LOL. Touche Adamah!
Rignt, but you've seen the quotes that are the same as lies. You mention that in your OP. So that's not light getting brighter. That's purposefully Misleading. So for YOU I can't see how you would be able to pull it off.
Like I said just below those quotes. I'd have to have faith that Jehovah is guiding them to do certain things for reasons that are beyond me.
Okay. Well I can see what you mean now. :)
I do hope it never happens lol.
Hi, WAWUM. I was never a witness but I can relate to your religious conclusion. I challenge Adamah that a Skeptic can end up a hard Theist, if indeed this is what I am, as long as the subject knows that such faith is illogical.
You would never survive the indoctrination process. You would be dropped like a hot potato, by perhaps study three or four. That is what happened to me. We got stuck early on whether the bible was inerrant.
As to whether your beliefs allow you to join any religion, keeping those two zones separate as it were, I am not so sure. Slimboyfat, being a relativist, is giving it a try.
I challenge Adamah that a Skeptic can end up a hard Theist, if indeed this is what I am, as long as the subject knows that such faith is illogical.
Ohhh, challenge accepted.
1) Do you publicly state that you believe God exists (needed for determination for 'hard' vs 'soft theist')?
2) Did you accept that belief BEFORE or AFTER examining the evidence to support that belief?
If it was BEFORE, then you're not a skeptic, since by definition a skeptic demands to see evidence or proof BEFORE accepting a belief in anything.
Now you and I know there's no evidence that points to God's existence, and the many examples previously cited and argued on JWN (eg Paul's claiming that the creation all around us points to a creator) are misinterpretations of the evidence (in Paul's case, the evidence seen in creation only offers the seeming appearance of an intelligent designer, but is not the product of an intelligent designer who made all living things per the Genesis account).
But in lieu of any powerful evidence as yet unknown to humanity, a skeptic cannot (and should not, IF they're truly a skeptic) accept a belief in God or anything, in lieu of evidence. I don't believe in pink unicorns, etc. for the same reason. Even more than I'm an atheist, I'm primarily a skeptic, where atheism is a side-effect, or grows OUT of my being a skeptic. Show me the proof and THEN I'll believe in things, AFTER evaluating the evidence.
BTW, if someone is discarding the nature and value of faith, they're apparently willing to discard large chucks of the Bible, both OT and NT, since the entire point of Jesus' work on behalf of his Father was preaching that faith in him is what salvation is based upon (and the question of whether it was faith alone, or faith PLUS works, doesn't apply: both involve faith). That principle was most-vividly demonstrated in the account of the 'penitent thief' in Luke, who simply confessed a belief in Jesus (based solely on faith) and was promised salvation, not on his acts (hard to do, when hanging on a cross!), but faith.
You would have to answer certain questions before you were approved to be baptized as a JW, if you even got that far. If you expressed those beliefs as a baptized JW, you would be disfellowshipped.
There are many other religions that would accept you. I attended one for a few months. They told me that at any one time about 40% of the group is atheist. The next week, also 40%, but different individuals. They had no set doctrine, it was more about mutual support and good works. It was an interesting experience, I may go back.
I am about where you are, I see no evidence of a God, but I have a hard time stating categorically that there couldn't be a God. I don't know what that makes me, and I don't really care, labels are meaningless to me. If someone says they believe in God, I don't care, I would never debate it, that is their spiritual path to follow. I guess I am open to the possibility.
Yes Lisa Rose. I understand that I'd have to answer the baptism questions. I haven't looked at them in the last few years, but last I checked there weren't really any that couldn't be answered purely on faith. I'm not really interested in any other religions as that would leave me in far worse standing with my family than I am now. My family on my mom's side has a "theocratic history" dating to 1905-1910(Not sure of the exact date), and my dad's side goes back to the 50's. Basically, 75% of my family are Witnesses. 20% are DF'd. 5% are like me and were smart enough to never make a commitment... lol.
Dude, I won't abide it.
If you wanna shove reason aside then that's your big mistake. That's just credulity, Dude. Don't give me this crap about 'faith'.
Definition of credulity:
Credulity is a state of willingness to believe in one or many people or things in the absence of reasonable proof or knowledge.
Credulity is not simply belief in something that may be false. The subject of the belief may even be correct, but a credulous person will believe it without good evidence.
Credulity is often associated with gullibility: a tendency to believe too readily and therefore to be easily deceived.
Whether someone is easily-decieved or is only acting like they are is a distinction without a difference, IMO. Why would someone ACT like they believe when they don't?
(I'm not saying there's not benefits to playing dumb, just that the reason has to be other than honest).