1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Why are Jehovah's Witnesses reluctant to discuss their faith?

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by Jose Fly, Aug 27, 2019.

  1. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,945
    Ratings:
    +4,758
    Well, I don't think any religion should interfere with science, but to be fair I don't believe Jehovah's Witnesses actually "interfere" with science.

    That's not really what I'm getting at with this thread. I'm not advocating for the JW organization to do anything or fundamentally change how they operate. I'm just pondering why the Witnesses here at RF completely refuse to acknowledge that being a Witness (and all that entails) influences their views on science.
     
  2. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    16,862
    Ratings:
    +1,935
    Science identifies its domain and goes on its own course independent of any world-view/no world-view.

    Regards
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  3. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    3,380
    Ratings:
    +2,737
    I suppose that it could be just a coincidence, but I note that after I exposed hockey's source as fake news, and started a new thread to discuss the creationist lies, he stopped replying to me, and apparently reported my new thread as a "call out" (which is why it was deleted).

    Again, it must just be a coincidence, for a good Christian chap could not possibly be so disingenuous...
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,945
    Ratings:
    +4,758
    Yeah, the Jehovah's Witnesses seem to be quite adept at reporting posts where anyone calls them on their behavior. I guess this is the kind of forum where you can come in, post all sorts of nonsense, and behave dishonestly, but if anyone points out that behavior, mgm't will delete it. Pretty strange IMO.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    16,862
    Ratings:
    +1,935
    JW's are very active to preach, they cannot be reluctant to discuss/debate.
    JWs, please!

    Regards
     
  6. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    5,972
    Ratings:
    +3,445
    Religion:
    Christian
    I don't recall ever directing any attention to management concerning another's post. (If I have, staff can call me on it.) I've approached people privately, through conversation mode, and told them to stop rating my posts as "funny", which is a violation. Someone did that just recently, but I didn't mention it to them.

    Some here bring attention to themselves, attacking the poster's intelligence, education or motives, rather than the content of their post.
    Sometimes I'll just ignore them.

    What 'bad' behavior, exactly, do you think I've exhibited?
     
  7. Jose Fly

    Jose Fly Fisker of men

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    5,945
    Ratings:
    +4,758
    That's good.

    Why do you ask that?
     
    • Creative Creative x 1
  8. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    3,380
    Ratings:
    +2,737
    The content - like the stuff you plagiarized? I ask about that because when someone copy-pastes the work of others and presents it as their argument, and replies to any attempts to discuss the merits of the copy-pasted stuff via ignoring them, dismissing the counter-arguments, and/or reiterating the material in question, then it certainly does speak to their motives and knowledge, does it not?

    I mean, you told me to watch my bias, even as your "counter argument" was to link to some idiotic right-wing propaganda written by 2 creationists and published on a site considered unreliable due to frequent failures of fact-checks and for pushing fake news.

    Amazing - the lengths religionists will go to in order to prop up their failing beliefs.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    5,972
    Ratings:
    +3,445
    Religion:
    Christian
    “...replies to any attempts to discuss the merits of the copy-pasted stuff via ignoring them....”

    Lol.
    “Ignoring” someone is not replying.

    You think you ‘attempt to discuss’? Please spare me. Man, all you do is berate and belittle. And you wonder why I ignore you?

    “Failing beliefs”? You don’t even know what I believe, let alone understand them.

    And Jehovah’s Witnesses worldwide are growing, not failing.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    3,380
    Ratings:
    +2,737
    I am pretty sure I know - same reason nPeace and Deele do - I have called you out on your plagiarism and reliance upon incompetent and biased sources, even as you foolishly accuse of others of doing this. I have exposed your ignorance and dishonesty.

    You cannot stand that your hypocritical and childish antics are exposed and hope that ignoring it all, it will all go away.

    I care not - I rather enjoy exposing the hypocrisy, ignorance, arrogance, etc. of religionists with near zero competence in the things they pretend they can discuss.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  11. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    3,380
    Ratings:
    +2,737
    BEHOLD - the preferred source of information of our own @Hockeycowboy:

    CNS News - Media Bias/Fact Check


    [​IMG]
    QUESTIONABLE SOURCE



    A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

    • Overall, we rate CNS News Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of propaganda and numerous failed fact checks.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  12. savagewind

    savagewind Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    37,945
    Ratings:
    +4,316
    Religion:
    An X-Jehovah's Witness
    I know what you believe. But, you are right that nobody (but the Jehovah's Witnesses) can understand that you believe the Bible wholeheartedly except for the parts that say do not trust in men which you do and it is why I had to leave the organization.

