While any such an incident is regrettable, specifically the condition that took your mother’s life, it is undeniable that you loved her and that you both enjoyed a close relationship. You may want to think in terms that perhaps neither of you asked the tough questions because you understood each other and there was no need; that she somehow knew how devastated you would be at her loss as you understand how hard her death has been for you. Don’t concentrate on what you didn’t say and instead think deeply about the good things you both shared. It’s not constructive to play the wouldof, shouldof, couldof game. Instead, bathe yourself in her good memories and feel her presence and influence in all you do.
Posts by Etude
-
16First post in years
by voodoo lady inwhen i was last here, my mother had recently been diagnosed with cancer.
there were potential issues regarding transfusion, none of which eventuated.
she undertook a course of chemo which worked quickly and effectively, with minimal side-effects.
-
-
-
92
NASA Identifies The Hand of God
by Perry init even has what looks like blood flowing from a palm wound.
article.
world-renowned astrophysicist robert jastrow, founding director of nasas goddard institute for space studies, explains the fear of faith many of todays scientists experience.. there is a kind of religion in science, it is the religion of a person who believes there is order and harmony in the universe, and every effect must have its cause; [but] there is no first cause.
-
-
Etude
Perry
From Post 4235 of 42621) You cannot prove that God does not exist, so He does.(Burden of Proof Fallacy)
Proof is everwhere, from the "Hand of God" to billions of tighly packed information bits found in the DNA to the living cell's hundreds of irreducible complex parts.
No Perry. Facts and evidence of objects and events are everywhere. Proof is quite different. You would have to demonstrate that proof explicitly. So, do you have any? It is a fact that DNA is “tightly” packed with bits of information. Proof of what that means is an entirely different proposition.
2) There is currently no explanation for this, so God did it (Argument from incredulity fallacy)
There is an explanation. Rather, truth be told, there is not reasonable scientific explanation how this design just appeared.
So what would you have instead, Perry, an unreasonable scientific explanation? Or how about no scientific explanation. Assuming there is not scientific anything, how would you determine that your non-scientific conclusion is not based on credulity or the result of a mental aberration? How? Because you feel it. Right? Therein lays the problem. By that measure, anyone who claims anything would be correct in their statement. After all, they believe it and confirm it inside themselves. So, if you encounter someone who has their apartment or house covered on the inside with aluminum foil to stop the rays that read their minds, please believe them.
3) God exists because the bible/qu’ran/torah says it’s the word of said “on true God” /bible, torah, qu’ran quotes (Circular Reasoning Fallacy)
Wrong. There is no "because" , in other words no previous "cause". He is the First Cause which is reasonable to deduce.
And you know this how? Let me guess, you read it in the Bible. No, you have a reasonable explanation (emphasis on the word “reasonable”). Please share. If it’s because you read it in the Bible, please explain how we’re supposed to differentiate that existence in light of all the other things the Bible states that are just plain wrong, contradicting and immoral. If it’s because you feel you can’t reasonably regress to a point where there was nothing, that requires another argument and I guarantee you it’s not in the Bible.
4) Many people believe God exists so he does (Appeal to belief Fallacy)
See above.
See above, above.
5) The bible makes me feel good, so it is true (Appeal to Consequences of a belief Fallacy)
The bible does not make me feel good at all. I cannot participate in my own salvation. This insults my pride. Jesus said I must give up everything to get everything, this insults my sensibilities, He says his saved are children, brothers, but also slaves, this upsets my notions of freedom until I compare Christian "freedom" with slavery to sin, vice and death.
Wow, what a miserable book. I’m sorry I’m not attracted to a book that constantly reminds me how worthless I am and dangles a carrot in front of me to make me believe how rewarding it will be in the end. Of course, no one has ever been there to give us any confirmation that it will be great. Never mind all that about what Jesus says. How can you be sure of anything you read about Jesus when the very source of such information is cast into doubt? Wait, you don’t cast that source into doubt, right? It’s because you’re sure about because it says so, which makes you feel it, which confirms what it says. Notice any circularity of reasoning there? That’s what you’re doing.
6) I had a personal encounter with God, so it is true (Anecdotal Evidence- Jews and Muslims do as well)
Personal testimony is high quality evidene if it is from a credible witness. 40% to 60 % of all Muslim converts to Christianity are doing so because of personal encounters with God through dreams.
