Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Do you Know Your God?
130 Answers
The word “know” can carry a wide range of meanings. For example, a person Who had never met him might say: “Yes, I know David Cameron. He is the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.” On the other hand, another person who has, on numerous occasions, seen the Prime Minister might acknowledge: “No, I don’t know Mr. Cameron.”
Answers
I am reading this thread and cannot quite get my head round the fact that the OP was about knowing God, and now it seems to have gravitated towards Christmas, Santa Claus, the Watchtower Organisation and even to a little mudslinging.
Surely a person is entitled to his/her belief without having to state every time that he/she is a believer and have to battle...
Surely a person is entitled to his/her belief without having to state every time that he/she is a believer and have to battle...
12:46 Fri 26th Oct 2012
Naomi-There many other verses in the Bible succinctly explain why people—perhaps otherwise ordinary people—do bad things. While it is helpful to understand the forces that move people to do bad things, is there hope of a change for the better? Yes, for the Bible not only explains why people bad commit acts but also promises that such acts will be no more one day. What a promises!
Goodlife, it is not only atheists who utterly reject your preaching, but also sincere and devout Christians, whom you would despise as being of "organised religion". I can think of no body more "organised" than the Watchtower! Remember that JWs have been in existence only since the mid 19C, founded by Charles Taze Russell, a well-known fraudster who made his fortune by selling so-called "miracle wheat", designed to yield ten times the crops of ordinary wheat. Of course, it didn't. In your efforts to distance yourselves from mainstream Christianity you refuse to celebrate Christmas on the spurious grounds that the only two birthdays mentioned in the Bible are those of Pharaoh and King Herod, as if that had anything to do with it. You deny the Holy Trinity and in an effort to distance yourselves even further, deny even the crucifixion, which even some non-believers accept as fact, preferring instead your own theory of an "upright torture stake", for which there is absolutely no evidence. To suggest, as your organisation does, that the faithful are divided into 144,000 elect and "other sheep", is to fly in the face of accepted teaching. Your sect will always be on the fringe; you are dangerous and heretical, you lead people away from the "truth", and I haven't even mentioned the most damning thing of all, blood transfusions.
@Goodlife.
Reading your last few posts, one could be forgiven for thinking you are engaging in a temper tantrum.Your posts are analogous to a baby mewling for attention, red faced and puckered up, limbs thrashing, snot running from your nose and tears from screwed up eyes, with the toys scattered on the floor around your pram.
Complaints to the editor about being mocked. Fact - ideas are not sacrosanct. People who spout ideas do not get special protection from being lampooned or ridiculed. Grow a pair, grow up, learn why so many people criticise and ridicule your posts.
Hint - stop cutting and pasting without attribution. Try using argument from a wider range of sources, and definitely try to find sources with less internal inconsistencies and more authority than the bible.
Your sanctimonious tone I find irritating. In one of your more recent posts, you attempt to redefine the conventional definition of "stupid", and then attempt to equate what you term stupidity with atheism. You go on to assert that non-believers or atheists are blind to the "moral truths"; that you and your co-religionist enjoy a kind moral superiority over us poor, benighted non-believers. That view is totally unwarranted.
Anyone with a modicum of learning and education will know that morality is not derived from a holy book, and I resent your intimation otherwise.I resent your rejection of science in favour of a book of myth.I resent your continual proselytising. Your posts are like a scab - you know you shouldn't scratch it, but one just can't help oneself.
I would suggest that the only people here who "achieve nothing worthwhile" are those who come here and initiate trite homilies based around biblical verse in an attempt to evangelise for a pathetic, ludicrous, literalist subset of the judeo-christian tradition.
In your posts, you exhibit a complete absence of any logic, any evidence of critical thinking or rational analysis. Were your posts offered on paper, they would have the solitary benefit that they could be used for something useful - wiping my backside. Your posts have no more use than random bits of information, cluttering up my bandwith.
Your posts should be challenged, mocked and ridiculed at every single opportunity, with the delusions clearly pointed out.And the more you exercise your temper tantrum, the more you should be mocked.
Reading your last few posts, one could be forgiven for thinking you are engaging in a temper tantrum.Your posts are analogous to a baby mewling for attention, red faced and puckered up, limbs thrashing, snot running from your nose and tears from screwed up eyes, with the toys scattered on the floor around your pram.
Complaints to the editor about being mocked. Fact - ideas are not sacrosanct. People who spout ideas do not get special protection from being lampooned or ridiculed. Grow a pair, grow up, learn why so many people criticise and ridicule your posts.
Hint - stop cutting and pasting without attribution. Try using argument from a wider range of sources, and definitely try to find sources with less internal inconsistencies and more authority than the bible.
Your sanctimonious tone I find irritating. In one of your more recent posts, you attempt to redefine the conventional definition of "stupid", and then attempt to equate what you term stupidity with atheism. You go on to assert that non-believers or atheists are blind to the "moral truths"; that you and your co-religionist enjoy a kind moral superiority over us poor, benighted non-believers. That view is totally unwarranted.
Anyone with a modicum of learning and education will know that morality is not derived from a holy book, and I resent your intimation otherwise.I resent your rejection of science in favour of a book of myth.I resent your continual proselytising. Your posts are like a scab - you know you shouldn't scratch it, but one just can't help oneself.
I would suggest that the only people here who "achieve nothing worthwhile" are those who come here and initiate trite homilies based around biblical verse in an attempt to evangelise for a pathetic, ludicrous, literalist subset of the judeo-christian tradition.
In your posts, you exhibit a complete absence of any logic, any evidence of critical thinking or rational analysis. Were your posts offered on paper, they would have the solitary benefit that they could be used for something useful - wiping my backside. Your posts have no more use than random bits of information, cluttering up my bandwith.
Your posts should be challenged, mocked and ridiculed at every single opportunity, with the delusions clearly pointed out.And the more you exercise your temper tantrum, the more you should be mocked.
Goodlife, as far as I am aware you know no one here - and you have no idea whether or not they do bad things or good things. Nevertheless, in your supreme arrogance you deem yourself qualified to preach, to accuse, to criticise, and to insult. I suggest you take a long hard look at yourself because your attitude warrants neither admiration nor emulation.
@Sandy - What then? I can devote even more time to interesting posts in Science, or News, or Health, or TV/Media.
We could have more enlightening discussions about the evolution of humanity and the changing cultural values exhibited around the world.
Instead, we get the relentless evangelising of the cut and past brigade.
We could have more enlightening discussions about the evolution of humanity and the changing cultural values exhibited around the world.
Instead, we get the relentless evangelising of the cut and past brigade.
We could let them languish, thats true. As I have already said though, for me at least I think them deserving of ridicule and mockery because the countervailing view needs to be represented to those who might read the unthinking drivel spouted by the goodlifes of this world.
And, as i have already said - they are the online forum version of a scab - you know you shouldn't pick it, but you can't help yourself. Perhaps thats what goodlife means when they say the faithful have greater moral fibre? :)
And, as i have already said - they are the online forum version of a scab - you know you shouldn't pick it, but you can't help yourself. Perhaps thats what goodlife means when they say the faithful have greater moral fibre? :)
