Regarding the attitudes towards atheists and nonreligious people in general, and some of the concerns of those people, I found the following article very informative and interesting.: https://www.atheists.org/2022/12/ny-governor-hochul-secular-recovery-bill/ .
Disillusioned JW
JoinedPosts by Disillusioned JW
-
29
New poll shows public knows Jehovah's Witnesses and dislike them....almost as much as the Church of Satan
by Balaamsass2 inwow.
while not a pew survey, i found these to be surprising results.
" a recent yougov poll explores americans' attitudes toward 35 religious groups, organizations, and belief systems.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
-
27
Is The Religion Of Jehovah's Witnesses Biblical?
by Vanderhoven7 inthe answer is a definite no!.
because every doctrine that is unique to jehovah's witnesses is not in the bible.
the unique doctrines of jehovah’s witnesses are the ones that only jehovah’s witnesses teach.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Has anyone ever become a Christian of a specific church (such as Roman Catholic or Lutheran, for example), denomination, sect, or 'cult' of Christianity just by reading the Bible (and I don't mean an edition of the Bible bundled with notes, helps, or an appendix of a specific denomination or specific church)?
-
98
Who raised Jesus from the dead?
by Blotty ini have seen arguments surrounding jesus' resurrection being proof of "the trinity" - now while in some cases it's a good argument the evidence for it remains very weak.
(bible quotes are from the nwt but other bibles are referenced, use whichever you please) this following version of it is a good example.. "the bible indicates that all [persons] of the trinity was involved in jesus’ resurrection.
galatians[1:1] says that the father raised jesus from the dead.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Though I still have a number of Christian books which I still read (though for various reasons) I now intensely dislike reading books (and watching videos) which are specifically apologetic for Christianity (or for some other religion which teaches that the supernatural exists) - especially if they are also heavily criticizing atheism, evolution, and/or scientific naturalism. I thus have no desire at all to watch Christian apologetic videos of Mark Lanier.
-
98
Who raised Jesus from the dead?
by Blotty ini have seen arguments surrounding jesus' resurrection being proof of "the trinity" - now while in some cases it's a good argument the evidence for it remains very weak.
(bible quotes are from the nwt but other bibles are referenced, use whichever you please) this following version of it is a good example.. "the bible indicates that all [persons] of the trinity was involved in jesus’ resurrection.
galatians[1:1] says that the father raised jesus from the dead.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Correction: On page 9 of this topic thread I had a typo when I wrote the following. "Well I learned many years. from a science show on television, that some people can function well (including thinking very consciously) despite having the vast majority of their brain tissue!" I meant instead the following. "Well I learned many years ago from a science show on television, that some people can function well (including thinking very consciously) despite having the vast majority of their brain tissue severely damaged or even gone/missing!"
-
98
Who raised Jesus from the dead?
by Blotty ini have seen arguments surrounding jesus' resurrection being proof of "the trinity" - now while in some cases it's a good argument the evidence for it remains very weak.
(bible quotes are from the nwt but other bibles are referenced, use whichever you please) this following version of it is a good example.. "the bible indicates that all [persons] of the trinity was involved in jesus’ resurrection.
galatians[1:1] says that the father raised jesus from the dead.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
On page 8 of this topic thread Sea Breeze wrote the following. "Mark Lanier is a Trial Lawyer" who spoke "on the topic of the nature of evidence" at an event "of an atheist / christian book club". Sea Breeze also said the following regarding the "club". "Recently they completed a segment called "Christianity on Trial". They just completed a segment called "Atheism on Trial"." What Sea Breeze did not say is that though Mark Lanier is a trail lawyer, he is also a Christian apologist with an honorary theological degree and that he has published a Christian apologetic book called Christianity on Trial: A Lawyer Examines the Christian Faith and a Christian apologetic book called Atheism on Trial: A Lawyer Examines the Case for Unbelief. Both books are published by InterVarsity Press - a Christian publisher. I thus strongly suspect that the "club" Sea Breeze wrote of is one created by Mark Lanier. https://www.lanierlawfirm.com/attorneys/w-mark-lanier/ says the following about Mark Lanier.
