Hoffnung

Joined

• started 12 topics
• posted 459 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Hoffnung

• 
  17

  WATCHTOWER WRONGFULL DEATH LAWSUIT - UPDATE

  by Lawrence Hughes in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  dear friends,.

  i wish to thank everyone who has helped me over the past nine years to fight the watchtower society in court.

  as a result of your kind support there has been important legal precedents set, a tremendous amount of media coverage created and numerous magazine articles published to expose the watchtower society and many lives have been saved.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Hoffnung
• 
  17

  WATCHTOWER WRONGFULL DEATH LAWSUIT - UPDATE

  by Lawrence Hughes in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  dear friends,.

  i wish to thank everyone who has helped me over the past nine years to fight the watchtower society in court.

  as a result of your kind support there has been important legal precedents set, a tremendous amount of media coverage created and numerous magazine articles published to expose the watchtower society and many lives have been saved.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Hoffnung

  How much money do you estimate that the trial will cost?
• 
  13

  Anyone here from The Netherlands?

  by Medina in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i am curious of any of the members comes from the netherlands and wich particular congregation, i myself was in emmen where bethel was.

  maybe we know eachother.

  bedankt!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Hoffnung

  Is the Emmen bethel couple with family name "Smans" familiar to you?
• 
  122

  Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

  " jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

  the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Hoffnung

  So Jonathan, what do you believe in?
• 
  122

  Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

  " jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

  the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Hoffnung

  1st of all, Nicalou, thank you for having started this thread, I am sorry if it goes further than what you intended.

  Jonathan H, thank you for your comments, i think you go too easy by scuffing the ID idea off, calling it is impossible to know. But that is OK. I'll reply on a few specific points you made.

  "The problem with your list on what designed life would look like, hoffnung is that it's merely assertions without evidence or solid reason."

  I fully agree, I don't see it as a problem though. It is an invitation to research and accept or reject the assertion based upon facts. Obviously I do not have the evidence yet. Otherwise I would have come up wit it.

  "Why would a designer leave behind a bunch of traces of trial and error, opposed to leaving only the successful attempts?"

  Ever seen a designer where his very 1st model was perfect? I have not. I am not merely looking for extinction and reappeance of a few spieces, I am looking for restarts from zero or almost zero. And even then we have to be cautious, because mass extinction on global scale & restarts of life can have natural environmental causes.

  "Why would there be hard boundries as to what life can do rather than a broad range of synthesis, and why are those specific boundries (such as no animals can breathe carbon dioxide) the lines that can't be crossed?"

  designers choose options, and this choice makes other options impossible. A car with a diesel engine cannot run on petrol, that kind of stuff. Natural selection does not have a free will to choose. Species are pushed to adapt and develop, taking on as much options as they can, as a reaction upon stochastic elements, if I understand it right. That it thereby crosses boundaries is a very important cornerstone of natural selection.

  "The problem with coming up with a list of what designed life would look like is that it infers an understanding of what the designer would do. Which in essence means you can make the theory fit the facts."

  I have gone out of my way to not fall into this trap. I might have failed in some points, but I guess I succeeded in others. And again, I don't have all the facts available, so my theory does not fit your assumption, and I cannot make it fot mine either.

  "All you have to do is explain why the designer did it this way instead of that way. Are there traces of trial an error? Yes? That's because the designer was working out solutions, he didn't get it right on the first try. No? That's because he's an intelligent designer and didn't leave behind lots of mistakes. Either outcome is explainable by design just by changing the designer. A vague designer is a theory that will fit any fact"

  Very true. This list is intended to make the designer less vague and more concrete, without ever really knowing him. If you want to help to narrow it down, add some more items to the list. And again, it is not about WHY, it is about HOW.

  "To come up with a solid methodology for prediction, you would first have to make solid predictions about the designer involved. And no ID movement wants to do that."

  Well, I must be the very 1st then. I am making solid predictions about the designer.

  "But even with the list you made, it doesn't conform to our planet. Ecosystems for instance, are not spontaneous and stable. The planet is in constant flux, the continents are drifting around the planet, it shifts from ice age to thawed age, and back again, and there have been multiple mass extinctions on the planet, as well as a constant background extinction rate. You would have to infer, not a designer that made it and then watched it go, but a designer that is constantly at work, shaping and reshaping the world's ecosystems."

  We are well aware no designer is at work in nature at the moment.