    Psalms 146:3; Psalms 60:11; Psalms 108:12; Psalms 118:8-9; Isaiah 2:22; Jeremiah 17:5
     
  13. Dan From Smithville

    Dan From Smithville Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2017
    Messages:
    10,262
    Ratings:
    +6,780
    Religion:
    Christian (Methodist)
    Someone(s) does that to me all the time or uses the rainbow or the tool rating. I didn't know it was a violation to do that. I truly find what I rate as funny to be funny. I guess I will have to re-evaluate and stop doing it to some posts just in case. Though, I doubt the people that use ratings as a back-handed attempt to denigrate will re-evaluate or stop doing it.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  14. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    3,380
    Ratings:
    +2,737
    This is so... bizarre...
    This article was linked and quoted as evidence of discrimination against shoddy ID 'scientists'...
    OK, looks bad... But keep reading...
    Hmmm...

    Some additional info:

    ...In December 2006 a partisan report was issued by Mark Souder,[49][50] on the basis of information he and fellow Republican representative and intelligent design advocate Rick Santorum (author of the pro-ID Santorum Amendment) had requested, calling into question the Smithsonian's treatment of Sternberg and repeating many of Sternberg's claims.[13][51][52] The report was commissioned by Souder in his capacity as subcommittee chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform, written by his subcommittee staff, but published by Souder as an individual representative without it being officially accepted into the Congressional Record.[53] This is contrary to oft-repeated claims by the Discovery Institute and other design proponents that the report represents an official position by the Committee supporting Sternberg's claims of discrimination....

    You post evidence?

    OK....

    Like your posted "evidence" on that 'Third Way' meeting? The "evidence" was a 3rd rate hack essay by 2 zany creationists on a right-wing fake news site.

    THAT 'evidence'?
     
  15. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    3,380
    Ratings:
    +2,737
    Except that they didn't - some dopey right -winger had a dopier right-wing staffer write up (more like write down as Sternberg whined) a sob story that took Sternberg's version of events at face value.
     
  16. Polymath257

    Polymath257 Think & Care
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2017
    Messages:
    14,142
    Ratings:
    +14,666
    Religion:
    Non-theist
    *** Mod Post ***

    Just to clarify, call-out threads without the target's approval are against the rules. Talking about someone in the third person is often against the rules (depends a bit on context). Overuse of the 'funny' rating as a means to express disagreement is against the rules.

    1. Personal Comments About Members and Staff
    Personal attacks and name-calling, whether direct or in the third person, are strictly prohibited on the forums. Critique each other's ideas all you want, but under no circumstances personally attack each other or the staff. Quoting a member's post in a separate/new thread without their permission to challenge or belittle them, or harassing staff members for performing moderation duties, will also be considered a personal attack.

    3. Trolling and Bullying
    Where Rule 1 covers personal attacks, Rule 3 governs other behaviors and content that can generally be described as being a jerk. Unacceptable behaviors and content include:

    1) Content (whether words or images) that most people would find needlessly offensive, especially when such content is posted just to get a rise out of somebody and/or is not part of a reasoned argument.

    2) Defamation, slander, or misrepresentation of a member's beliefs/arguments, or that of a particular group, culture, or religion. This includes altering the words of another member to change their meaning when using the quote feature.

    3) Antagonism, bullying, or harassment - including but not limited to personal attacks, slander, and misrepresentation - of a member across multiple content areas of the forums. Repeatedly targeting or harassing members of particular groups will also be considered bullying.

    All the rules:
    RF Rules
    Abuse of the "Funny" Rating

    Finally, moderators are not allowed to discuss specific acts of moderation. We cannot say who filed a report, or how we acted towards another member.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. shmogie

    shmogie Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    8,976
    Ratings:
    +1,858
    Religion:
    Christian
    I consider myself a Christian fundamentalist. What makes you think that we consider ourselves "special¨ ?

    I will take issue with that characterization. We aren´t special, we simply have been able to grasp the concept of how God has revealed Himself. That isn´t special, all people, have that ability, if they choose to exercise it.

    There are some denominations that consider themselves special, they have the ultimate truth, and the rest of us believers do not.

    For a Christian, there is only one truth, Jesus Christ, and the revelation of him.
     
  18. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    16,862
    Ratings:
    +1,935
    "Jesus Christ, and the revelation of him."

    Did Jesus dictate anything or write himself from his Revelation from G-d, please?
    If yes, kindly give its reference, please?

    Regards
     
  19. shmogie

    shmogie Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Messages:
    8,976
    Ratings:
    +1,858
    Religion:
    Christian
    Yep, the entire New Testament was written by men guided by the Holy Spirit, the active member of the Trinity, of Which Christ is part.
     
  20. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    16,862
    Ratings:
    +1,935
    Nothing written by Jesus or dictated by Jesus not even authorized by Jesus. Right, please?

    Regards
     
Loading...