Reality Development Lab: Troubled by WorldsLastChance.com - Reality Development Lab

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Troubled by WorldsLastChance.com A tough cookie for me to break.. Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   libervisco 

  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 06-December 07

Posted 06 December 2007 - 08:49 PM

Greetings,

I am an explorer and I just joined this forum. Some people say that I too easily fall for various conspiracy theories, but the thing is, I also usually easily climb back up. Everyone is different. Everyone evaluates things a bit differently. I am open and considerate towards even the most far fetched idea because I don't want the commonly accepted social and cultural norms be the ones which define my boundaries. This is both an advantage and a disadvantage, but it is a curse of an open mind I suppose.

One of the things I have encountered quite some time ago, and which also sounded VERY convincing, was WorldsLastChance.com. Why was it convincing? Well, for someone who grew up in a 7th Day Adventist family I was already quite vary of the Roman Catholic Church so it didn't take much convincing that they are up to no good. For the same reason I also knew that the commonly held view of what bible says is not usually the correct one. It is often not even a matter of interpretations. Some things have simply been altered by catholics and presented as what bible says while it doesn't say that at all.

So by claiming that bible in fact interprets itself and casting away all other commonly held beliefs and interpretations by other people WorldsLastChance.com presents a rather convincing base on which they build their case. And little by little, in a text that is practically more consisted of bible quotes than the narrator's comments we get the story about a "New World Order" that would be built in cooperation between USA and Vatican, about a new pope being John Paul II impersonated by Satan in order to most easily deceive the world (because JPII was the most popular and positively viewed pope) etc. You can read it all on the site.

Now, what troubles me is this. I am for all intents and purposes a former christian. As I interacted with the world more and more, learned more and more, faced various "temptations" more and more, my life style became quite incompatible to what I believe bible would require. At first I tried to justify my changes within the light of bible, but then I became more and more willing to question its validity as a whole. Today my official response to the question of whether bible can be taken as an absolute trustworthy source of truth is a big "no" and my reasoning for it is that "there are too many doubts about its consistency, origins, conformation to commonly held ethics and science" etc. Further I would say that "how can I change my whole life around something about which there are so many doubts and so little clarity, something that I essentially perceive as so unstable". These days I would also say that I don't want to accept anything that requires of me to believe in a dogma that should be scarcely questioned.

And then I hit a wall.. the WorldsLastChance.com site is one of the very rare ones which really spoil the party, so to speak. Be it ultimately determined as untrue or not I would nominate it for the most convincing christian promotional site.

Here is the trouble. When atheists, agnostics, people who consider themselves realists, essentially people like those that can be found here, debunk bible in a vast majority of cases what they are debunking is not so much bible itself as much as a commonly held belief of what bible says or is. So essentially, by debunking a common belief rather than a bible itself, you've done nothing. The bible still remains unharmed. You've merely attacked a probably false myth that parades as truth that came from bible.

For example, December 25 and three kings are quoted in the movie Zeitgeist (Part 1) as they debunk bible as a mere astrotheological myth while bible in fact mentions no December 25 nor three kings. There is no date of birth and the number of "kings" is not mentioned, nor are they kings - they are mages. As you go on the whole "it's an astrotheological myth" claim starts to crumble. What did they accomplish? Pretty much nothing.. Only people who actually think bible says this (falsely) will be convinced. Case still open, bible still unharmed.

I see that as a problem. Either we are going to, once and for all, present a solid case about bible (the way it really is) not being the absolute source of truth or failing to do so face the fact that it may actually be right - which demands of us the responsibility to actually adapt our lives to its teachings!

So what do you say? What rock solid evidence and arguments can you provide against bible as truthful word of god - even after reading/watching the WorldsLastChance.com messages???

I will be waiting for your honest and serious responses with much interest. This is after all, a place where we constantly seek the truth, whatever it may be.

Thank you

Danijel
0

#2 User is offline   libervisco 

  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 06-December 07

Posted 06 December 2007 - 11:50 PM

Hm looks like I'll be the first to reply to my own topic. Reading more of churchofreality.org site I find certain assumptions that I wouldn't exactly agree with and don't exactly fit what I think bible really says, but at the same time some logical observations with assumptions that do fit what I believe bible says. So while the former kind of taints the overall convincingness of the CoR site the fact that CoR's whole philosophy is fluid and without assumption of knowing it all I can't dismiss everything it says based on a few fallacies. So the latter ends up being quite a blow to my view of the bible. I'm not sure if I anywhere else found such a collection of simple logical debunking of bible.

For example, that stars were created when Earth was created how can the stars we see be more than 10 000 light years away. I suppose one way a christian would respond is by questioning our measurements of space distances. However, even if we are really off in our measurements it just seems quite unplausible that the galaxies and star clusters we see are actually all within 10 000 light years.. We can then get down to the rabbit hole of further attempts to defend bible here by, for example, saying god merely created an illusion of these stars and galaxies, but then this begins to question bible on a whole new level. Why would God do any such thing?