"Mark has been awarded honorary doctor degrees from St. Johns University, Pepperdine University and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. ...
Personal Background
A devout Christian, Mark is also the founder of the Lanier Theological Library, one of the nation’s largest private theological collections. He teaches a weekly, 700-plus-member Sunday school class focusing on Biblical literacy at Champion Forest Baptist Church in Houston. Mark is also the founder of the Christian Trial Lawyers Association, a nonprofit organization working to create a network of principled attorneys to minister to others through civic-minded endeavors. Mark has also published several books on faith. These include Christianity on Trial (IVP, 2014) and a daily devotional book titled Psalms for Living: Daily Prayers, Wisdom, and Guidance (Baylor University Press, 2016), the latter of which was awarded the 2018 Illumination Book Award in the Devotional category. He followed this up with Torah for Living (Baylor University Press, 2018)."
Laanier's above mentioned web page in the html code for "<title>" says "W. Mark Lanier - Attorney, Pastor & Founder of The Lanier Law Firm".
Atheists and others who do not believe in Christianity should keeps the above mentioned facts in mind about Mark Lanier when considering watching the video (of which Sea Breeze provided a link to) which includes him as a speaker. Sea Breeze tends to use exclusively Christian apologetic sources in his posts in which he criticizes atheism, materialism, naturalism, and evolution.
-
98
Who raised Jesus from the dead?
by Blotty ini have seen arguments surrounding jesus' resurrection being proof of "the trinity" - now while in some cases it's a good argument the evidence for it remains very weak.
(bible quotes are from the nwt but other bibles are referenced, use whichever you please) this following version of it is a good example.. "the bible indicates that all [persons] of the trinity was involved in jesus’ resurrection.
galatians[1:1] says that the father raised jesus from the dead.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
From my recent research on the subject of terminal lucidity, terminal lucidity (in regards to brain damaged, but not brain dead, people becoming lucid hours to days before dying) is something which sometimes really happens. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_lucidity says the following regarding possible natural explanations.
"According to Macleod (2009)[13] in his observations, explanative causes could not be found for the variety of cases, but it was suggested that due to the modern pharmacology in terminal cases, the condition may be less common today.[4] A recent proposed mechanism includes a non-tested hypothesis of neuromodulation, according to which near-death discharges of neurotransmitters and corticotropin-releasing peptides act upon preserved circuits of the medial prefrontal cortex and hippocampus, promoting memory retrieval and mental clarity.[14]"
On page 5 of this topic thread Sea Breeze quotes https://island.lk/lucidity-before-death-brain-releasing-consciousness/ when Sea Breeze said the following. "There are a number of cases reported where patients who were dying of malignant tumours that destroyed almost the entirety of the brain, confirmed by radiological investigations like CT scans and MRI, waking up and discussing their lives and imminent death, lucidly". Sea Breeze then alludes that such facts are a poor fit to a materialist view where consciousness is said to be ONLY a product of physical brain function. [I get the impression that Sea Breeze alludes such since he said the following."Do these facts better fit a materialist view where consciousness is said to be ONLY a product of physical brain function? Or, do they better fit a biblical view where consciousness is said to be separate from the body, especially at death?"]
The article says that Dr Greyson makes use of the following factor. "Complex consciousness with minimal brain; he describes cases of very high IQ students in High School or University with hardly any brain. Only post-mortem examinations would reveal whether they had functioning brain tissue elsewhere." The article says that
Dr Greyson considers such "... to support the concept of consciousness without the brain ...." While I think that there are people with complex consciousness despite having a minimal brain (I will state my reason for believing such later in this post) I don't think that excludes a a possible naturalistic explanation for such (I will state my reason for believing such later in this post).In a previous post of mine I mentioned that https://www.newsweek.com/near-death-experiences-out-body-phenomenon-study-1757602 said the following.
' "What seems to be happening as a person is dying, their brain is shutting down and in this process disinhibition, braking systems [in the brain] are being removed because they are no longer relevant," said Parnia, referencing how people can only access a small part of their brain's consciousness at one time.
