Posts by tkmmorgan

These are my favorite kind of posts as long as they don't degenerate into name calling. You can't prove any thing with that.

I.M.O. The whole debate between creation and evolution is really simple. You can't "prove" either one. However you can disprove one of them. Evolution is easily disproven. There simply are NO transitional creatures anywhere nor has there ever been.

To revisit the car example- I cannot disprove Henry Ford's ghost made your car. I can strain the credibilty of your statement but cannot disprove it. The best I can do is cast doubt on it. However, if I said my Lincoln evolved, on its own, from a Model T, I would have to show some cars(at least one) that was part one model and part another model. If I could not do that, to believe my statement you would have to use more faith than I would to believe yours simply because you made no claim to verifiable evidence while I did but was not able to produce it.Bad example I know, because with a car unlike us, there are a whole myriad of ways you could prove where it came from and who built it, and someone could even build a 1/2 Lincoln and 1/2 Model T, just go with the spirit of it.

If you don't believe that creationists practice science then you must not believe evolutionists do either. Evolution is there only because it adherents cannot accept the possibilty that there might be a God. Lets look at something Darwin believed-inheritable mutation. He believed that something he called gemmules floated from the affected part of you to you genitals thereby altering you DNA. That is just funny. A scientist trying to prove this started cutting the tails off of lab rats then breeding them. Amazingly every new generation of rats had their tails again. Another did it with fruit flies and xray radiation. After thousands of generations they didn't turn into something else.

Anyway, my two cents are in.

Todd

I live in Billings, MT!!!! My in-laws are hardcore borg members, is there any information I can get to show them?

There are JW's all over in the county government here. I found that out a year or so ago when I was getting a divorce, they were everywhere you looked!

I don't know anything about how to get info out of public officials but if you guys coach me through I would be happy to get what I can and post it here and also try to get our useless local paper to run a story on it.

The community here is small and my new wife was a JW until I got her to start thinking for herself and now she is an apostate in good standing so that is how I know who they are. Also my brother-in-law is a computer support tech for the city and both city and county governments here are in the same building so he does support work for the county too. I don't know if that will help to get info or not but.......

Todd

If anybody wants to email me feel free to. Just put something like "JW, JW, JW" in the subject because if you are not on my safe list the email will get sent to my junkmail and without a distinctive subject like that I won't ever see it.

Edited by - tkmmorgan on 21 September 2002 18:0:33

Bleep,

Try this for some reading on the Nephilim.

http://www.prophecyinthenews.com/articledetail.asp?Article_ID=24

Interesting anyway.

Todd

A_Rev,

Since you don't seem to take what anybody here says as having any merit, how about listening to the WTBS?

"We need to examine, not only what we personally believe, but also what is taught by any religious organization with which we may be associated with. If we are lovers of the truth, there is nothing to fear from such an examination." (The Truth that Leads to Eternal Life, 1968)

If we want to worship God acceptably, we must know the truth. This is an important issue. Our eternal happiness depends on it. Therefore, everyone should ask himself: Is my way of worship acceptable to God? Am I genuinely interested in learning the truth of Gods Word? Or am I afraid of what a careful investigation might reveal? (Watchtower October 1, 1998)

When persons are in great danger from a source that they do not suspect or are being misled by those they consider their friends, is it an unkindness to warn them? They may prefer not to believe the warning. They may even resent it. But does that free one from the moral responsibility to give that warning?(Watchtower Jan. 15, 1974)

That is what people on this board are attempting to do-give warning. You could do a lot worse than to take what they say seriously instead of dismissing it out of hand.

Good luck,

Todd

Edited by - tkmmorgan on 16 July 2002 12:3:3

ravingferret

By all means continue your study. Try a couple of things though, and see what happens;

1. Ask them to prove that the WTBTS is really Jehovah's mouthpiece and not a false prophet, without badmouthing other religions and keeping in mind that the only Biblical test for a prophet was if they made claims in Jehovah's name and the prophecy didn't come true. Keeping this in mind

"From a purely human viewpoint, it could appear that these developments could hardly take place before the generation of 1914 disappears from the scene. But fulfillment of all the foretold events affecting the generation of 1914 does not depend on comparatively slow human action. Jehovah's prophetic word through Christ Jesus is: "This generation [of 1914] will by no means pass away until all things occur." (Luke 21:32) And Jehovah, who is the source of inspired and unfailing prophecy, will bring about the fulfillment of his Son's words in a relatively short time." (Watchtower 5/15 1984 page 6; bold added - brackets theirs) (thanks JanH)

Until they can prove this (which they can't) talking about doctrine that comes from the GB is totally meaningless. I have about 18 pages of research that I have done with nothing but quotes from their own publications and their own translation of the Bible- the New World Translation that proves they are false prophets if anyone is interested.

