slimboyfat

Joined

• started 538 topics
• posted 17,596 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by slimboyfat

• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  On the subject of "what we need in order to believe", I think Karen Armstrong's perspective on this is interesting. From my reading, she argues that the common notion that religious actions follow beliefs is the wrong way round. She says that in order to believe a religion we first need to practise the religion. You don't become convinced about a religion by reading or studying or debating. The only way "in" to a religion is practice. If you practise a religion, often you will find your faith growing before too long.
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  God can't lie but he can "send out delusions". 2 Thes 2:11

  In the case of lying, God probably uses the Nixon defence: it isn't lying when God does it.

  Or maybe God is constrained by certain things. Maybe the world he creates is the best possible one. Why not? He's still almighty in relation to us.
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Do materialists really believe in "natural evil", or what do you mean by it? If there is no God or purpose behind things, isn't it a case of "natural indifference" rather than evil? If there is no God, what is the use of a concept such as "natural evil"?
• 
  36

  What is the basis for advising “Don’t pursue higher studies”?

  by venus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  two elders who visited my friend last week encouraged her not to pursue higher studies.

  it seems they are dishing out the same old stuff: “the end is imminent, and this is the time to do more in the service; hence don’t waste your resources on higher studies.”.

  i wonder whether there was some official communiqué (something that is sent out recently like letter to the elders, or kingdom ministry article …).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  People who get an education tend to leave JWs. That's the basis of the "don't do higher education" instruction.
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  I don't think it is JW theology proper that is the problem. A good Bible case can be made for many of their distinguishing theological claims: Jesus as a created being; soul sleep; importance of God's name; God's self-limited foreknowledge; endurance for salvation; paradise earth and so on. To me the problem lies in their authoritarian structure; lack of engagement with modern science, scholarship, culture, and ethics; punishment of free thought and the like.
• 
  11

  Book That Helped Me - My Recommended Reading List

  by doubtfull1799 in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  these are the books that led to my awakening:.

  the art of thinking clearly - rolf dobelli.

  how to defend the christian faith: advice from an evolutionist - john w.loftus.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Good and Bad Religion - Peter Vardy
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  You are very clearly changing the goal posts.

  Your first post claimed the Bible should supply useful information not available to people at the time.

  Failing to give any good reason why God should meet this standard you have set, instead you talk about the Bible being written by ignorant goat herders. (Familiar new atheist trope)

  If you are not willing to back up your original assertion that the Bible should contain useful information not known at the time. Where is the justification for the new assertion that God could not inspire a book that conforms to a contemporary conception of the world?

  You have asserted God would not do that. What is your evidence?
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  I am asking a perfectly straightforward question. You said for example:

  The bible would contain useful information that people could not have known at the time it was written.

  I said this was an example of your preference and asked why should God satisfy your preference.

  You responded it was nothing to do with your preference, but that it's what the God of Jesus "by his own words" must be like, if he exists.

  So the simple question is: where does the God of Jesus promise to be a God who provides "useful information that people could not have known at the time"?

  Very specific question. Any chance of an answer instead of insult and obfuscation?
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  The Bible acknowledges a world with predators and suffering, I don't know where in the Bible it promises clear and specific prophecy, or scientific and ethical insights ahead of its time. And there are parts of the Bible that describe God as acting and answering humans at his own choosing and as he sees fit.

  In particular the idea that the Bible should be, in some sense, "ahead of its time" seems to be a very culturally conditioned view of the sacred text, situated within a Protestant/enlightenment conception of progress, and what the sacred text is and should be like in relation to it. I don't know if the text itself that promises this.
• 
  496

  This is What I Would Need in Order to Believe

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  sometimes theists challenge atheists about what evidence would be required before they would believe.

  various unlikely scenarios are offered in reply.

  i have taken the bait myself in the past.. i think the correct answer is much more ordinary.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  slimboyfat

  Why could God not have created the world as it is, the Bible as it is, and answer prayers as he sees fit? I understand you would prefer that God made a world without predators, a Bible with clear prophecy, and prayers with consistent answers. But beyond mere preference, what has this actually got to do with the existence or otherwise of God? Can't God be God as he chooses to be God rather than how you would choose him to be?

  What is your actual argument?