  "But there again is the rub, either way all you have to do is change the designer to fit the facts. As long as you assume a priori that it was designed then it's easy to explain anything by design. You just have to say that's how the designer wanted and then make up a reason why. Which is really a reverse process"

  I don't assume it was a priori designed. By making a list of solid predictions about the designer, I am making it more difficult to make the theory fit the facts.

  "It would be more logical to try and understand the nature of said designer by examing the available data, rather than the other way around."

  That is exactly what I am trying to do, hence the list. And as you have stated, in order to avoid making facts fitting the theories, you need to have some clear ideas about the designer, so that you cannot renounce it when it does not suit you any more .

  It is indeed not easy to find undeniable proofs of design. If it would be easy, somebody would have done it before us. One thing is important in this discussion. It centers around HOW, and not WHY. The why is in the realm of religion and stuff.
• 
  122

  Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

  " jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

  the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Hoffnung

  The lazy God... That is a cool idea. I like that one. It's funny

  Unfortunately it does not answer any questions. I am aware that many theist have a similar viewpoint, Psacramento being one. Makes it very easy to go by. But that is a lazy way of going about one of the most important questions. It does not stimulate research. And therefore it does not appeal to me. By the way I have read the God delusion many years ago, when I was still a good believing dub. It did not convince me back then. It felt a little bit like the Da Vinci Code. If you repeat something often enough, people will start accepting it. It was a good read though, and I still have it somewhere.

  Let us all have a beer and toast on the lazy God (no, not you Djeggnog, you are not allowed to toast because of your religion). Cheers
• 
  140

  The effect we are having on the Watchtower is HUGE

  by jwfacts in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i was inspired by a recent thread i know i aint gunna crumble the wt, but a girl can dream to look at the effect we as individuals are having on the watchtower society.. 3dogs1husband quoted a story to show that even helping only one person is worth it.. it is encouraging to note that the one person you may have helped has lead to millions being helped, due to the power of compounding growth.. compounding growth is well illustrated by the rice on a chessboard problem.

  if you start with 1 grain of rice on square one, and double it to 2 on the second, 4 on the third, 8 on the fourth, by the last (64th) square there would be 18,446,744,073,709,551,615 grains of rice.. likewise, if you help one person out of the grip of the watchtower this year, then next year you help one more and they help one, in a few years that is going to have a formidable result on the number of jehovahs witnesses.

  look at the following statistics.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Hoffnung

  There are quite a few indicators that the society, although still growing in absolute numbers, is going down. The amount of biblestudies making it to baptism is in free fall at the moment. in 10 years the percentage has been halved all over (from 8% to 4%), in some countries it lost 2/3.
• 
  122

  Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

  " jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

  the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Hoffnung

  Got to give it a try. I hope some others come up with more stuff.

  1.- Is harder the further we go back in time. I think we would have to review how often life restarted from scratch or near scratch, and then evaluate how it ended and restarted, and what living organism made it through. Remembering that a lack of explanation for the restart in itself is not proof of a designer. I has much to do with: how often was there a restart, how did it happen, what life forms remained. Fossile research is of great help in this regard. I do not think the designer to be perfect though, but that again, is an assumption.

  2. "No systems designer adds stuff to make it more beautiful." Maybe this does not deserve a place on this list.

  The next 2 will be hard to prove, but are valid points if confirmed.

  5. "non-related" in this context means: it could not be passed on in the process of natural selection. There should no connection in the "tree of evolution" if you wish.

  6. "There would be certain barriers between life forms that cannot be broken. e.g.: Plants live on carbondioxide and sunlight. animals need oxygen to live. There does not exist an animal that lives on carbon dioxide instead of oxygen, as far as I know.".... " . . is this feature exclusive to design?"

  I believe so, because natural selection does not have any of these barriers. Ultimately the species that survives, is the best adapted one, according to natural selection. In the example, there is no reason why an animal species should not use carbon dioxide, there always was enough of it available. A designer chooses options, thereby ruling out others. More research is needed to establish it though.

  7. - there should be repetitive processes in the development of life, a kind of design software if you like.

  "The guiding parameters must be examined for evidence of design rather than the life that results. We must answer this question first before drawing any conclusion from the other."

  I fully agree with you on that one.

  8. - there should exist unique building blocks which can be torn down, but which can never be replaced or rebuilt from scratch. E.G the ozone layer or the ionosphere.