2.Just because JW's can "prove" other religous groups wrong dosen't mean they are right.

Simplified example:

Catholic: The sky is red.

Protestant: The sky is green.

Mormon: The sky is orange.

Jehovah's Witness: The sky is purple.

Me: I wonder which is right?

JW: The sky is not red, green, or orange. If it's not those it must be purple. No, no don't bother to look into it yourself I'm a follower of Jehovah and would never mislead you.

Make them prove it without a single word of comparison to other religions.

3. Ask them questions that make them think. The average JW is so indoctinated he/she dosen't even have to listen to you to know what you are going to ask and so answers from what has been drilled into them by rote, so ask things that aren't in their little book of drivel "Reasoning from the Scriptures"

Examples:

1.After I live through the Big A as a JW what happens next?

Their own book (I forget the title-something about living forever in paradise on earth) says that the survivors will have to clean up and rebuild the earth into a paradise for all the people to be resurrected into. Let's look at that for a minute- billions of bodies to clean up, all the rubble to clean up, homes to build, and clothing food and such provided for newly resurrected ones, the majority of which will be "evil ones" getting their second chance to accept "the truth". All this will have to be done by hand since all machinery, factories, etc. will have been destroyed. Sounds like fun huh!?

2.If I get a second chance why shouldn't I just ignore your message and since you believe in soul sleep and I will be unaware until resurrected then I will miss out on all the work of recreating the paradise? What would I have to lose by following that course?

3. You teach that the JW's will be teaching all these resurrected ones about the truth. Does that include all the JW's that have died over the years?

4.If so how will you close the knowledge gap since what you teach now bears almost no resemblance to what you taught in Russell's day? Will all those older generation JW's be resurrected first so you can bring them up to date on the "new light"?

5. Your living forever book teaches that JW's will be administrators of the paradise earth. JW's keep totally out of any type of government so what training program have you implemented so that they will have the skills necessary to deal with mundane issues that come up, such as sewers, trash disposal etc.? (The Mormons believe the same thing and they have such a program. They are kooks too but this isn't a Mormon site)

6. You teach Jehovah God limited his own knowledge so that he wouldn't be responsible for sin. Is this the reason he fails to present truth to you in an understandable whole?

7. Since the truth must be presented in pieces to JW's how is it that sometimes you see the pieces as exact opposites? For example, organ transplants were once called marvels of modern medicine and were ok, then cannibalistic, then a matter of conscience and once again ok. Is Jehovah God not powerful enough to make sure you at least see the parts correctly?

8. In the above example, how is the light getting brighter? Seems to me to be vacillation. (And don't even show me the sailboat)

9. In light of present day JW teaching explain John 5:24 to me.("Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life." -NKJV, but it reads about the same in the NWT)

Anyway, the JW's tactics are always to avoid talking about the WTBTS and the GB but they love to talk doctrine, and to attack other religions as if that makes them correct by default. I don't see how you can discuss doctrine without discussing whether or not its source is correct.

Always question take nothing anyone says (including me) at face value. Do you own research. The truth about the WTBTS is out there but you have to be willing to hear it.

One more thing to consider: this is the GB's definition of a lie-" saying something false to a person who is entitled to know the truth and doing so with the intent to deceive or to injure him or another person". This differs slightlyfrom mine, I thought a lie was just saying something false. So you have to ask yourself (obviously they aren't going to say "oh no your not entitled) if they think you are entitled to know the truth. If they don't they will lie to you and think they are doing right. They call it "theocratic warfare".

God's Word commands: "Speak truth each of you with his neighbor." (Eph. 4:25) This command, however, does not mean that we should tell everyone who asks us all he wants to know. We must tell the truth to one who is entitled to know, but if one is not so entitled we may be evasive ( Watchtower June 1, 1960)

Some things to think about

Todd

p.s.

I was actually impressed by the fact that there are so many sites that are anti-witness,an excellent witness in itself,does make one wonder how 6,000,000 can become so hated in the world,

Please explain this kind of reasoning to me. Let's put it another way- If you were going to buy a car and found lots of research stating it had huge problems this would be an excellent endorsement of the car?

Edited by - tkmmorgan on 12 July 2002 13:21:23

Edited by - tkmmorgan on 12 July 2002 13:37:5

I'm a newbie on this board so if this question has been answered already I apologize for my ignorance but,

For those of you who don't believe in God, are you evolutionists? Or do you have a 3rd explaination for our being here?

Whatever you believe is the method-why do you believe it?

Hi all,

First off I would like to state that this is a fantastic board! Contrasting with the JWs it allows us to communicate with others who may or may not agree with our view of religion and God, and from most of what Ive seen, it doesnt turn into a hateful mud-slinging contest. Not only that, no one has to worry about being DFd for disagreeing with someone else! AlanF and JanH in particular have very well thought out posts. Since both of you are well-read, intelligent guys, and AlanF seems to have at least a small bit of room for the probability that God may exist, I would be interested to find out if either of you (and anybody else for that matter) have read Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis, and if so what did you think? I guess one thing that needs to be set out here is that Im in total agreement that the concept of Jehovah as taught by the JWs (and many other religious groups) is nonsensical and not Biblical. The notion of some fire-breathing entity that lives to ignore us until its time to destroy us, like some spoiled brat who wants new toys, is ridiculous I think. That being said, I do, however believe in the God of the Bible, who is infinitely different from the "Jehovah" concept of the JW's. AlanF, I understand your personal experiences with prayer yielding zero response, I have myself though had experiences where it yielded results that were independent of myself. It is most definitely possible that this was mere coincidence. I choose though to believe in God. It is also possible that for me, God exists inside me (and I think in all of us) and as such I am deeply saddened by your statement:

We had it demonstrated to ourselves that, despite the sincerest of motives, if a God exists, he wanted nothing to do with us.

Pascals Wager is a mathematical argument which requires you to bet on Gods existence. Pascal himself says this:

"Let us examine this point and declare: 'Either God exists, or He does not.' To view shall we incline? Reason cannot decide for us one way or the other: we are separated by an infinite gulf. At the extremity of this infinite distance a game is in progress, where either heads or tails may turn up. What will you wager? According to reason you cannot bet either way; according to reason you can defend neither proposition . 'Both are wrong. The right thing is not to wager at all.' Yes, but a bet must be laid. There is no option: you have joined the game."

The wager is not proof of Gods existence but instead is proof that is wiser to believe in God than not. According to decision theory, reason requires you to go for maximum gain. Either God exists or He doesnt. The gain of the possible outcomes are as follows where x,y,z are values not specified beyond the requirement that they are not infinite

Mathematically speaking then where p is your positive, non-zero (however small but greater than zero) probability for Gods existence.

F(for God)= infinite*p+x*(1-p)= infinite

So your expected gain from belief in God is infinite. Wagering against God however is:

A(against God)= y*p+z*(1-p)

This is finite. Since reason requires you go for the greatest gain an infinite gain is better than a finite gain. Put another way-

Either God is or He's not. If God is not, it does not matter much. If God is, then betting there is no God will bring loss while betting God is will bring reward. Because the latter is infinitely more desirable than the former, the outcome of the conditional probability problem is clear, even if you believes that the probability of God's existence is very small.

I have a feeling Im going to get slaughtered on this! Oh well. For the record, I dont agree with this, stating in essence that you should believe in God just because it makes better mathematical sense and there are admittedly lots of problems with it not the least of which being if you are a total atheist then your possibility for Gods existence is zero which destroys the whole thing. There is no harm in having faith in God. Until you begin to force your way of belief or disbelief onto someone else it really affects only you. But I love to get differing points of view, that is how we grow, mature, and shape our lives. So Im going to throw this out and see what comes back!

And for Perfection Seeker- Im glad for you that you still have faith in God. Since it works for you it is correct for you whether He exists or not.

Edited by - tkmmorgan on 11 July 2002 16:22:22