I don't think that's the killer objection you take it to be.
After all, is there any evidence that cumulative events in a purely material reality can create consciousness? If you say we are such evidence it rather begs the question.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znmk2viuqba.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/simulation_hypothesis.
consequences of living in a simulation[edit]some scholars speculate that the creators of our hypothetical simulation may have limited computing power; if so, after a certain point, the creators would have to deploy some sort of strategy to prevent simulations from themselves indefinitely creating high-fidelity simulations in unbounded regress.
I don't think that's the killer objection you take it to be.
After all, is there any evidence that cumulative events in a purely material reality can create consciousness? If you say we are such evidence it rather begs the question.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znmk2viuqba.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/simulation_hypothesis.
consequences of living in a simulation[edit]some scholars speculate that the creators of our hypothetical simulation may have limited computing power; if so, after a certain point, the creators would have to deploy some sort of strategy to prevent simulations from themselves indefinitely creating high-fidelity simulations in unbounded regress.
Not exactly an analytical response from Dawkins there. Atheists seems to have real difficultly with the simulation argument, just laugh it off, or change the subject.
so i was having this argument with a friend about the westboro baptist idiots.
my point is that while they are horrible people, they are pretty much right in that the bible is against gays because it has verses in both the old and the new testament.
which is one of many reasons to reject the bible as merely man-made rules from ancient middle-easterners.. and she argued that there are problems in translation, etc.
Because they were perhaps more enlightened than some in the 20th century? Progress has not be linear or consistent on this issue. From Wikipedia:
In ancient Assyria, homosexuality was present and common; it was also not prohibited, condemned, nor looked upon as immoral or disordered. Some religious texts contain prayers for divine blessings on homosexual relationships.[85][86] The Almanac of Incantations contained prayers favoring on an equal basis the love of a man for a woman, of a woman for a man, and of a man for man.[87]
In Greater Iran, homosexuality and homoerotic expressions were tolerated in numerous public places, from monasteries and seminaries to taverns, military camps, bathhouses, and coffee houses. In the early Safavid dynasty (1501–1723), male houses of prostitution (amrad khane) were legally recognized and paid taxes.
Some scholars argue that there are examples of homosexual love in ancient literature, like in the Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh as well as in the Biblical story of David and Jonathan. In the Epic of Gilgamesh, the relationship between the main protagonist Gilgamesh and the character Enkidu has been seen by some to be homosexual in nature.[88][89][90][91] Similarly, David's love for Jonathan is "greater than the love of women."[92]
so i was having this argument with a friend about the westboro baptist idiots.
my point is that while they are horrible people, they are pretty much right in that the bible is against gays because it has verses in both the old and the new testament.
which is one of many reasons to reject the bible as merely man-made rules from ancient middle-easterners.. and she argued that there are problems in translation, etc.
By coincidence I just posted this on another thread!
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/06/05/us/samesex-scriptures.html?_r=0
People who take the Bible seriously can always emphasize one part over another, or point out that cultural situations are not equivalent so you can't draw a direct line.
the anti gay video that watchtower recently produced has now had over 1,000,000 views.
of those who selected to like or dislike the video, over 92% disliked it.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnk52bu92oe.
You didn't say JWs interpret the Bible that way. You stated that the Bible itself condemns gay relationships. It's relevant to point out that many don't interpret the Bible that way. And JWs may change their position too as society changes it view. It's increasinly socially unacceptable.
the anti gay video that watchtower recently produced has now had over 1,000,000 views.
of those who selected to like or dislike the video, over 92% disliked it.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnk52bu92oe.
Side by side interpretations of verses commonly assumed to oppose homosexuality.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/06/05/us/samesex-scriptures.html?_r=0
the anti gay video that watchtower recently produced has now had over 1,000,000 views.
of those who selected to like or dislike the video, over 92% disliked it.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnk52bu92oe.
2 - The bible condemns gay relationships (it does)
The Bible doesn't discuss "gay relationships". What the Bible does say has been interpreted in various ways. Some people who believe in the Bible also believe that what it says allows for gay marriage, others believe that it doesn't.
i have just finished reading "the true believer: thoughts on the nature of mass movements" by eric hoffer.
the book was published in 1951, during the cold war, yet the theories and principles, that hoffer proposes to explain the phenomena of mass movements, are as relevant today as they were then.
(there are several threads on this forum that discuss aspects of hoffer's statements and theories.).
Funny I just listened to a video where Peter Hitchens explains his own involvement with Trotskyist politics with reference to Hoffer.
I don't think JWs are a mass movement though, are they?
i often read that ct russell was more influenced by "age-to-come" christians than adventist christians.
what exactly is "age to come" christianity?
what are some of its denominations?
You say you've often read this. Where do you read this? It's new to me.
the anti gay video that watchtower recently produced has now had over 1,000,000 views.
of those who selected to like or dislike the video, over 92% disliked it.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnk52bu92oe.
Excellent question wizzstick. Shame about the non-answer.
I wonder if others know the facts surrounding the Mormon church abandoning their racist teachings? As I understand it until 1978 they taught that people are born black as a punishment for failings during their prehuman existence and they were not allowed to join the Mormon priesthood.
Did that racist teaching actually become illegal or did they abandon it because of social pressure? If a church wanted to continue teaching racist beliefs would that be allowed?
I am curious because I agree with wizzsrtick these situations are comparable.
My guess is that the Mormon church changed because of social pressure rather than actually be ruled illegal. I think a similar dynamic will play out with Watchtower bigotry. It won't be made illegal but it will become so socially unacceptable that they have to change.
The Watchtower says "people can change".
Well I say "bigots can change!"