  The atmosphere in itself is not a valid argument for design. Many other planets also have an atmosphere. The question is rather, what parts are of our atmosphere are unique , and if so, how did it come in existance? Could it be designed or was it a lucky concidence (natural selection does not come into play for the atmosphere)

  Testing for design is not an easy exercise unless the features of design that we identify can be attributed exclusively to design . . . ie; there can be no other explanation. A design feature of this nature, is tremendously difficult to identify and isolate in itself. Hence the inconclusive nature of the whole debate. I could not agree more. And it is a nice and big challenge.
• 
  122

  Refuting the ARGUMENT BY DESIGN.

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's tiresome and it doesn't add up but it's one of the most popular arguments for god's existence, "the argument by design.

  " jehovah's witnesses and other believers point out a wonder of nature like the eye and compare it to a 'lesser' mechanical wonder of human design like a camera.

  the supposed conclusion is that this natural wonder is evidence of creation by a powerful designer; god.. .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Hoffnung

  "How would designed life differ from non designed life?"

  "How do you test design, or predict what is designed and natural occuring?"

  All very good questions. I have tried to make list of expectations to be set if the designer theory would be true. Definitely this list is not complete, and maybe some points are not valid. I invite you all to debate the merits of these, and add others if you like.

  For life to be a product of design:

  - There should be proof of trial and error. How bizar that may seem, I do not think a designer will have it spot on from the 1st time, so I would expect to see traces of try outs, and traces of removing and restarting.

  - Every life form should have a purpose or a function in the system where it lives. No systems designer adds stuff to make it more beautiful.

  - There should be sudden appearances in relatively great amounts of new inventions. Let us say, feathers were developed for the 1st time. I would expect to find the 1st traces of feathers from the same era in several places of the world.

  - Ecosystems appear suddenly and remain relatively stable, and do not develop over millions of years.

  - Balancing mechanisms should be introduced, which prevent one species to become so numerous that it destroys its ecosystem upon which it depends, thereby preventing its own extinction. Also these balancing mechanism should appear all in the same era.

  - components that have proven to be reliable, will be found in other non-related life forms.

  - There would be certain barriers between life forms that cannot be broken. e.g.: Plants live on carbondioxide and sunlight. animals need oxygen to live. There does not exist an animal that lives on carbon dioxide instead of oxygen, as far as I know.

  - there should be repetitive processes in the development of life, a kind of design software if you like.

  - there should exist unique building blocks which can be torn down, but which can never be replaced or rebuilt from scratch. E.G the ozone layer or the ionosphere.

  Please add your comments. I am quite sure a few of these will be trashed with logical arguments.
• 
  35

  57% of all publishers pioneered in April

  by hoser in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  we had a letter read this afternoon after the watchtower study that said we had 54,408 auxillary pioneers in april and with the regular pioneers it totaled 64,855 in full time preaching in april.

  57% of the publishers.. so my guess is that the co will come down hard on any congregation that didn't meet those numbers next april.. i think the 30 hour thing had it's desired effect.. hoser.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Hoffnung

  Can someone go to a few meetings a month or none at all, never do field service (yet perhaps talk with a neighbour or leave one magazine/year at a bus stop), etc. and have full assurance of living forever? This may be an acid test of Christian grace/faith alone vs cultic works. Can a person be saved by not being part of the Catholic Church or the WT organization?

  Godrulz, there are 2 options to get salvation, according to the watchtower system:

  Either, You were so lucky to have not known enough about the witnesses to become a believer before you die AND your death is BEFORE Armaggeddon, you will get a resurrection in paradise. e.g. you live in China and died last year = free ticket to paradise. You live in the USA and had multiple visits of JW and died last year = most probably eternal destruction. You die at Armaggeddon = guaranteed eternal destruction (JW included, he/she must have done something wrong and was not "deserving")

  Or, you are a bapized witness and go faithful in service every month, enduring to the very end, to the max of your capacities & life circumstances, never doing a hidden sin, or (God forbid) speak bad about the elders, faitful and discrete slave and other muppets. No works = no salvation. Works = possible salvation. Actually, it is never going to be enough. There is always an extra goal you have to set yourself to improve yourselves, never being sure if even that is enough. Grace is hardly ever used amongst witnesses. Going to a few meetings or leaving one magazine a year is not going to do the trick. Right now the actual wording used lately = you must "qualify" to get saved. You can imagine the pressure to perform is up.

  It is all part of the mind control techniques