"This disinhibition seems to give access to parts of the brain become activated and seeing spikes in EEG activity and gives access to dimensions of reality they otherwise did not have access to, including full consciousness." '
While Dr. Sam Parnia believes/thinks such supports the idea of the human consciousness having no need for the human brain, I interpret the matter as being a clue for a naturalistic mechanism for terminal lucidity.
I previously learned from scientific sources that our subconscious mind has access to, and processes, far more information than our conscious mind is aware of us. Our subconscious mind receives and processes vast amounts of information, and usually only presents a small percentage of that information (and other times only the conclusions made based upon that information) to our conscious mind. If we humans could tap much more into that enormous amount of information which our subconscious mind has, then our conscious mind would be far more powerful than it normally it. [But, if we tapped into a tremendous amount of it at the same time, our conscious mind would likely become overwhelmed.] Along these lines, last night on a PBS television show in my local area there was an episode of a four-part science program called "Hacking Your Mind" and some of what it said related to this. It even included a segment about "blind sight". The existence of blind sight is very fascinating. The article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blindsight defines blind sight as follows.
"Blindsight is the ability of people who are cortically blind to respond to visual stimuli that they do not consciously see due to lesions in the primary visual cortex, also known as the striate cortex or Brodmann Area 17.[1]
... Patients with blindsight have damage to the system that produces visual perception (the visual cortex of the brain and some of the nerve fibers that bring information to it from the eyes) rather than to the underlying brain system controlling eye movements.[12] "
Here is the naturalistic idea I obtained to explain terminal lucidity. "... as a person is dying, their brain is shutting down and in this process disinhibition, braking systems [in the brain] are being removed ...." That then gives the person "access to parts of the brain" that the person hadn't had conscious access to for a very long time.
But you may be wondering how could a person have a complex consciousness with minimal brain - even if the brain is severely damaged from malignant tumors, or if the brain's structure is severely impaired (mentally retarded) due to a congenital defect during its development? Well I learned many years. from a science show on television, that some people can function well (including thinking very consciously) despite having the vast majority of their brain tissue!
In the science show (probably on PBS) I watched it was pointed out (and even shown in the video) that when the brain of a particular female was imaged, it was seen that her brain was hollow! She had hardly any brain left; the only part she had left was close to her inner side of her skull. Yet she functioned normally during her daily tasks! The scientist(s) concluded that her brain remapped itself to compensate for the massive damage and loss of brain tissue. I was astonished to learn such. I watched that science show a great many of years ago, probably long before I became an atheist. Yet I did not conclude (nor the scientist in the show) that the female's capability under such circumstances meant her mind was that of a spirit soul which had no need for the brain to create and maintain consciousness.
This suggests to me that under the right circumstances people only need a small percentage of their brain tissue to function adequately, provided the brain is wired/mapped in a highly beneficial way.
From ore recent science show I learned that crows and other birds, despite having a very tiny brain, can make and use tools! I say a video in the show in which a crow did both of those things, without the bird being trained to do such? That further supports the idea that even a small brain, a minimal brain, is capable to creating consciousness.
A dew days ago I learn certain facts about the extinct species of human called Homo naledi. That specie had a small cranial capacity (of 465–610 cm3) of only about one third of that our species, yet science articles from December 2022 say it was discovered they used fire and cooked (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_naledi and see the posts made by truth_be_known and by Earnest located at https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5068233325936640/early-hominem-neanderthals-evolution?page=5 for documentation)! https://news.wisc.edu/homo-naledi-had-a-tiny-brain-but-it-looked-a-lot-like-ours/ says the following about Homo naledi.
'... a new study published Monday (May 14, 2018) in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.... shows that though its brain was small like those of apes and our more distant human ancestors, such as Australopithecus sediba, Homo naledi’s brain shared structural features (grooves and folds) decidedly more like humans.
“Maybe brain size isn’t all it’s cracked up to be,” says one of the study’s corresponding authors, John Hawks, a paleoanthropologist at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. “It opens the door for us to say that maybe they were more capable than we might assume; maybe it isn’t just (brain) size.”
Notice that their brains were thus about the size of the Australopithicenes and of modern-day non-human apes yet they had enough consciousness to make and use fire and to cook! The earlier mentioned Wikipedia article about Homo naledi says that despite their small cranial size (and hence small brain size) that "Nonetheless, H. naledi brain anatomy seems to have been similar to contemporary Homo, which could indicate comparable cognitive complexity." That also further supports the idea that even a small brain, a minimal brain, is capable to creating consciousness.
During part of the past 7 days or so I have been reading about Homo floresiensis. See https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5675982848524288/evidence-human-evolution-keeps-getting-stronger-stronger?page=5 where I point out the following. "... scientist Morwood says Homo floresiensis made stone tools, used fire, hunted Stegodon and Komodo dragons, and the front of its skull looked very human except that its forehead (of specimen LB1) is very short, and that the cranial capacity inside the skull was only 380 cc (for specimen LB1)." Note that brain of Homo floresiensis was even smaller than that of Homo naledi and that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_floresiensis says the brain size of the LB1 specimen of Homo floresiensis was in "... the range of chimpanzees or the extinct australopithecines.[3][42] " The Wikiepedia article also says the following.
"Smaller size does not appear to have affected mental faculties, as Brodmann area 10 on the prefrontal cortex, which is associated with cognition, is about the same size as that of modern humans.[42] H. floresiensis is also associated with evidence for advanced behaviours, such as the use of fire, butchering, and stone tool manufacturing.[4][6] "
That even further supports the idea that even a small brain, a minimal brain, is capable to creating consciousness.
As a result of the above evidence and analysis, I see no need to invoke a supernaturalistic explanation (such as spirit souls) to explain terminal lucidity in humans with minimal intact brain tissue.
-
98
Who raised Jesus from the dead?
by Blotty ini have seen arguments surrounding jesus' resurrection being proof of "the trinity" - now while in some cases it's a good argument the evidence for it remains very weak.
(bible quotes are from the nwt but other bibles are referenced, use whichever you please) this following version of it is a good example.. "the bible indicates that all [persons] of the trinity was involved in jesus’ resurrection.
galatians[1:1] says that the father raised jesus from the dead.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
For those who are unsure if the arguments made by Sea Breeze against atheism and materialism and naturalism are flawed I invite you to read my posts made at the following two topic threads.
Besides the above, a good place to learn about Atheism (including the vision the American Atheists non-profit organization) is at https://www.atheists.org/about/our-vision/ . That web page includes mention of the following.
"American Atheists envisions a world in which public policy is made using the best evidence we have rather than religious dogma and where religious beliefs are no longer seen as an excuse for bigotry or cause to receive special treatment from the government.
... Definitions
Atheism is the comprehensive world view of persons who are free from theism and have freed themselves of supernatural beliefs altogether. It is predicated on ancient Greek Materialism.
Atheism involves the mental attitude that unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.
Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own inherent, immutable, and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that humankind, finding the resources within themselves, can and must create their own destiny. It teaches that we must prize our life on earth and strive always to improve it. It holds that human beings are capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism’s ‘faith’ is in humankind and their ability to transform the world culture by their own efforts. This is a commitment that is, in its very essence, life-asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation that is impossible without noble ideas that inspire us to bold, creative works. Materialism holds that our potential for good and more fulfilling cultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited."
WOW! That is sure is a very powerful and very beautiful message of Atheism and of Materialism! Isn't it?
If you were raised to believe in Young Earth Creationism, the WT/JW religion, or some other fundamentalist type/style of mentally controlling religion and if you know and/or feel that such harmed you both intellectually and emotionally, doesn't the above statement by American Atheists bring joy and hope to your figurative heart? You can leave fundamentalist religion, Christianity, and theism behind and become an atheist naturalist. You can become a happier person as a result and have a more fulfilling life as a result.
-
98
Who raised Jesus from the dead?
by Blotty ini have seen arguments surrounding jesus' resurrection being proof of "the trinity" - now while in some cases it's a good argument the evidence for it remains very weak.