And yet, Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world (1.86% as opposed to 1.3% for Christianity). Perry, please. Personal testimony is quality evidence that you had an experience. That’s all. It doesn’t tell you if that experience adheres to reality. It could be totally convincing. That doesn’t mean it’s real. Some people hear voices that are not there for others in the same room. Are they real? Hmm…I’m not saying that believing correlates to having Schizophrenia. I’m saying that the mind is a complicated thing and we need to use our faculties to rid ourselves from delusion.
7) I prayed to God and I was cured (Post hoc ergo proptor fallacy)
Unless of course its true.
OK. Mention an example. And, don’t trot out what Jesus did back in the First Century. That narrative is questionable and self referent. Tell me about an incident that happened in your church. Tell me that it wasn’t that someone had a head ache and prayed and God took away the head ache. And if it’s not as obvious as that, compare such a happening to what happens to a person who goes into Cancer remission by thinking positively and by believing in the power of the mind.
8) Ontological* Argument (Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness)
*Because we think something perfect can exist it therefore does exist. Also Existence is wonderful. God is wonderful therefore God has existence.
Unless of course he inhabits believers and they can feel his presence inside them. Then, it isn't just "thinking"
So, your evidence that He inhabits believers comes in the form of what? Let me guess, personal testimony that only you can verify with nothing that I can attest to other than what’s inside your head. Very convenient. Let me think: Is it because you know many people who also attest to the same thing? OK. On that basis, you would have to believe that there are UFOs with ETs that torture cattle and kidnap humans in order to perform experiments on them. Think about it. The exact same rules apply here.
9) Bible prophecies (Circular Reasoning Fallacy+Red Herring Fallacy+ Self-fulfilling Fallacy+Composition Fallacy+Equivocation)
Fulfilled Bible Prophecies are powerful evidence.
OK, I’m going out on a limb here. Tell me which Bible prophecies have been fulfilled. Tell me what has transpired that is different in fulfillment than what many people interpret Nostradamus predicted. Tell me about what has transpired as a Bible prophesy that would not be obvious to people who watch the world. Is it “wars and rumors of wars? OK, then. We can tackle that, although I’m sure it’s been covered many times on this forum.
10) *ignores argument * Argues about something else (Red Herring Fallacy)
Christians are not saying that they can out argue someone on whether or not God exists. They KNOW he does because he lives inside them.
Look at item 6 in the list.
11) *ignores argument * You don’t believe in God because you’re dumb, atheist! (Personal Attacks Fallacy 'ad hominem')
Not dumb. God's existence implies accountability, judgment. This is scary stuff. However, the good news is that there is nothing that you can do to improve your situation as someone who will face judgment one day. It has already been provided for you. If you receive him.
I look at your answer as a great cop-out for personal responsibility. I once worked with a “Christian” (a fairly young man) who was a deacon at his church and counseled youth. He had called me over to see about a tool box he’d found and proceeded to bust the lock to take the tools. In an unrelated conversation, he told me that he was saved because Christ died to provide that salvation and that no matter what you did, once you accepted Him, you could not forfeit your salvation. That explained to me his readiness to steal what did not belong to him. I’m illustrating here how such beliefs are up for grabs, even if you yourself are forthright and sincere. But my “friend’s” example implies the lack of accountability.
12) This is all just lies and slander as expected from an atheist (Genetic Fallacy 'ad hominem')
Mostly just well-founded fear disguised as logic.
Do you detect fear in my statements? On the other hand, I detect fear in you of the consequences resulting from not following what you interpret and believe. The Bible contains many texts stating or suggesting how one should fear the Lord. The Lord has given many examples in the Bible of how he deals with those who don’t fear him. That is not a nice God. How is it possible that an atheist can have fear in something s/he does not believe in? How about an atheist having fear of the triumph of religion over atheism? Is that it? Hmm…No. I don’t think that’s it.
-
-
-
Etude
In answer to your questions: “No”; “Many” and “Yes”. I detect that you’re making some definite but incorrect assumptions about what I believe and how I’ve arrived at this place. Do I really have to literally read in the Bible that God is not an asshole to know whether or not He’s not an asshole? Although I don't disagree, I’ve never used such a term. That was Captain Obvious. In a passionate rant, I might say that. However, I refrain from it in order not to unnecessarily offend other people. But, why can’t such conclusions come from deeply disappointed people who have spent a good deal of their life questioning and searching real for answers instead of the uninformed individuals you picture? Why must it be that anyone who doesn’t agree with what you say be cast in a less learned light?
