Stupid questions require stupid answers

by Norm 71 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Bradley:
    In that wonderful story (of fruit-feasts, talking snakes, and flying swords) one would have to define many words, and not necessarily in accord with WTS explanations (which assigns Adam a perfection that the text doesn't actually state).

    Why not take the word "perfect"? If "perfect" means "fit for purpose", why does that require that Adam's mind be any better than ours?

    "Free will" is another phrase that isn't found in the text. Freedom to choose one's own path instead of that of anothers'? Surely we are all hindered by our environment to such a degree as to know this isn't truly possible. Where there are limitations, is it really freedom?

    I just thought I'd help throw in 2p to help you overthink this one

  • Norm
    Norm

    Little Toe,

    You said:

    Norm:
    ...as well as being far more logical (in the absence of evidence either way) than stating either:
    • God did it, or
    • There is no God.

    Point taken, and to use your excellent repartee: "I dont know". But in the world such as it is and reality around me cause me to come down on the side of "There is no God". The alternative is dealing with an absolute bastard, perverse maniac God.
    Norm
  • AlanF
    AlanF

    For reasons like Norm's, I don't believe that anything like the Christian God exists. That God, as described in the Bible, would be, by any reasonable standard, insane.

    I don't discount the existence of some sort of creator (does that make me an agnostic deist?), but it's obvious that such a creator, assuming he/she/it exists, takes a hands off attitude towards mankind. Such a position by a creator is in practical terms indistinguishable from him not existing.

    As a side note, so-called Intelligent Design creationists claim before certain audiences that their ideas have nothing to do with religion, and allow for even super-intelligent aliens as creators. But anyone who reads their literature immediately understands that their real goal is to insert the Christian God back into the place He had in American culture 150 years ago.

    AlanF

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Norm:

    But in the world such as it is and reality around me cause me to come down on the side of "There is no God".

    And may I assure you that your point is well taken, too.

    The alternative is dealing with an absolute bastard, perverse maniac God.

    I can see why you would come to that conclusion.
    Reconciling a loving God with the barbarity of nature is the most difficult thing a "god-botherer" can do. I've yet to hear a palatable explanation.

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Alan:

    I don't discount the existence of some sort of creator (does that make me an agnostic deist?)...

    I don't know what it makes you (and I wouldn't dare presume to attempt to pigeonhole you), but it seems a reasonable position.

    ...but it's obvious that such a creator, assuming he/she/it exists, takes a hands off attitude towards mankind. Such a position by a creator is in practical terms indistinguishable from him not existing.

    I can also see why you would come to that conclusion, too.

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Alan:

    As a side note, so-called Intelligent Design creationists claim before certain audiences that their ideas have nothing to do with religion, and allow for even super-intelligent aliens as creators. But anyone who reads their literature immediately understands that their real goal is to insert the Christian God back into the place He had in American culture 150 years ago.

    That's an interesting perspective, and one that I hadn't considered (not so much in the rather obvious attempts of such "Christians", but in the retrograding of America). Such attempts are a little less obvious this side of the pond. I find comments like that enlightening - perhaps I'm also in a bit of a reflective frame of thought, having watched "Mississippi Burning" last night. Maybe it's partially in view of that.

    (Sorry about the excess posts - I'm having difficulty posting large chunks of text, this evening, and think it may be down to how my browser is dealing with emoticans)

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    "The retrograding of America" is a good way to put it. Phillip Johnson, leader of the ID folks, makes no bones about his intentions in certain writings, and before Christian audiences. I'll try to find a reference when I get home.

    AlanF

  • A Paduan
    A Paduan
    You said:

    "To say "christian" and then put up a jw point of view/theme as example (subjection to rulership - a jw favourite) is like a straw man argument against christianity - I say that I am christian because I could hear and identify, without need for or the utilising of superstition - I could agree and be who it is "I am". The jw subjection and rulership trip is a whole other kettle of fish."

    Really? I think they are identical twins. But you must feel free to bring your own explanation of the presence of suffering and pain in a world where a just and loving Christian God is in control. I for one would just love to have this cleared up once and for all. Preferably without resorting to superstitious and supernatural arguments.

    If indeed you believe that jwism and christianity are from the same mold, I would say that you must be living in the U .S. - i.e. christianity means something else to many others

    I see it as an onerous task to explain to you why I believe Christ chose to 'suffer for our sake' - it is intertwined in the actions of man, free will, individuality, wholeness, contrite reality.................................

  • A Paduan
    A Paduan

    Oh yes, and social constructionism

  • hillary_step
    hillary_step

    Norm,

    Interesting post - many thanks.

    But in the world such as it is and reality around me cause me to come down on the side of "There is no God". The alternative is dealing with an absolute bastard, perverse maniac God.

    There is of course a third option and that is an amoral 'God', who would then accurately reflect the experience of nature which survives and progresses without the need of morality or behavioral judgments. A sort of pantheism without borders.

    Best regards - HS

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit