Debunking Jehovah's Witnesses latest anti-science article
Post Reply
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-08-2014, 05:02 AM
RE: Debunking Jehovah's Witnesses latest anti-science article
(16-08-2014 06:40 PM)Sam Wrote:  Pricks...

It's a long time since I last read a Watchtower or Awake magazine... But their anti-evolution always seemed to be based on the idea that you have a choice about what's fact or fiction.

"Which would you prefer?" "What is more desirable?" as if that changes the facts.

Ah well... Shit heads gonna be shit headed.

I concur. It is one of the many things that irritates me most about religious people. They believe so wholeheartedly in humanities right to choose that they try to apply it to everything.

Humans choose how reality works.
Humans choose their gender
Humans get to choose their sexuality and what makes them horny.
Humans get to choose whether or not something is true or not.
Humans get to choose x and y and z and define what x y or z actually means and can argue it all they want.

The funny thing about reality is, it does not matter what how we feel or what we think or believe in or what we "think" we "know". Someone like Sye Ten Bruggencate can keep saying he knows, he knows, he knows, he knows and there for its true because BIBLE all he wants. The funny thing is.

100% of everyone who knows all these things and has god and jesus and the bible...are 100% wrong.

Reality does not care about the bible, god, Amaterasu, Thor, or the volcano god. It doesn't care about anything because reality does not have a consciousness TO care. Reality simply is as it is. Reality stays the same without all that superstitious and it nonsense and regardless of a persons ability to "imagine" something, does not change the fact that the science is right.

My Youtube channel if anyone is interested.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-04-2017, 01:06 PM
RE: Debunking Jehovah's Witnesses latest anti-science article
That would be in their publication "Daniel's prophecy" it had something to do with Cyrus sacking Babylon by daming the river that surrounded Babylon.

Its how they calculate the date for their 1914 prophecy. The year 607 is really important, but secular historians put the date an entire 12 months off making the entire basis for Jehovah's witness claim for being chosen as the "faithful and discrete slave" off.

They also reinterpret the prophecy as "weeks of years" and multiply the years by 1,000. You can find the "math" in the back of the NW translation. But it hinges entirely on whether the entire field of historians are wrong, or JWs are right.

(19-08-2014 06:26 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(18-08-2014 08:53 AM)Northern Skeptic Wrote:  May I inquire as to what that prophecy was?

I'll have to look it up to get the book and verse(s), but the gist of it is that a city was supposed to be destroyed in October. I think the person who did it was supposed to re-route a river or something to flood the place.

Whatever the specifics were, from what I gathered, there's no end date by when the prophesy needs to be fulfilled, and it is to be fulfilled by human actors. So, this makes it less than compelling. Really, unless the city gets destroyed either by some other means or gets destroyed on a month that isn't October, so long as it stands, anyone who wants to be famous can take a crack at fulfilling it. So, the fact that someone did isn't particularly compelling.

I'd be impressed if it said something like "On such-and-such date (and year!), God will smite ___ with a meteor from the sky", if it happened like that, was corroborated by an outside source, and we could prove the prophesy was made before the event took place. But, of course, they never are. They're always vague, open ended, and/or subject to be "fulfilled" by anyone with an agenda to fulfill the prophesy. Fuck, there are fundies today endlessly fapping about the goings on at Israel hoping to make some biblical prophesies come true. It's creepy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2017, 03:43 AM
RE: Debunking Jehovah's Witnesses latest anti-science article
I once read a watchtower article, that seemed partly on-board with science to an extent, which looked like JW were going to change for the better, although the article ended with "...but are you saying god is a liar?", which pretty much rendered everything positive I'd just read to be obsolete lol.

I love how most religions still don't really get on with science or even attempt to use it against the facts themselves.

I'm training for a 10K run, read about it in my blog :
Lost In Pace - A Running Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-05-2017, 06:27 AM
RE: Debunking Jehovah's Witnesses latest anti-science article
These child molesters have been making up bullshit claims for hundreds of years. They've been proven wrong time and time again. This is no different.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein It is objectively immoral to kill innocent babies. Please stick to the guilty babies.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: