as the default position, and hence would need to be presented evidence that it DIDN'T occur to disbelieve. Is THAT logical?

Is that logical? Wouldn't that depend on the evidence they use to believe it in the first place?

If all evidence shows that it did not happen as they believe it to happen, and yet they continue to beleive it anyway... that is what i would call mere belief: a choosing to believe despite the evidence against. Closer to blind faith, but again, it would depend upon their evidence to believe it in the first place. If their leaders told them it was true, and their leaders have always been right in the past, and led them to truths/etc... then they have a basis to put their faith in their leaders. That basis might still be flawed, but there is a basis.

(Of course, we know this is not the case - leaders having never led them wrong - but just as a hypothetical.)

And Adam and Eve? Do you KNOW that they didn't exist? Do they know that they DID exist? Which is the proper default?

Neither is the proper default. One might consider the proper default to be neutrual, unless evidence points one way or the other. (as well as considering the possible literal/figurative/mix of both... tool of the story)

See, you can (and SHOULD) do that for MANY OTHER beliefs, apply the same logical approach. If you want me to believe in something, ANYTHING, then the burden is on YOU to demonstrate that it exists.

I do remain neutrual on a great many things that I know nothing about.

Now, what you believe in is entirely up to you. I share my faith as a witness to Christ, but I can do no more than that. I cannot make you believe. That is not within my power to do. I witness... you do with that as you will.

After you consider some of the arguments in favor of the existence of God (including the "God is merely hiding" argument), the ONLY REAL reason to believe in YHWH ARE the tales found in the Bible, which ARE used as examples to support having FAITH in YHWH in Hebrews.

The only real reason for you...you mean?

Because I have other reasons. I have an entire thread devoted to some of those reasons. I'll find it for you, but I think you've commented on it. I cannot recall. In either case, the evidence that I see is not enough for you. But that has nothing at all to do with me, or my faith.

And again, the only reason to have unquestioningly accepted the existence in God in the first place is because most had no choice.

I did. I do. And I have questioned. Those questions have led me here, to where I am now, to whom I follow now.

That's why the saying, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" exists, and God cannot meet the burden of even offering a HINT as to his own existence.

Sure He can. Has. Does. It is not evidence acceptable to you. But that does not mean it is not evidence.

Peace,

tammy

Satanus

'Christian's don't kill, they GET KILLED, and if they do they are diverging from their beliefs.'

Aah, i see. So, that's why all those christian soldiers go to afghanistan and iraq.

S

sabastious

Aah, i see. So, that's why all those christian soldiers go to afghanistan and iraq.

Yup, and how is that working out?

-Sab

EntirelyPossible

Take your own advice instead of trying to refute everything I say. I figure if I stop replying to your replies eventually you will stop. I'm probably totally wrong on that, though. You seem to like it when your words are next to mine.

Oh buttercup, first, I don't TRY to refute everything you say. I simply absolutely refute things I notice that you say.

And hey, you are wrong about everything else, why not this?

With respect to Christians getting killed, clearly you didn't see the story about soldiers writing scriptures on bombs before they dropped them on Muslims. So again, you're wrong. How is that working? Christians are killing the shit out of Muslims, lots of innocent ones.

sizemik

NewChapter

Christian's don't kill, they GET KILLED, and if they do they are diverging from their beliefs.

LOL. Did you really just say this?

It's like we live in completely different worlds. Christians don't kill---I am still smiling. You just seem to make it up as you go along. You should write a history book---we could read it, and then relate to what you are talking about, since your take history doesn't even mildly resemble the reality.