Posts by slimboyfat

58

No more official visits to disfellowshipped & disassociated ones

by AverageJoe1 in

new letter today (please visit avoidjw.org for a copy of the official letter and yes, i also noticed they got the date wrong!).

february 28, 2017. to all bodies of elders.

re: visiting disfellowshipped or disassociated individuals.

slimboyfat

many disfellowshipped or disassociated individuals have returned to Jehovah after having seen Jehovah’s Witnesses carrying out their ministry in public places.

I said it before. I am convinced this is the main effect of the JW carts - to reactivate former JWs. I've heard of it happening locally. And it makes sense that seeing JWs publicly has induced guilt/nostalgia in some former JWs. They sure as hell aren't attracting ordinary members of the public with the carts, but former JWs it might have some effect. However it's an effect that's probably subject to diminishing returns as the carts become familiar.

236

What did President Trump say about Sweden?

by kpop in

this you will never see on the mainstream media.

before you comment watch the whole video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.

slimboyfat

Merkel is presented as making a big mistake, but she stated the situation very elegantly early in 2015 when she said:

"Wir schaffen dass!"

Meaning we can do this. It may be difficult to welcome people from a different culture and there may be problems. But Germany and other countries are equal to the challenge. Compassion and the lessons of history demanded that we take refugees fleeing for their lives. Germans know this better than most. They are to be commended and supported, and Sweden too, not lied about for political reasons.

236

What did President Trump say about Sweden?

by kpop in

this you will never see on the mainstream media.

before you comment watch the whole video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.

slimboyfat

Mass immigration of young men from countries where fundamentalism is endemic can't end well.

What's the basis for this assertion? Why can't it end well? Of course it can end well, if democrats don't allow right wingers to exploit the situation to promote suspicion and stigmatisation.

And anyway, isn't the mass migration of fundamentalists from one continent to another precisely how the United States began in the first place? And this is a far smaller scale and in the context of liberal democracies.

"Can't end well"? Exaggerate much? Stop stigmatising and fear mongering.

236

What did President Trump say about Sweden?

by kpop in

this you will never see on the mainstream media.

before you comment watch the whole video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.

slimboyfat

The difference is the faith of a moderate Muslim makes them an asset to the community.

It's perfectly true that extremists of all kinds tend to disguise themselves. The problem arises when this is presented as a issue peculiar to Muslims. Or worse still, as above, when people aftempt to stigmatise the very category of "Muslim" to the extent of saying the only way to be a good Muslim is to be an ex-Muslim.

Prejudice takes many forms and this kind reminds me of assimilationist anti-Semitism of nineteenth century Germany. It was argued that Judaism was a destructive ideology not really a religion (sound familiar?) that was incompatible with European values (sound familiar?) and the only way for Jews to be acceptable was to give up their religion because it was inherently wicked. (Sound familiar?)

Many Jews responded and converted to Christianity and adopted the dominant culture, many fighting for Germany in the First World War. But of course anti-Semitiam didn't stand still. When the Nazis came to power it was no longer acceptable for Jews to renounce their heritage and beliefs. Anyone with a practicing Jewish grandparent could be convicted of being a Jew whether they themselves practised or not.

20

Round and round the not so marigoround

by Coded Logic in

i find most theist arguments to be either confused or dishonest at best.

and most of them i regard with mild annoyance.

but there is one track of thinking that is so stupid it really gets under my skin: when, in order to try and prop up "faith", people try and tear down reason and critical thinking.

slimboyfat

The question Stephen Fry poses about why God would create a world where children suffer is a good one, and of course all sensible people wonder this at some time.

The problem is when Stepeh Fry and other atheists insist this is the end of the conversation rather than the beginning.

As Williams puts it, the way Fry asks the question, one wonders whether he would brother to listen to the answer.

No matter how good our logic or evidence or powerful personal experience, I think we should always be ready to be surprised. There may be an answer when we least expect it.

20

Round and round the not so marigoround

by Coded Logic in

i find most theist arguments to be either confused or dishonest at best.

and most of them i regard with mild annoyance.

but there is one track of thinking that is so stupid it really gets under my skin: when, in order to try and prop up "faith", people try and tear down reason and critical thinking.

slimboyfat

I mean to say the idea that consciousness arose from non-consciousness inside the universe as we know it, rather than, for example, a consciousness or a being that is not part of the universe. As Roman Williams says, not an item or thing in the universe. What Terry Eagleton calls the 'Yeti theory of God' where many atheists imagine they can use science to eliminate God as if he's some sort of mythical creature.

I am not saying the problem of evil is solved because it's old. The point Williams makes is a good one. The fact is that people in the middle of suffering often find a conception of God that works for them. Some atheists may dismiss this as "no atheists in foxholes" scenario. But that really is an impoverished and cynical view of the attempts of fellow humans to make sense of the world and suffering in a way that combines conceptions of a transcendent being.

I agree definite claims about creationism and 6000 years are stupid. I didn't think that's what we were talking about.

20

Round and round the not so marigoround

by Coded Logic in

i find most theist arguments to be either confused or dishonest at best.

and most of them i regard with mild annoyance.

but there is one track of thinking that is so stupid it really gets under my skin: when, in order to try and prop up "faith", people try and tear down reason and critical thinking.

slimboyfat

I agree synthetic statements are definitive. They are also tautologous if they are truly synthetic statements, including all of mathematics. And I agree no analystic statement is immune to revision.

Personally I don't find anything I can say about the subject of God that I would call well founded.

Provisionally I would say that existence is a mystery that seems to require some sort of explanation. And the idea that consciousness arose from nothing and has no purpose beyond the purpose it makes itself, seems like a leap of faith in some sense.

I like Rowan Williams' comment in the last video where he describes the encounter with God to a footprint in the forest. From just the footprint, you know it's big, you know it was there, it leaves an impression, but beyond that there's not much you can say for sure about it.

And it's interesting that none of the arguments "new" atheists use are anything new. The Bible itself already complains that God stands by and allows suffering. It already asks why. It already says that such a God is incomprehensible and it seems wicked. None of these observations are new. Believers incorporate these difficult problems into their questions about how God is, whereas atheists use them as a basis for saying God cannot exist or he is evil if he does exist. Sometimes it's not clear which.

236

What did President Trump say about Sweden?

by kpop in

this you will never see on the mainstream media.

before you comment watch the whole video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.

slimboyfat

The Muslim you think might be your nice neighbour is not really your real friend anymore than the guy at the local car dealership is your friend even though he's super friendly if you go look at cars.

That's a hell of an assumption. And a nice neighbour is all I really need my Muslim next door neighbour to be.

It's also strikingly similar to what I've been reading in Laurence Rees new book Holocaust. Many Germans objected to Nazi propaganda by saying that the Jews they knew personally were good people. So the Nazis produced a propaganda campaign (poison mushrooms) that argued that some Jews pretended to be good people but Germans should not be fooled. In fact these Jews who pretended to be good and ordinary Germans were the most dangerous of all because they were hiding what they truly were. Like mushrooms that appeared harmless it was claimed they were really poisonous.

http://www.aish.com/ho/p/Personal-Accounts-During-the-Holocaust.html

20

Round and round the not so marigoround

by Coded Logic in

i find most theist arguments to be either confused or dishonest at best.

and most of them i regard with mild annoyance.

but there is one track of thinking that is so stupid it really gets under my skin: when, in order to try and prop up "faith", people try and tear down reason and critical thinking.

slimboyfat

I don't think there is anything definite we can say about anything. Like philosopher Quine said: "no statemeant is immune to revision".

Which is not the same as saying we cannot make claims and give reasons for them. The problems arise when people start saying: "this is the only legitimate answer". Such as the atheistic answer to the problem of evil for example. Or any particular theistic response for that matter.

If people are making definite statements about God I object to that too.

Science is great at answering all sorts of questions, which beguiles some into thinking it should be able to answer all important questions. Dawkins as a "professor for public understanding of science" added much confusion in this regard.

I notice that the next scientist to hold this post has attempted to remedy the situation by explaining there are questions science cannot answer, including the existence or otherwise of God.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jun/29/what-we-cannot-know-marcus-du-sautoy-review

236

What did President Trump say about Sweden?

by kpop in

this you will never see on the mainstream media.

before you comment watch the whole video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.

slimboyfat

I don't know if any particular interpretation makes a person "more" or "less" Muslim, either moderate or extreme.

What I said is that claiming the only "good" kind of Muslim is an apostate or ex-Muslim is an attempt to stigmatise anyone who claims to be a Muslim by forcing them either to renounce the identity or by categorising them as not "good".