Christian Apologists - Please Watch This and Tell Us Why it is wrong?

by cantleave 834 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

ziddina

I call bullshit: Can you point out even the slightest evidence of zid being "intolerant and discriminating against fellow human beings"? [bohm, page 40...]
Really? YOU calling something bullsh*t? No, can't be.
1.I feel sorry for you. 2.if in fact he DID have such - as a means to coerce ME into "believing" in your fractured and confused version of "god/gods"

3.Lemme explain something about science and scientists to you....

4.Poopsiecakes, who was just TOO kind!! (too Sab)

5.Sab, your insanity is astounding to observe.... 6.And yet again with the death-orientation instead of being life-oriented... 7.I don't think I'm quite as likely to be called "ignorant" by future people as certain others whom I shan't name...

8.Why are you SO dammed incapable of seeing your own blood-thirsty thought processes? You've mentally associated with a Bronze-Age Middle-Eastern male 'gawd' who demands human sacrifices for SO long, that you've absorbed THAT way of viewing the world...
^ She looks at me as an uncultured ignorant believer. She's discriminatory and is hell bent on painting believers that put faith in the Bible or the Quaran as monsters themselves for following a monster. ..." Sab, page 40...
Sab, Sab, Sab...
Nice cherrypicking... You're just so "persecuted" for your brilliant theist veiwpoints, aren't you...
Saying someone has "lost it", does not imply insanity. Saying you're INSANE does - but I was basing that comment on the way you're flipping and flopping around in your current version of "theology" - mixing in Christian ideas with your idea of what "sun" worship is, and also with Chinese Buddhism and maybe Confucianism thrown in...
Perhaps I should refer to such conduct of yours in future, as "amalgamated theism" or "homogenized theism". It's a crackpot dodge smoke-screen used to duck the inevitable fact that the bible god is only around 3,500 years old, and despite "amalgamated theists" protests, most of their "amalgamated theology" is coming from that 3,500-year-old Bronze-Age Middle-Eastern nomadic males' volcano god, ESPECIALLY IF CHRISTIANITY WAS YOUR FIRST CONTACT WITH RELIGION.
I apologize for any real insults, but I do NOT apologize for pointing out the flaws in your reasoning, whether using straight comment, sarcasm [one of my favorites], satire [another favorite], or irony.
As to the last comment in that post...
"and is hell bent on painting believers that put faith in the Bible or the Quaran as monsters themselves for following a monster. Wonder where she god that idea? From information like the video in the OP perhaps?"... Sab, same post
No.
I'd already figured out that the bible was a collection of ignorant, superstitious mythology and the Jehovah's Witnesses were unpleasant and destructive by the time I was 10 years old, long before the "World Wide Web" started up in 1991.
It was only the physical and psychological brutality of my JW parents that kept me in for so long. By the way, Sab, your ignorance is strikingly similar to their ignorance.
I didn't need "props" to enable me to see what the bible actually was saying - the first "creative day" in the bible having at least 2 glaring errors, the remainder of the "creative days" having major errors of their own; Lot offering his daughters to a brutal mob to be raped to death - then fathering two incestuous sons by his own daughters; Abraham willingly going along with sacrificing his own son; Moses making a bronze statue of a snake on a pole for the Israelites to worship - er, "view"; Joshua killing off whole cities, even the animals; David being viewed as "righteous" - even though he committed adultery and murder...
And in the New Testament, Jesus first saying that he came to bring 'god's' word for "peace", then saying "Let he who has no sword, sell his outer garment and buy one..."; being supposedly "kind" towards women but insulting his own mother and a non-Jewish woman who asked for a miracle - he compared her to a DOG...
Anyone who's actually paying attention to what is REALLY being said, will realize what the bible is - a collection of Middle-Eastern male mythology, comparable in its attitudes to those of the Al Qaeda, the Ayatollah, the Taliban, towards women - and for that matter, towards anyone NOT a member of their precious little tribal population.
Especially if one has ever had the chance to actually ASSOCIATE with Middle-Eastern men, as I did when I took up belly-dancing in Los Angeles in the late 1980s. That finished opening my eyes to the Middle-Eastern origins of the bible, and it was bone-chilling to realize the underlying social attitudes frozen in the bible's mythology.
Attempting to divorce your theology/mythology from its Middle-Eastern-male origins is ineffective, no matter how many times theists declare "jesus christ" to be "independent" of the only books claiming that he ever actually existed - well, except for things written after Christianity became a sect under observation and then co-opted by the Romans, and that one Indian reference.
I am NOT a polite Southerner. I am a prickly Westerner. WE SAY WHAT WE THINK, even if it trods on some peoples' toes.
However, you've added your own intensity to my comments. I did not call you an "ignorant whelp" - that came out of your own mind. I did not call you or other Christians "monsters themselves for following a monster" - that came out of your own mind.
I don't refer to the Middle-Eastern male volcano 'god' as a "monster".
I refer to it as a Johnny-come-lately Bronze-Age Middle-Eastern superstitious, ignorant, backwards nomadic males' volcano "god".
When you claimed that I made such a reference, you were confusing me with a couple other posters who DO refer to the Johnny-come-lately Bronze-Age Middle-Eastern superstitious, ignorant, backwards nomadic males' volcano "god", as a "monster".
In other words, I refer to the bible and its products - a "god" or actually several "gods" - as a group of myths which some people who haven't really looked at all the information have deluded themselves into believing is "real"
Get yer facts straight. Mixing in your over-the-top versions with what I've actually said, is yet again intellectually dishonest.
It appears that you cannot even see clearly what I am saying - let alone see clearly the nature of your "amalgamated theology" and fictional "god/sun god".
Sooo, I expect another temper tantrum over this post, too...
Surprise me, Sab.
Grow up a little.
Zid
bohm

Well sab, missed your post but i think your quotes proove my point. If not you can be adventurous and read zids last post
Andrew Sh

Sab,
Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "mysticism" since it would need a clear definition, though I think I was clear in the context. Neither do I consult the Holy Spirit directly, I consult the Word of God and the Holy Spirit uses it to instruct me, and work in me, increase my faith, etc. All the workings of God in my soul are through His Word, applied by His Holy Spirit, and as I apply the Word of God with the help of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does not work apart from the Word of God; He comforts through it, He leads us to understand it; He instructs through it; guides through applying it; etc.
I do not believe for a moment that the Holy Spirit would want to lead us apart from by the Word, and certainly not away from the Word. If the Spirit were to act as if we did not need to have the Scriptures then this would encourage us to depart from the Scriptures.. and nothing can persuade me He would ever want that. The Scriptures are the Word of God in print and show us the Word of God made flesh. It is the Word of God made flesh who saves us, and it is the aim of the Holy Spirit to get us to believe and live upon the Word of God made flesh as described in the Word of God in print.
Cheers
NewChapter

I fear it isn't me picking and choosing which scriptures to believe, but you.
Wrong. I believe none of it, unless it is collaberated with other evidence.
I quoted the Scriptures above not because they are the only ones I like but because you are ignoring them and painting an unrecognizeable caricature of the God of the Bible in consequence
I ignore none of them. It is a disturbing message in it's wholeness.
Let's have all the Biblical evidence not just the bits you like.
Biblical evidence is not evidence.
The truth really I think is that you are relying on your logic more than you are relying on the Word of God.
Wrong again. I am not relying on logic more than than the word of a god. I am relying solely on logic, and not at all on the word of god. Hello---ATHEIST.
This is the Infinite we are discussing: surely you can feel that this is an area where there needs to be a bit of caution: we are finite, limited in our abilities.
I agree. And that explains why the god of the bible is finite and limited in his abilities, and proves he is creation of humans that are finite and limited.
Andrew Sh

NC
Thanks for your reply. I hope you will reply to these questions:
In what way or ways do you believe the god described in the bible is finite and limited?
Luke 19:41-44 - which starts "And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it, saying, If thou hadst known,even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! But now they are hid from thine eyes",
Do you find it disturbing that Jesus Christ should weep over Jerusalem when he considered the punishment they were going to receive because they knew not the hour of their visitation? If this upsets you, then please tell me how and why. Thanks.
tec

There is no Christ outside of the Bible, coming to us in our reason, feelings or whatever: that is mysticism, not Biblical Christianity: it leads to Anything Goes and ends up with our views being dominated by the false ideas which the Bible was given partly to deliver us from. Sola gratia, sola fide, solo Christo, Sola Scriptura, soli Deo gloria.
I am not a biblical Christian, as in Sola Scriptura or whatever. I am a spiritual one. My faith resides in Christ. He does speak to me, in spirit, through spirit. I have learned about him through the bible... but I also take it with a grain of salt (not set in stone, so to speak) unless He has shown me the truth of something. Then I KNOW because He has shown me.
The Holy Spirit does not work apart from the Word of God; He comforts through it, He leads us to understand it; He instructs through it; guides through applying it; etc.
Perhaps this is what works for you because this is what you need. I'm not knocking this, or judging at all. Not my place to do so. But of course He can work apart from the bible (though I would always apply Word of God to Christ, but I understand that you are referring to the bible). Otherwise, how did anyone hear from the spirit, or 'get caught up' in the spirit, before the NT was ever added to the OT?
God does not have to rely on a book, holy or otherwise. He can communicate to us via Spirit, via Christ. But most of US need to see something tangible. It is our limitation; not His... and not everyone has that limitiation; at least not once they learn or are told or are introduced to the idea that they can hear Christ, in spirit.
Peace,
tammy
Andrew Sh