Among other nice logical observations is the story about flood being unscientifically possible or the one about limits to God's omnipotence...

What all of this leads me to is that the final choice every human faces with regards to their beliefs is a choice between faith and reason. The only way one can go about accepting bible as the absolute source of truth is on faith. And I suppose that is acceptable to some, but with further debate and discussion it seems impossible not to come to the conclusion that those to whom it is acceptable to accept things on faith are dishonest when they say they believe in freedom of choice. Why?

Well, a christian could defend bible from our logical observations by saying that our own logic is insufficient to God's, essentially that "God works in mysterious ways" and we're simply too dumb to understand them no matter how hard we try and no matter how logical or illogical something seemed. But what this then, indeed by our own inferior logic, means is that since we aren't capable of discerning for ourselves and should just have faith that God knows better and if we don't have faith we'll one way or another be punished for it - we don't really have free will. Yet christians believe we do and bible says that we should be thinking for ourselves (according to most interpretations). Yet another logical contradiction.

So between faith and reason a natural human choice seems more and more skewed to the latter, for why would a human accept that (s)he is stupid and that (s)he should therefore not have freedom of will and thinking for oneself. Unless your logic is truly clouded by emotion, unless you are truly deceived, you just can't choose faith over human reason.

So how do I explain WorldsLastChance.com, their theory of bible's self-interpretation and it predicting historical, current and future events as such. Well, defeated by a few simple logical observations self-interpreting or not bible essentially fails to be a word of a God that can exist as one described by that same word of God. If we are to believe such a self-interpreting bible it's the same as believing in a god who says things that deny his own existence. :D Incredible.

Well, the simplest way to classify WLC then is as a yet another very elaborate fraud. How did they get the "self-interpreting" bible to so convincingly "predict" the events that are real? Perhaps the so called self-interpretation was not so much of self-interpretation after all, but skillfull connecting of the dots in bible with their plausible counterparts in reality in order to come to the plausible story of bible predicting everything. Sad thing is, they actually believe it as they do it. As someone's quote in a signature on this forum says, looking at reality through the myth, the myth becomes reality - and in their ongoing strive for proof to this reality they came up with a way of having the bible to them, and many others even, appear as the true word of god that predicted everything - all of the simple logical contradictions aside (ignored as irrelevant, unknown or explainable by "god works in mysterious ways" I suppose).

Still I would like a better explanation of WLC than I provide here. :)

Cheers
0

#3 User is offline   Ocelot 

  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,128
  • Joined: 22-May 06

Posted 07 December 2007 - 04:41 PM

 libervisco, on Dec 6 2007, 11:50 PM, said:

How did they get the "self-interpreting" bible to so convincingly "predict" the events that are real?


Predict or retrofit? If they made their interpretation before events transpired that's a prediction and moderately impressive. If they did so afterwards it's rather a pathetic demostration of having too much time on their hands.
Good buy and gobble less.

Ocelot.

A myth is a fixed way of looking at the world which cannot be destroyed because, looked at through the myth, all evidence supports the myth.
-Edward De Bono, consultant, writer, and speaker (1933- )
0

#4

  • Group: Guests

Posted 10 December 2007 - 05:10 PM

I think that this site should help you greatly:

http://ffrf.org/
0

#5

  • Group: Guests

Posted 03 January 2008 - 01:54 AM

 Question Everything, on Dec 10 2007, 09:10 AM, said:

Question Everything..?

..But as you dig your way further and further into a dark hole, don't forget to question the rationality of questioning everything. :)


libervisco,

Realize that the Bible is not a literal writing. But because it is of metaphorical and allegorical nature, any predictions must face the skeptics saying, "yeah, you're just making up something to fit what you now see." You must realize that real translation before you can be properly impressed with the real predictions. Skeptics are made of those who do not see the metaphors and thus have only the words and thoughts of uneducated followers to be impressed with if at all.

But then again, once you see the patterns being used to make those impressive predictions, you tend to be less impressed. As you see what the authors saw, you tend to say, "well yeah, that's kind of obviously predictable."
0

#6 User is offline   Ocelot 

  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,128
  • Joined: 22-May 06

Posted 03 January 2008 - 09:23 AM

If you predict something possible but improbable without specifying a timeframe then given enough opportunity then it will surely come true eventually. Given the bible predictions have had around 1700 years of opportunity we shold perhaps consider any predictions only coming true now to be rather poor quality predictions.
Good buy and gobble less.

Ocelot.

