Posts by slimboyfat

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

Like I said above, given suffering in the world, and our inability to reconcile that with a loving God, it seems to me there are two possibilities with respect to an almighty, loving God.

1. Suffering shows there is no amighty, loving God.

2. God is both almighty and loving but the human mind is not equipped to understand how this is possible in a world with suffering.

Can anyone tell me any logical reason why the first must be true and the second cannot be true? I am really interested to know if there is a good atheist reply to this, involving more than simply name calling and rhetoric.

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

Then the god of Jesus is a delusion and theism retreats into esoteric bullshit masquerading as sophisticated theology.

How does that follow? The New Testament describes God as beyond human understanding.

I suggested there may be a solution to the problem of evil that humans either don't know yet or are not able to understand. Is this really the best reply you've got? "Esoteric bullshit masquerading as sophisticated theology"? That's just rhetoric, not an argument.

couldn't this have been a great thread with people discussing what they think reality is and then offering what gives life purpose for them personally

Yes it could but SBF failed to deliver on his OP. He ended up waffling something vague about some Scottish poet. Then he spent a couple of pages criticising a book he has never read.

What a strange comment. The poetry was precisely about finding meaning: "larks for no reason but themselves". And I have read some of the book, watched the talk, and read his other books, and given reasons for my objections. When are you going to read a book on pragmatism or postructuralism before dismissing them?

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

John Mann would it have been impossible for God to create a world with free will, but without suffering? If you say that would be impossible it does seem to set a limit on God. As if the universe consists of laws which have priority and constrain God's action. That's one reason I don't like the free will argument.

For me an answer to problem of evil is that there may be an answer we don't know yet or that we can't understand. There is far too little humility in discussion of these issues. Some atheists seem to have such supreme confidence in the human mind, or their own minds in particular, that if they can't see an answer to the problem of evil that therefore means there is no answer. How arrogant is that?

We can readily accept that a dog can't do calculus, most of us don't understand quantum mechanics, and our brains are not designed to think in more than three dimensions. Yet when it comes to whether a supreme being might know something about reality and the nature of evil that we don't understand, the idea is dismissed out of hand. Why?

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

Catholics wrote the Bible?

Maybe Catholics re-wrote the Bible (St Jerome and others) but without a time machine I don't know how you could credit any Catholic with writing any of the Bible.

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

I agree that it seems impossible for us to reconcile God's almightiness and his goodness in our mind amid a world with so much suffering.

There are two different logical conclusions we can draw from this:

1. There is no amighty, loving God.

2. God is both almighty and loving but the human mind is not equipped to understand how this is possible in a world with suffering.

There may be an emotional attachment to option 1 for many atheists, but I can think of no logical reason for ruling out option 2.

12

At last something about JWs on a German news site.

by Driving Force in

for anybody who understands german.. http://www.n-tv.de/panorama/masha-16-jahre-zeugin-jehovas-article18689741.html.

it is quite rare that a german news site actually puts something up about jws, after all they are insignificant from a newsworthy point of view.

but i like the fact that they have put this up..

slimboyfat

Left at 16 like Jonathan Saunders. I missed this the first time round.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/199238/another-successful-ex

405

Origin of Life

by cofty in

in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

slimboyfat

I don't know because, as far as I'm aware, they've never said one way or the other. Maybe they have said something somewhere but I wouldn't even know how to find it. Resurrection seems pretty implausible and they've perhaps not discussed it just because it doesn't seem technically possible at the moment, if ever.

However we do know what they think about scientists creating life because they said so.

The question is, even if the Watchtower allowed for the possibility of resurrection, and said so in their publications, would you accept that's what they really think? Or would it be another, "they don't really mean what they say because I know their doctrines better than they do" scenario.

On a related issue I think JW theology actually lends itself quite well to adaption to transhumanist notions of technological salvation. David Gobel of the Methuselah Foundation is reportedly a JW and Aubrey de Grey has had some contact with JWs. They are both interested in technical solutions to aging and death including cryonics. I have sometimes wondered if JWs could morph into a transhumanist cult at some stage. That would make for a good novel!

33

Two Brothers Living Together - Never Dated Girls...

by pale.emperor in

in my old congregation there are two brothers (non related) who are in the early 30s.

they've never dated girls.

they're "best friends".

slimboyfat

I've seen worse than this. But I better not talk about it because you never know who's reading.

On the one hand you got to feel sorry for gay JWs who are closeted. On the other hand I've known some almighty hypocrites it's difficult to feel sorry for.

4

Using Pokemon Go to spread apostasy!

by slimboyfat in

i tried to post this yesterday but the picture must have been too big.

i don't know how to choose a smaller option.,.

anyway, for any pokemon go players here: i noticed there is a pokemon go gym in the city right next to the where jws have their trolleys.

slimboyfat

I tried to post this yesterday but the picture must have been too big. I don't know how to choose a smaller option.,

Anyway, for any Pokemon Go players here: I noticed there is a Pokemon Go gym in the city right next to the where JWs have their trolleys.

So I renamed one of my Vaporeons JWFACTS.COM and entered it into the gym.

Maybe nobody noticed, and it only lasted a few hours, but I like the idea of the JWs noticing it and then frantically battling to take the gym and remove it. They probably would, the Poliwags!

I had a picture of my JWFACTS Pokemon in the gym but the image was too big to post. I might try again in a separate post after this one goes through.

405

Origin of Life

by cofty in

in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

slimboyfat

Your initial post asked what the response would be if scientists managed to demonstrate the emergence of life. I pointed out that a recent WT brochure answers this question.

Think of the challenge facing researchers who feel that life arose by chance. They have found some amino acids that also appear in living cells. In their laboratories, they have, by means of carefully designed and directed experiments, manufactured other more complex molecules. Ultimately, they hope to build all the parts needed to construct a “simple” cell. Their situation could be likened to that of a scientist who takes naturally occurring elements; transforms them into steel, plastic, silicone, and wire; and constructs a robot. He then programs the robot to be able to build copies of itself. By doing so, what will he prove? At best, that an intelligent entity can create an impressive machine.
Similarly, if scientists ever did construct a cell, they would accomplish something truly amazing—but would they prove that the cell could be made by accident? If anything, they would prove the very opposite, would they not?

The same brochure also states the "life from life" principle. And they argue on the next page that such a scenario would demonstrate their point.

If the chemicals in the experiment represent the earth’s early environment and the molecules produced represent the building blocks of life, whom or what does the scientist who performed the experiment represent? Does he or she represent blind chance or an intelligent entity?

What the WT objects to is the idea that life could arise by its own by "chance". Scientists creating life in a laboratory would not meet this test in their view. The contrast is between an "intelligent entity" creating life and it arising by accident or by "chance".

All scientific evidence to date indicates that life can come only from previously existing life. To believd that even a “simple” living cell arose by chance from nonliving chemicals requires a huge leap of faith.

https://download-a.akamaihd.net/files/media_books/d0/lf_E.pdf