Cofty: I see what you mean.. Your post helped me a great deal as it forced me to look up the exact definition of skepticism, which led me to look at the basic philosophy of skepticism that Socrates held throughout his life. This website brought out something I think is relevant to this thread, sorry about the length, but it's important.. [url]http://public.wsu.edu/~dee/GLOSSARY/SKEPT.HTM[/url] "Socrates claimed that he knew one and only one thing: that he knew nothing. So he would never go about making any assertions or opinions whatsoever. Instead, he set about questioning people who claimed to have knowledge, ostensibly for the purpose of learning from them, using a judicial cross-examination, called elenchus . If someone made an assertion, such as, "Virtue means acting in accordance with public morality, " he would keep questioning the speaker until he had forced him into a contradiction. As in a court of law, this contradiction proved that the speaker was lying in some way, in this case, that the speaker did not really know whatthey claimed to know. If an assertion can be worked into a contradiction, that means that the original assertion was wrong.While Socrates never claimed that knowledge is impossible, still, at his death, he never claimed to have discovered any piece of knowledge whatsoever. After its introduction into Greek culture at the end of the fourth century BC, skepticism influenced nearly all other Greek philosophies. Both Hellenistic andRoman philosophies took it as a given that certain knowledge was impossible; the focus of Greek and Roman philosophy, then, turned to probable knowledge, that is, knowledge that is true most of the time. Christianity, however, introduced a dilemma into Greek and Roman philosophies that were primarily based on skeptical principles. In many ways, the philosophy of Christianity, which insisted on an absolute knowledge of the divine and of ethics, did not fit the Greek and Roman skeptical emphasis on probable knowledge. Paul of Tarsus, one of the original founders of Christianity, answered this question simply: the knowledge of the Romans and Greeks, that is, human knowledge, is the knowledge of fools. Knowledge that rejects human reasoning, which, after all,leads to skepticism, is the knowledge of the wise. Christianity at its inception, then, had a strong anti-rational perspective."
The Quiet One
JoinedPosts by The Quiet One
-
-
-
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Tec and Aguest: Thank you for your time, effort and patience. If I've learned one thing for certain, it's that not all 'apostates' become cynical atheists (I'm not having a go at those people, just saying) or even people with no morals (just to be clear, I'm not talking about atheists or a particular group of people here), or love for God, as the Society would have us believe. I understand New Jerusalem and the other things mentioned, but I wonder if you still miss my point. All of these things, including Moses, you are again quoting from the Bible to prove the Bible.. No problem with that, I almost envy the strength of your faith. What you may fail to understand is that ALL my life until a few weeks ago when I fully 'woke up', I , not perhaps with my thinking ability, but wholeheartedly (I was more than willing to sign a no blood form in at least one instance) believed that 'the Truth' was the answer to everything and I believed everything I was told (without really proving it to myself). So I feel as though believing in anything or anyone could just lead to me being duped/controlled again. My faith in people and Jesus has fallen apart, how can I trust in any potentially man-made concept again? I feel lost...
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Heaven: Sorry to hear that about your parents. But the Bible makes clear that the man is only the head of the woman in the same way that Jesus is head of his followers, and he gave up his life for them.. It was never meant to be about domination. I know that some men abuse the so-called 'power' the headship gives them, but it's meant to be a responsibility, not a weapon.. Tec: I respect your viewpoint and your faith, but what you're saying sounds like a chicken-egg scenario to me. How can someone put faith in Jesus before the Bible if the only hard evidence (as in an eyewitness account) of his existence is contained in the Bible? Maybe the Watchtowers deceit and hypocrisy has turned me into a cynic...
-
12
When did Watchtower launch the first WT Library CD?
by FatFreek 2005 inthe first i became aware that one existed was 2005. but i was under some rock till then.. the other question is have should probably be fielded in some other thread but i'll ask it here anyway .
how long have watchtower writers been creating their magazine articles, books, booklets, etc., by using computer software?.
len.
-
-
The Quiet One
In 1993, Watch Tower of Pennsylvania produced the Watchtower Library on CD-ROM, an electronic compilation of most of its religious materials published since 1950. Subsequent up-dated versions have been released (collectively, the “CD-ROMs”).
-
42
Do You Think It Is Wrong To Stereotype?
by minimus ini know we are supposed to be politically correct but i don't always feel that this is warranted.. i do think that certain things might be generally true and could be viewed as stereotyping.
for example, if i see a young person driving a car very slowly, i might think that they are texting and driving (or else are asian).
now that might not have sounded proper, but i do think it's generally true, from my experience driving in the city.. if i see a "butchy" looking woman, i generally assume the woman is gay.
-
-
The Quiet One
Women ARE less likely to talk about stereotypes, I agree, especially blondes because they wouldn't even know what the word meant.
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Jaguarbass: That's an interesting link, especially as it mentions that Jesus himself referred to a global flood as a REAL event. Isn't it kind of hard to dismiss the global flood as merely a tale when someone you believe in talked about it in that way?
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Keyser: If there are indisputable internal contradictions that can't be excused, I guess. Science becomes irrevelant to someone who believes in a God that can change physical laws. This subject seems to have got some people thinking, at least. Can't believe the number of posts, I thought it was a simple question at first. Keep it up :)
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Thanks jgnat, the historical jesus link was exactly what I wanted. No disrespect to cyberjesus, but I don't want to have a blind faith in anything ever again, I had that with the Watchtower and look where that got me.. Ah well, if push comes to shove and I can't find evidence worth believing in, there's always the Flying Spaghetti Monster... LOL
-
-
-
The Quiet One
Jgnat: fascinating, thanks for sharing that :) Lore: I see what you're saying. Incidentally, I've always loved Spiderman comics/films. Can't believe I just admitted that... Psacramento: If the Bible isn't to be taken literally, but as a 'possibly based on a true story but we can't even prove that' collection of tales, as you seem to be suggesting, then why live our lives believing in Jesus, the Holy Spirit, or anything else contained therein, any more than we believe in the Tooth fairy (as wobble put it)? You're free, as am I, to believe in anything you want, I'm not attacking you or that right in any way.. My point is that I can understand people who say it's all a bunch of myths, but I can't understand how anyone can defend the Bible and one of its characters (Jesus) as being based on reality, but at the same time say that some things (such as the flood) did happen, based on the Bible, but not as the Bible actually said? And if the Bible has been written with 'artistic license', as you suggest, where does that leave the gospels? Do you believe Jesus was just some man who said some good things and the rest is just hype? It's probably just my born-in black and white mentality, I'm still adjusting to reality, so please forgive me if I come across as agressive or critical :)
-
29
Why are men not allowed to do the bible study parts at the service meeting?
by garbonzo ini know why they do it, because the women would complain, but it's not logical, the men need to be trained on how to conduct a bible study with a student, also.
if it doesn't matter, why are the sisters doing it?
just to give them something to do?
-
-
The Quiet One
Who was Timothy trained by? He turned out alright.. Women aren't allowed to teach in public because of how it looks. I also wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that if an attractive sister was giving a talk for a length of time, the brothers might not pay attention to the 'spiritual food' provided? Just a thought :)