A myth is a fixed way of looking at the world which cannot be destroyed because, looked at through the myth, all evidence supports the myth.
-Edward De Bono, consultant, writer, and speaker (1933- )
0

#7

  • Group: Guests

Posted 03 January 2008 - 12:30 PM

 Ocelot, on Jan 3 2008, 01:23 AM, said:

If you predict something possible but improbable without specifying a timeframe then given enough opportunity then it will surely come true eventually. Given the bible predictions have had around 1700 years of opportunity we shold perhaps consider any predictions only coming true now to be rather poor quality predictions.
The Sucker - One who is fooled into drawing a conclusion even when he knows that he doesn't know.

What you have expressed here is merely a "theory". You are saying that PERHAPS the Bible is insignificant because PERHAPS its predictions are just chance occurrence due to the amount of time afforded. Yes, the ignorant must guess at all things through suspicion and prejudice. But why guess? Why not just see that you do not see the metaphors involved and thus know nothing. Why draw a conclusion or even a speculation when you can clearly see that you simply don't know enough of what they were trying to say?

Is there more silicon or more carbon on Mars? What is wrong with saying, "I don't know enough about it to answer that." And in addition, "I am offended that you attempt to draw me into making a possibly false statement without my need for doing so."

I can tell you why you make guesses one way or another about the Bible. It is because you want to influence others. But ask yourself why you do. And ask yourself what has come from so very many people wanting to influence everyone else even when they know so little themselves. Why insist that everyone else accept your guess work when you know it is only guess work?

Probability is based on current information at hand. When someone hasn't the critical information, any guess, no matter how probable it seems to him, is just as likely to be wrong as right (that is why it is called "critical" information).

When it comes to the Bible, why not be honest and just say, "I don't know." You might want to add, "..and I don't think you do either" But more importantly, learn to be in the situation to honestly say, "..and I don't care."

The fewer guesses you are fool of enough to make, the less of a fool you will be.
0

#8 User is offline   Lepar69 

  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 20-July 10

Posted 20 July 2010 - 07:07 PM

THE TRUE MEANING OF Jesus Christ teachings "UNCONDITIONAL LOVE" evaporated with the Christianising of the (Western) Roman Empire. I am sure the influential and the well healed have used the word God or Jesus to control the real message of the Bible by fear and intimidation over the centuries? I mention no specific names or so called institutions. The Meek will inherit the Earth but to do so they must listen truly to there higher selves first. WLC and other related sites will always have a bias side to there message but at least for the moment they have free speech and free will...

Thank you.
0

#9 User is offline   Poor Richard 

  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 267
  • Joined: 16-April 09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Huntsville, AL
  • Interests:Science, philosophy, evolutionary psychology, cognitive neuroscience, cosmology, Gurdjieff, intentional community

Posted 26 July 2010 - 11:30 PM

 Lepar69, on 20 July 2010 - 07:07 PM, said:

THE TRUE MEANING OF Jesus Christ teachings "UNCONDITIONAL LOVE" evaporated with the Christianising of the (Western) Roman Empire. I am sure the influential and the well healed have used the word God or Jesus to control the real message of the Bible by fear and intimidation over the centuries? I mention no specific names or so called institutions. The Meek will inherit the Earth but to do so they must listen truly to there higher selves first. WLC and other related sites will always have a bias side to there message but at least for the moment they have free speech and free will...

Thank you.


well heeled -- not "well healed"
their (possessive pronoun) -- not there (adverb)
free will -- article of faith

Your tin foil hat may have some holes in it.
Poor Richard

My Blog: Poor Richard's Almanack 2010

Facebook: Poor Richard

There is no answer. There is no solution. There is only practice. (Anon.)
0

#10 User is offline   Brian Wiler 

  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 106
  • Joined: 11-November 11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dublin
  • Interests:too many to list

Posted 12 March 2012 - 09:53 PM

 Poor Richard, on 26 July 2010 - 11:30 PM, said:

well heeled -- not "well healed"
their (possessive pronoun) -- not there (adverb)
free will -- article of faith

Your tin foil hat may have some holes in it.


Had a quick look at WLC. What they are doing is mixing old and new testiments. There is a fatal flaw here. The old testiment is incomplete. When King James decided to put together the modern bible he edited the scriptures to suit. When Constitine gathered the cardinals to debate christianity they came to compromise (and also the universal church of christ).

The reason that we use a solar calander is because a lunar calander is only good for religious purpose. You can not predict seasons or plant crops using a lunar calander.

The sole purpose of any religion is to control a population. The word of man is in the bible. The word of God is found only in science. We are only begining to understand the universe. Any thoughts before the 20th century is conjecture at best.

I use God as a metiphore for that which created all things. It is not a being, it is a process.
Every word in the bible can be traced to a man, not god. So, if a man can predict that there will be a war... so what? Of course there will be a war. Hell, I can predict that society as we know it will fail. Am I using the word of God? No... I am just stating the obvious.
All the faith in the world will not stop it. What we do when it happens is up to us, that's free will.
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users