(bible quotes are from the nwt but other bibles are referenced, use whichever you please) this following version of it is a good example.. "the bible indicates that all [persons] of the trinity was involved in jesus’ resurrection.
galatians[1:1] says that the father raised jesus from the dead.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Sea Breeze has stated a false claim of materialism and makes a straw man argument based upon such when he claims that codes and mind are not part of the definition of what the philosophy of materialism is. Note that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism defines materialism as follows. "Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds matter to be the fundamental substance in nature, and all things, including mental states and consciousness, are results of material interactions." Notice that that definition of materialism doesn't say that only matter exists, but rather that matter is the fundamental substance in nature. It further says that mind and consciousness are the results of material interactions.
Like in a computer, even in a memory stick with stored code and/or stored information, that which is stored in it is a configuration of electrical charges of electrical particles. To store code/information in the computer memory stick one adds and/or removes electrical particles from various places in the memory stick and/or shifts their position in the memory stock. That changes the mass of the computer stick (if electrical add is added or subtracted from the memory stick) since subatomic particles (such as electrons) have mass. When one charges up an electrical capacitor, one is adding electrons to it and since electrons have mass one is increasing the mass of the capacitor. Sea Breeze is thus wrong when he said the following. " If I give you a memory stick full of information, it weighes [sic] exactly the same as an empty memory stick doesn't it? It has no mass." That is because the means of imparting the information involved the changing the electrical state (and hence the amount of mass, at least temporarily) of the computer memory stick, as well as the configuration of the mass.
Furthermore, in Sea Breeze's reply to Jeffro (on page 9 of this topic thread) a number of Sea Breeze's remarks were already made irrelevant by me when I made an earlier post which explained what I thought Lewontin meant about his remarks of materialism.
Sea Breeze also continues to repeat a claim of many creationists (including of the WT) which says that all atheists/materialists/naturalists (including ones who are also scientists) say the universe is solely the result of unguided explosions and random chemical reactions. But that is also a straw man argument by Sea Breeze. I have pointed out to Sea Breeze before atheistic scientist (and myself) don't say it is solely the result of such, but is instead also the result of laws of physics and of orderly effects of the forces of nature. I made a post in which I mentioned how Steven Hawkings mentioned such (and illustrated such) in a televised video which aired on PBS.
Young Earth creationist Christian theist apologists are flawed in much of their argument against materialism, atheism, scientific naturalism, evolutionism (cosmological evolution, chemical evolution [including origin of life from non-life], and biological evolution).
-
98
Who raised Jesus from the dead?
by Blotty ini have seen arguments surrounding jesus' resurrection being proof of "the trinity" - now while in some cases it's a good argument the evidence for it remains very weak.
(bible quotes are from the nwt but other bibles are referenced, use whichever you please) this following version of it is a good example.. "the bible indicates that all [persons] of the trinity was involved in jesus’ resurrection.
galatians[1:1] says that the father raised jesus from the dead.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Thanks Jeffro for clarifying.
-
30
What really is UN doing with religions?
by Kosonen inoccult un forces seek to hijack religion for globalism.
https://thenewamerican.com/occult-un-forces-seek-to-hijack-religion-for-globalism/it does not look like religions dominate un but the other way around.
journalist alex newman gives a totally different picture about the real state of affairs.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Beth Sarim, on some level though there is some degree of continuity. It looks like what I said earlier was somewhat incorrect, and it looks like the WT is somewhat correct in saying the UN is essentially a revived and improved League of Nations. I say that because of the following.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_Court_of_International_Justice says the following. "By a resolution from the League of Nations on 18 April 1946, both the Court and the League ceased to exist and were replaced by the International Court of Justice and the United Nations." Furthermore, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations says the following.
"The League of Nations (French: Société des Nations [sɔsjete de nɑsjɔ̃]) was the first worldwide intergovernmental organisation whose principal mission was to maintain world peace.[1] ... The main organization ceased operations on 20 April 1946 but many of its components were relocated into the new United Nations.
... The onset of the Second World War in 1939 showed that the League had failed its primary purpose; it was inactive until its abolition. The League lasted for 26 years; the United Nations (UN) replaced it in 1946 and inherited several agencies and organisations founded by the League."