Origins of life

[Loadnabox]

...(sorry I go on about Sikhs so much, I got kinda hooked on their religion and culture, it's all just so interesting) ...

Even though Atheists and Agnostics tend to have knowledge of many religions and often more knowledgeable than Most Christians, their knowledge tends to be a mile wide and two feet deep about those religions as well. (I use the We in a broad sense for the moment knowing I might not truly be in the agnostic/atheist group) We generally have a starting point for religion that we reject and will have the most in depth knowledge of that particular religion. If we know about a second religion it will probably be one that fascinates us in some way.

For me, I know Catholicism best as my wife is Catholic so it's very recent/current. I know Mormonism fairly well since my dad is a practicing Mormon and I spent a lot of time in LDS sacrament services.

Using the things you know best as a point of reference, even as an atheist/agnostic is inevitable since our brains are wired to use something as a base point.

 

[AToE]

Even though Atheists and Agnostics tend to have knowledge of many religions and often more knowledgeable than Most Christians, their knowledge tends to be a mile wide and two feet deep about those religions as well. (I use the We in a broad sense for the moment knowing I might not truly be in the agnostic/atheist group) We generally have a starting point for religion that we reject and will have the most in depth knowledge of that particular religion. If we know about a second religion it will probably be one that fascinates us in some way.

For me, I know Catholicism best as my wife is Catholic so it's very recent/current. I know Mormonism fairly well since my dad is a practicing Mormon and I spent a lot of time in LDS sacrament services.

Using the things you know best as a point of reference, even as an atheist/agnostic is inevitable since our brains are wired to use something as a base point.

I couldn't have said it better, I know a little about a lot of relgions, but not a lot ("a lot" is pretty broad here. Compared to the average Christian I've met, yes I know a lot, but compared to someone who actually knows something about Christianity I know very little) about any one in particular! I wasn't really exposed to religion that much growing up, so I never really learned much about it until I got older, even the local ones like Christianity I'm only learning about academically recently, most of what I know I've learned in the past 5 years or so.

 

[Echostatic]

Interesting, so if I'm understanding correctly, the people born before Jesus will be resurrected, judged and given a chance for baptism & salvation. Again, I applaud, this is a question oft missed by many Christian faiths.

From what I can tell, JW's also share with the Mormons a view that childhood baptism is irrelevant at best.

Seems you understand correctly. And yes, JW's don't baptize very young children. On occasion some older children may be baptized if they meet the requirements (and some do, I know a few that are incredibly knowledgable and mature, and have made that decision themselves.)

 

[Chevette Girl]

Using the things you know best as a point of reference, even as an atheist/agnostic is inevitable since our brains are wired to use something as a base point.

Right. Compare what you don't know to what you do, and being raised Catholic, despite identifying myself as agnostic, it's what I know (albeit sketchily) and what my baseline was established to be, like it or not. The basic stuff's still there and it's in deep but it's generally the stuff that most religions agree on - don't steal, don't kill, don't be greedy, don't be jealous, don't be untruthful, don't be unfaithful to your promises.

But I really am enjoying this compre-contrast with everyone else's beliefs and opinions.

 

[Chevette Girl]

Now, I've met a lot of Christians who will say that they DO believe people from other religions can get into heaven/worldhearafter, but I've only met a small handful that would actively encourage someone from another religion to stick with their own religion and just do it as best as is possible. (I have indeed met a few though, but they're rare)

I'm fortunate enough to know a family of such. My friends' parents took them to a wide variety of Christian and non Christian places of worship to learn about others, encouraged them to do research, and let them choose what worked best for them. It's kind of refreshing, actually, and one of them has probably the strongest faith in God that I know of next to my mother in-law, despite bouncing around from church to chapel to temple, etc, and she chooses her place of worship depending upon the leader, if the priest/pastor/minister can answer her questions and she feels comfortable with the congregation, she stays with it. But if I ever have questions about stuff in the bible, I go to her because she's actually studied it for her own interest and from more than one major religion's perspective. Speaking of which I should ask her about the plurality of God that's implied in Genesis

 

[TheAlchemist]

Sorry, I'm confused as to how that pertains to some religions saying "our way or burn.."

My point, which I didn't articulate very clearly, was that a Christian doctrine, The Priesthood of the Believer, which seems to have originally been intended to be more inclusive (ie It's not "the Catholic Priest's way or the highway"...instead, the individual believer is trusted to be able to read and interpret scripture, recognizing that the Catholic Priest's way is not necessarily the only way)now seems to have evolved (devolved?) to mean yet again that there is only one way to read and interpret scripture, but now, the only way is the Baptist way (ie only the Baptist believer can be trusted to read and interpret scripture correctly).

Don't know if that clarifies...I've tried my best...

 

[AToE]

My point, which I didn't articulate very clearly, was that a Christian doctrine, The Priesthood of the Believer, which seems to have originally been intended to be more inclusive (ie It's not "the Catholic Priest's way or the highway"...instead, the individual believer is trusted to be able to read and interpret scripture, recognizing that the Catholic Priest's way is not necessarily the only way)now seems to have evolved (devolved?) to mean yet again that there is only one way to read and interpret scripture, but now, the only way is the Baptist way (ie only the Baptist believer can be trusted to read and interpret scripture correctly).

Don't know if that clarifies...I've tried my best...

That does clarify, and it is slightly more inclusive than the old Catholic doctrine, but only slightly. They're basically saying that people can learn Christianity themselves and get into heaven, without a priest, but it's not really what would commonly be called "inclusivism" which would be more like saying "it doesn't even matter if you're christian, you can still get into heaven".

 

[Loadnabox]

I was also curious if Echo & Pewter find thing like the priesthood, and specific priesthoods (Moronic, Melchisdic etc) to be important, and who currently holds them if so.

 

[Echostatic]

Yes we do believe the priesthood is important. Like Melchizedek once did, Jesus serves as our King and high priest. The 144,000 spoken of earlier are to serve as priests. (1 Peter 2:9) Representing the royal priesthood are appointed elders, who serve in positions of responsibility in congregations of Jehovah's people worldwide, appointed to their positions by Jehovah. (Hebrews 13:7,17)

This appointment by God is possible because they meet the requirements set in God's word, which is a product of God's spirit. (1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9) Therefore their appointment can be said to be by God's holy spirit. (Acts 20:28 ) They aren't perfect, of course. Aware of their limitations, they don't try to lord it over the flock, "God's inheritance", but consider themselves "fellow workers for the joy of their brothers." (1Peter 5:3; 2Corinthians 1:24)

 

[AToE]

Can I ask if you're a particularily educated JW, or a "teacher" of the religion (sorry, I can never remember which branches of Christianity have Reverends, Ministers, Priests, Pastors, so forth and so on!), or are most JW this knowledgeable about their religion? EDIT: Sorry, you kind of answer this in your last post, you have Elders instead? Do they take a role more similar to a Rabbi than say a Priest?

Compared to the average Christian I've ever met, who can usually only quote the few common passages that everyone knows like "thou shalt not kill" (which is actually a case of major mis-translation - I spoke with Jew who speaks Hebrew as his first language about this. It is supposed to read "Thou shalt not MURDER" which has a vastly different meaning than "kill"... sorry went off topic there!), your knowledge of scripture is better than anyone I've ever talked to who wasn't a Priest/Rabbi/Teacher/etc.

 

[Echostatic]

Can I ask if you're a particularily educated JW, or a "teacher" of the religion (sorry, I can never remember which branches of Christianity have Reverends, Ministers, Priests, Pastors, so forth and so on!), or are most JW this knowledgeable about their religion? EDIT: Sorry, you kind of answer this in your last post, you have Elders instead? Do they take a role more similar to a Rabbi than say a Priest?

Compared to the average Christian I've ever met, who can usually only quote the few common passages that everyone knows like "thou shalt not kill" (which is actually a case of major mis-translation - I spoke with Jew who speaks Hebrew as his first language about this. It is supposed to read "Thou shalt not MURDER" which has a vastly different meaning than "kill"... sorry went off topic there!), your knowledge of scripture is better than anyone I've ever talked to who wasn't a Priest/Rabbi/Teacher/etc.