Tell me, how many brown ducks do I have to encounter and count before concluding that all ducks are brown? This is where your reasoning falls short and makes you petty and judgmental. I don’t need to count; I just need to encounter one single exception to conclude the opposite. This is why you have made a notable but incorrect assumption about what I’ve “chosen to ignore”. And you also have not read sufficiently well my recognition of a “spiritual” need in humans, even though that can manifest itself in many right and wrong ways.
No, not everything that fails does so because it was wrong. Life is not binary, yes or no, good or bad, right or wrong. I stated that earlier: “If you look at reality with an unbiased eye, you'll find that there is no "good" or "evil" or "light" or "dark"; and I mean that in a moral sense and not a physical sense. But even in a physical sense, those things are a matter of degree from the absence of one thing to a full complement of it.” “Really, things simply ‘are’.” I realize you may be the type who likes simplicity and expedient answers in order to settle your own uncertainties and give you reassurance that everything will be OK. I, however, am content to accept questions I cannot answer and not believe in things I can’t verify, like the Bible or anything you say I’ve been taught by a government or an educational system or tradition.
Really, I don’t have to look outside the fishbowl because I removed myself from it a long time ago. It’s not the most clear and well-lit place to be, but it is better than being in bowl full of biblical shit. I sense that you, on the other hand, have your own definition of “truth” rather than one you can actually sustain via a cogent argument.
-
340
Fallacies about Faith
by tec inpeace to you!.
this thread is about false things (some) atheists think theists believe.
this is not a thread about false things that atheists think about theists.
-
-
Etude
Never mind. If you don't get the point, there is no point. That's why trees don't make a sound in the forrest when there's no one there to listen. That is why logic fails when one people refuse to recognize it. I know you can reason. But in most cases here, you just rationalize. BIG DIFFERENCE!
-
19
Do Wills Ever Affect Shunning?
by Cold Steel ina man has several sons and daughters who are active jehovah's witnesses.
so was his wife, who died two years ago.
he has since lapsed into apostasy and has been openly critical of the governing body.
-
-
Etude
Good advice Cold Steel. I've thought about leaving a letter of explanation as a will to be read to them in the event I go and they're still waiting for Armageddon. Thanks.
-
36
Topics not often discussed now
by jdubsnub inwhen i was a kid in the early 90's there always seemed to be a mention of how demons posessing people or how if you saw a demon or something supernatural occuring mearly calling jehovah's name would rid you of the situation.
rarely now a days do you hear anything of the sort.
that got me to thinking, what are some other topics the society has backed off of?
-
-
Etude
Thanks Apognophos! That's is the very one I used.
Etude
-
340
Fallacies about Faith
by tec inpeace to you!.
this thread is about false things (some) atheists think theists believe.
this is not a thread about false things that atheists think about theists.
-
-
Etude
Tammy:
It took a little bit of searching to find at least one major example (there have been many more) were you use the same logic. I didn't want to dig up the minutia of what you say because much of it is tidious. But here's one example from a year ago:
"I can't imagine not believing in God"
The thread is replete with responses to your statements, including your repetition of the "truth is truth" phrase. That’s on page 27 of a 33-page long discussion. I would also recommend you read the very last page, to which you never commented.
-
-
-
Etude
I’m absolutely convinced of your sincerity and fervor. Your parallel about how we both fell for the scam of the WT is true; and, we have both changed dramatically since. Here’s where we differ: I decided not to let my emotions, and even further, my passion, desire and need to believe to be the pivotal factor in finding answers. I set on a path to discover what I could really know with any degree of certainty. I can tell you know that my quest led to more questions than answers. However, I think I (in many cases, reluctantly) reached some conclusions I’m willing to live with. I summarize my condition as one where I will often say “I don’t know” about many things rather than force an answer and admit to not knowing because there is no practical or logical way to know.
I realize your need to surrender to the idea of Christ and accept Him as your Savior. But that doesn’t make Him real any more than anything I can imagine and don’t have. It’s a very seductive thing, though unselfish and even spiritual. What I’ve found is that I receive similar benefits by appreciating the universe and its wonders; by nurturing my relationships; by being in awe at the realization of the complexity of life and the cosmos by looking at a cell or a galaxy. By telling you all of that, I’m stressing to you that what you have is not exclusive or simply the purview of believing in Christ or any other deity. I did not come willingly to this place. I arrived after an arduous trek and then noticed that it was good. More importantly, I realized that it was not the destination that was ultimately important. It was the journey or how I got here that made all the difference; having sincerely reasoned; having kept an open mind; having been challenged by others to rid myself of tradition, religious inculcation and belief-based separatism.
No one can deny you your feelings. But many can certainly demonstrate that aside from you, those feelings are not founded upon any real quantities. That is one of the fundamental questions I started asking even before I left the WTS. I thought about it because I had already experienced intense attachment to causes and had felt highly emotional about something greater than myself. I had to take a more sober and rational approach rather than be a victim to my loftiest desires and good intentions. It’s a good thing I never lost the fervor and intensity for anything and that still allows me to enjoy life with reasonable freedom.
-
340
Fallacies about Faith
by tec inpeace to you!.
this thread is about false things (some) atheists think theists believe.
this is not a thread about false things that atheists think about theists.
-
-
Etude
Tammy, sorry for the incorrect assumption (and thank you cofty). Nevertheless, you said you "studied" for a while with the witlesses. So, at least you're familiar with their m.o. After some time reading your posts, I have found that what you now have is not so different than theirs. The perfect example is your circularity in saying "Truth is truth".
"I simply mean that truth is truth... regardless of what you or I or anyone THINKS is truth; or regardless of who does or does not accept it."
On the face of it, that statement rings true. But in the same vein, bad is bad, boys will be boys and opinions will be like assholes. But, who gets to make that determination? I suppose we can say that each of us do. But not arbitrarily -- not if what is considered truth is going to remain true. This is why we have some tools in order to make that determination. Truth can only be that which is verifiable or confirmed. It is not what someone thinks it is in their head. It has to agree with reality or at least the common reality we all share. It has to make sense to us via logic. The verification of truth is founded on real knowledge and not on what we simply have come to believe.
So, if I say that there is no possible way to determine that there is a Supreme Being, the burden of proof to the contrary must be something I can, not just accept for the sake of belief, but accept because the evidence is undeniable. You can claim that "faith" is the key to believing. But faith, if there is such a thing and is real, must also meet the same burden of proof. That it sometimes works out and events and ideas seem to coincide does not make anything true. You have built an elaborate universe in your mind about what is and what is not. That's OK. But you must expect that lacking any evidence (even in the form of reasoning), others will challenge you and point out the flaws in your thinking.
I think that I've expressed the gist of what I was trying to say without referring back to specific examples in your narrative. While the rest of the conversation has drifted away from your original poser, the fundamental problem is that what you started to discuss is unfounded or untrue resulting in the commentary that was generated.
-
340
Fallacies about Faith
by tec inpeace to you!.
this thread is about false things (some) atheists think theists believe.
this is not a thread about false things that atheists think about theists.
-
-
Etude
“Agressively shoving atheism down people's throats is not going to stop one person from joining the Witnesses.”
I agree that there should always be civility in our discussions. Insults (unless warranted) tend to polarize people and deteriorate the conversation. But I object to your characterization that atheist try to shove Atheism down other’s throats. Yes, some do. But a lot of people like are simply trying to prevent theists from shoving religion down everyone else’s throats. It’s a reactionary response. Furthermore, those of us who a slightly more critical in thinking tend to object to untruths and ideas that are completely unsustainable. Those conditions give rise to situations where we just have to speak up.
I must admit that I’m curious about your particular brand of Xianity. I’m guessing that you interpret the Bible in a different way, different enough to reject the traditional ideas of Adam & Eve or perhaps other teachings that are well entrenched in tradition. You’re not alone. Many denominations have been doing the same picking and choosing for centuries. Still, whatever it is you believe, I fairly certain that whatever is at your foundation has flaws (the existence of Christ as stated in the Bible, for one). I also believe that in a logical discussion, it would become evident that there isn’t much you can prove with certainty about what you believe.