Sister Tammy,
Fair enough(!) (Or is it?) Don't quite get the reference to Old Testament and New Testament. Perhaps you could explain a bit more fully. The kernal of all Scripture truth is found in Genesis, I believe. I'm much too tired now to try to answer and am retiring form the fray.
Regards
Andrew
tec

Oh, I just meant that some people learned from the spirit and not the bible about Christ because there weren't any writings that made up the NT, that formed the bible, in the beginning. Paul, himself, learned from Christ. From the Spirit of Christ. Not from the scriptures, though he may have understood them better or continued to rely on them for truth, for a spell. But he actually learned in spirit.
That is all I meant. Get your rest; I understand how a long debate can be so tiring :)
Much peace to you brother, in Christ,
tammy
sabastious

Nice cherrypicking... You're just so "persecuted" for your brilliant theist veiwpoints, aren't you...
I have had compassion for your misconeceptions of the people and the world around you, but now it has melted into pity. Your post was utterly pathetic and did nothing but toot your own horn while attempting to "set me straight." It's just more of the same. Here's what really happened: bohm said I was full of bullsh*t by saying I felt you discriminate against me as a believer. I said I felt discrimiated against because I didn't want to give evidence because I didn't want to make you look bad, you do that enough yourself. Instead of looking into my quotes as one trying to answer a question you discount them as cherry picking. Shame on you, Zid for letting pride blind you to the reality in front of you as a discriminating person. You should listen to what I have to say, but you won't. You have become what you hate, unfortunately. You must have been so oppressed in your life as to create a thick wall of ice that surrounds your heart. Who do you let in there? One maybe two people in the whole world? I was a fool to try to penetrate that wall, really I was. The you in the past was the tortured and now the you in the future is the superior authority (which is what your EGO has always wanted as somebody who didn't have control for a large portion of their life) and I the ignorant whelp. To even hint at the idea that my conclusions merely reside in my head where yours are based in reality because of your strict observance of empirical evidence is pitiful. It's you who is a legend in your own mind, not I. I simply came here to have fun and learn, whereas you came here to be mean spirited and assert your phony-baloney authority.
Saying someone has "lost it", does not imply insanity. Saying you're INSANE does - but I was basing that comment on the way you're flipping and flopping around in your current version of "theology" - mixing in Christian ideas with your idea of what "sun" worship is, and also with Chinese Buddhism and maybe Confucianism thrown in...
You accused me of backtracking when I wasn't and now you backtrack yourself. You are being a hypocrite to boot and to what ends? To safeguard your own pride? I really pity you and your outlook of the people you share this planet with. You directly called me insane, you used the WORD, and then you continued to drive that point home while using slang terms like "lost it." You went below the belt and now you are just trying to finish the job instead of saying sorry. You are mean and I don't say that to get sympathy, but to make a point in a debate. You are a mean person and you relish in it. I salute you, you gotta be good at something right, why not hate?
but I do NOT apologize for pointing out the flaws in your reasoning, whether using straight comment, sarcasm [one of my favorites], satire [another favorite], or irony.
In all my conversations with you I have never felt attacked by you pointing out flawed reasoning, I feel attacked when I am being attacked which you are completely unaware that you attack people (apparently) which makes you a real threat which deserves real reprimand. The kind of reprimand that you are giving me without warrant, but to protect your precious fantasy world view from falling down like a house of cards when something really does happen on this planet that is immune to your asinine act.
I'd already figured out that the bible was a collection of ignorant, superstitious mythology and the Jehovah's Witnesses were unpleasant and destructive by the time I was 10 years old, long before the "World Wide Web" started up in 1991.
The Jehovah's Witnesses are the single worst entity on the planet to represent the Bible. It looks to me that you are just using them as a scapegoat to demonize the whole book. There is no reason to connect the Witnesses to the Bible ever especially when arguing against it. Don't ever connect them to Jesus either they don't even deserve to be in the same breath.
It was only the physical and psychological brutality of my JW parents that kept me in for so long. By the way, Sab, your ignorance is strikingly similar to their ignorance.
Cofty's law brazenly broken. Leave the Witnesses out of it, and stop trying to take baseless cheap shots at my faith.
I didn't need "props" to enable me to see what the bible actually was saying - the first "creative day" in the bible having at least 2 glaring errors, the remainder of the "creative days" having major errors of their own; Lot offering his daughters to a brutal mob to be raped to death - then fathering two incestuous sons by his own daughters; Abraham willingly going along with sacrificing his own son; Moses making a bronze statue of a snake on a pole for the Israelites to worship - er, "view"; Joshua killing off whole cities, even the animals; David being viewed as "righteous" - even though he committed adultery and murder...
My belief system explains this rather elequently in my opinion. Of course you would just say I am extracting it from my head, misrepresent my very specific beliefs and discount it as anything other than ignorant fairy-tale. You can't see past your own bigorty unfortunately for you.
Anyone who's actually paying attention to what is REALLY being said, will realize what the bible is - a collection of Middle-Eastern male mythology, comparable in its attitudes to those of the Al Qaeda, the Ayatollah, the Taliban, towards women - and for that matter, towards anyone NOT a member of their precious little tribal population.
The bolded term is evidence of your group think and your argument is really narrow-minded.
Especially if one has ever had the chance to actually ASSOCIATE with Middle-Eastern men, as I did when I took up belly-dancing in Los Angeles in the late 1980s. That finished opening my eyes to the Middle-Eastern origins of the bible, and it was bone-chilling to realize the underlying social attitudes frozen in the bible's mythology.
There are countless Muslim American's who have been able to move past this bigotry and stop oppressing their women. Of course you would just call them intellectually dishonest and cherry pickers. You have all the cards, Zid you like it that way. You force people to either choose their book, as evil, or throw it in the trash. You are intellectually dishonest because you don't take into consideration the vast groups of people that have reclaimed the holy books of old and are explaining and expressing them accurately while still adhering to modern truths about morality and human rights. You have no reason to discount any of those groups just because "you associated with a muslim once." Give me a break.
Attempting to divorce your theology/mythology from its Middle-Eastern-male origins is ineffective, no matter how many times theists declare "jesus christ" to be "independent" of the only books claiming that he ever actually existed - well, except for things written after Christianity became a sect under observation and then co-opted by the Romans, and that one Indian reference.
Jesus divorced from the OT yet still quoted it. I follow that example by divorcing myself from modern organized religion while still keeping the good that they left behind. You clearly have a slanted view on Jesus and Christianity as a whole. You should stop misrepresenting them just in case they are for real.
I refer to it as a Johnny-come-lately Bronze-Age Middle-Eastern superstitious, ignorant, backwards nomadic males' volcano "god".
This statement is not consistant with how you view me as a believer in the Bible. You have repeatedly called me prone to bloodthirsty thoughts as a result of my faith in ancient books. You say that the BOOK creates bloodthirst, which ignores the clear law of personal responsibility.So, that means that you believe MY GOD is bloodthirsty which is false and I will defend him every time you assert it. I tried to explain life for life to you, but you will have none of it. You are easily the most difficult person to speak with I have came across in my life. You should blame the people not the book for the simple fact that not everyone succumbed to this "bloodthirst" that you keep refering to. You simply have an agenda to make yourself and your world view look good because people don't typically trust you because of your non belief in a deity. Maybe in your case they shouldn't.
When you claimed that I made such a reference, you were confusing me with a couple other posters who DO refer to the Johnny-come-lately Bronze-Age Middle-Eastern superstitious, ignorant, backwards nomadic males' volcano "god", as a "monster".
No confusion here, if it walks and acts like a duck it's a duck. I put you logically within your gang right where you deserve to be.
In other words, I refer to the bible and its products - a "god" or actually several "gods" - as a group of myths which some people who haven't really looked at all the information have deluded themselves into believing is "real"
Your position is laughable and clearly false. You base your vitriol off of this concept, so you feel justified, but in the end it just serves as an excuse to attack the personal beliefs of someone who stands up for them. You don't like it when a believer stands up to you, it's really that simple. You are a cliche, Zid, and you'd do well to take a good look in the mirror and correct your bleeding pride before it whirlwinds into more people in your life.
Sooo, I expect another temper tantrum over this post, too...
...and you end your pathedic rufute with a misrepresntation. Thanks for the nickel. I would call the outburst when I mentioned Einstein's faith as a temper tantrum of all the atheists who spoke up. They just can't handle the idea that Enstein believed in God, it just makes their heads pop in anger and they are compelled to refute and then piss on the argument as "one from authority." You are the temper tantrum thrower, Zid, but pride serves as a set of blinders so you may never know the truth about yourself. Maybe one day you'll choose to take them off and stop discrimiating against people who you think are lesser than you. Maybe you'll see a bloodthirsty human for what he truly is: a human just like you and I.
-Sab
ziddina

Are you having fun collecting all those imaginary nickels, Sab??
They're as real as your imaginary "god" - whatever version of it you are currently worshipping.
Why don't you try worshipping Thor instead? There's a deity you haven't tried yet.
You still haven't answered the question I asked many, many threads ago...
What is the REAL form that the earth took in its actual 'beginning', and what are the errors that the bible writers make, in Genesis 1: 1-5...
You keep ducking that question. Are you afraid of what you will see, if you compare that mythology to scientific advancements in its understanding of how planets form?

Christian Apologists - Please Watch This and Tell Us Why it is wrong?

Share this