All Jehovah's witnesses are "teachers" in the sense that we all go out preaching to others about God's kingdom worldwide. Within the religion, I wouldn't call myself particularly educated, nor do I have a role as an elder or anything, partly because I'm only 23 and was baptized less than a year ago. I would say many know more than I do, it always seems like there's still so much to learn. We center our lives around our religion, giving our service to God the highest importance in our lives.

The elders prepare for and conduct congregation meetings, work with us side by side in the preaching work, and provide scriptural advice when we need it(Matthew 24:14; Hebrews 10:23,*25; 1*Peter 5:2) They visit us when we are sick and comfort us when upset or discouraged. They loyally and unselfishly support the interests of God's kingdom. Those who serve the congregations as elders do not use the term "elder" as a title, nor do they elevate themselves above the rest of God's people, (Note Jesus' words at Matthew 23:1-12, if you look up just one passage from this post, I think you would find this one most interesting) but give of their time and energy for the best interests of the congregation.

The difference between "murder" and "kill" is very different, and the scripture does correctly translate to murder. That's how our "New World Translation" Bible puts it. I appreciate the compliment, but really can't take credit for it. If it weren't for Jehovah and his organization on earth, I would be totally in the dark on these kind of things. I've learned so much about the Bible's word from our two congregation meetings twice a week, our larger assemblies and annual covnentions, personal study, and from private study with an elder in our hall over the past few years. (Awesome guy.) Like I said, I'm nobody particularly special, accurate scriptural knowledge is very important to all of us.

 

[AToE]

Right, I forgot some translations of the bible do say murder not kill!

 

[Pewter_of_Deodar]

I'm with you on the "God is Timeless" bit.

The "We are Not" however, not so much.

Certainly there are numberless Technologies of the Sacred (the firewalk, ayahusca, shamanic journeywork, rosary or mala bead meditations, sensory deprivation tank floating, the sweat lodge, Simon's daturahoney metheglyn, amantia muscaria, Eleusinian ergotamine Mysteries, silence and darkness retreats, to name just a few) that can easily give the human a glimpse of timelessness.

Never experienced that sort of thing myself. I guess I would clarify that human consciousness is generally stuck at the moment of time where their corporal bodies exist. God has the capability to be all places in time at once or at least to travel freely between times.

Interesting side thought just came to mind. If a creature can time travel freely, they really only need to have the capability to travel to any one point in time at any given time, and they can still have the same effect as if they could be at all points in time. Didn't say that very well, but a timeless creature that figures out they need to be three weeks ago, can be and so they were there three weeks ago as soon as they go. That sounds even more like the random rantings of a fool. Oh well, I understand what I mean completely. Did anyone else pick up on what I meant?

Myself, I've never timetraveled far enough to discern a Cubs World Series Win, unfortunately...

I'd ask you how many decades (centuries?) forward you have gone but then I wouldn't want to cause massive depression amongst all of us Cubs fans. *grin*

 

[wayneb]

You've just described, in a somewhat roundabout fashion, is a generalization of a concept known in Science Fiction as the time travel paradox. One particular specific example of the paradox is what would happen if you bopped back in time and ended up killing your grandfather before your parent was conceived? Would you then cease to exist?

 

[Pewter_of_Deodar]

It doesn't change the way you cheer, however it does impact how we would think of a deity in regards to good or evil when compared with my first analogy.

Your dog food analogy isn't right either, the food would be the salvation provided by Christ/Christianity. God at the same time has allowed thousands of other bowls of food to be put out that are completely impossible to tell from the one he put out. If the dog eats out of any bowl but the one He set out, then He picks the dog up and throws it into the fire as punishment.

This goes back to the quote, You might be rooting for the Lions, but if you get that answer wrong you're going to hell. Being all-knowing and timeless, God already knew if the lions would win as he knew that 90% of the dogs aren't going to eat out of the right bowl. Him not stopping the other bowls being put out would be unethical. Punishing the dogs for eating out of the wrong one even though all the bowls (symbolic of religion) claim to offer the same salvation and look alike is unethical.

Mind you I'm not technically saying all religions look alike, but every religion claims to have the answer. Depending on the base, each religious base has their own book claiming to be the one true word of God. Each promises the path to salvation in some incarnation or another. Being able to tell which one is right, is truly impossible from my perspective.

I would like to add the caveat of, this is only my best ability to explain why I believe the way I do. Incongruities like this are why my belief in the very nature of God is drastically different than most organized religions.

You are absolutely correct that the dog food analogy is weak in a lot of ways but it was the best I could come up with on the spur of the moment. I will have to think of one that is better in several ways.
1. Dogs do not have the sort of thought processes required to sort between foods based on much more than a sniff test and taste test. So if it stinks or tastes like garbage, then they can sort it out but cannot read labelling or understand advertising like humans can.
2. Religions are much more diverse and have so many more aspects than a dog eating food. Some offer the same food in a different colored bowl. Some offer more or less food.

I do agree with you that there are a lot of bowls of food out there all claiming to be "the right one" and how to discern between them is very tough indeed. So is the burden on us to be discerning or does God have to give us a pillar of flame in the sky to guide us to the right one? Dunno...

 

[Chevette Girl]

I do agree with you that there are a lot of bowls of food out there all claiming to be "the right one" and how to discern between them is very tough indeed. So is the burden on us to be discerning or does God have to give us a pillar of flame in the sky to guide us to the right one? Dunno...

We also have free will, the ability to make mistakes... so either He's forgiving of that, or not. The vengeful angry god of the first testament might side with not, the happy loving god of the second testament maybe... (I know, sweeping generalizations from the agnostic over here ;D) Bit I think either way, the pillar of flame takes all the free choice out of it. Although I suppose you've always got the option to ignore the pillar of fire... but if I'd seen a pillar of fire, I [edit: probably] wouldn't be agnostic.

 

[Pewter_of_Deodar]

You've just described, in a somewhat roundabout fashion, is a generalization of a concept known in Science Fiction as the time travel paradox. One particular specific example of the paradox is what would happen if you bopped back in time and ended up killing your grandfather before your parent was conceived? Would you then cease to exist?

I really was not coming at it from that perspective but I just got done watching a movie on Sy-Fy a week or so ago where someone going back a million years stepped on a butterfly and it was destroying the current world.

I suppose though from a timeless being standpoint (God in this case), He would have literally limitless possibilities of going back in time, tweaking something a bit, then moving forward in time to see the results, go back and tweak a bit more, and so on... Now if I could only do that with my meads!

My original point was more that a creature that could travel in time did not need to be all places in time at once, but would appear as though they were to those bound by time by being able to travel through time and be present at any moment in time they chose to be present. Theoretically, they could travel discretely to all moments in time and therefore appear to us as being continuously present throughout time. Or something like that...

 

[Pewter_of_Deodar]

We also have free will, the ability to make mistakes... so either He's forgiving of that, or not. The vengeful angry god of the first testament might side with not, the happy loving god of the second testament maybe...

But He does forgive freely. Even though there are discussions about "unforgiveable sins" I am hard pressed to come up with anything that He will not forgive if you or I ask for forgiveness. I think the eternal problem is that there are those, who like Pharoah, still harden their hearts and refuse to request forgiveness or fail to recognize their need for forgiveness.

(I know, sweeping generalizations from the agnostic over here ;D)

That's cute. I had to chuckle. Thanks for the smile.

But I think either way, the pillar of flame takes all the free choice out of it. Although I suppose you've always got the option to ignore the pillar of fire... but if I'd seen a pillar of fire, I [edit: probably] wouldn't be agnostic.

I have said the same about a burning bush. Sometimes I wish He would take the guesswork out of things and just come and talk to me in some physical way that would leave absolutely no doubt.

 

[TheAlchemist]

My original point was more that a creature that could travel in time did not need to be all places in time at once, but would appear as though they were to those bound by time by being able to travel through time and be present at any moment in time they chose to be present. Theoretically, they could travel discretely to all moments in time and therefore appear to us as being continuously present throughout time. Or something like that...

Reminds me of the time lapse family portrait that has one cousin standing at one end of family (then secretly running, behind the group) and again at the other end of the family, like book ends...

 

[TheAlchemist]

I'd ask you how many decades (centuries?) forward you have gone but then I wouldn't want to cause massive depression amongst all of us Cubs fans. *grin*

My own time travel adventures, if you'd call them that, have been more of the Wrinkle in Time (al la Madeline L'Engle) fashion, where the moment I am in expands...

So, take heart, Cubs fans...