Christian Apologists - Please Watch This and Tell Us Why it is wrong?
by cantleave 834 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
sabastious
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...
I have answered this question more than once, but you never accept it, you simply refute and discount. Should I answer it again?
-Sab
-
sabastious
Palmtree I really like that image, it has an interesting message. Let me tell you why it matters. You and I have a soul, who created it? The answer to that question will indentify the owner of that soul and where it goes. Souls come to earth for a reason and they leave with knowledge and understanding. What we do here and who were are matters now and in the next life. Revelation in the Bible, to me, is about the ownership of mankind. We have the Dragon who seemingly owns humans for a period of time which explains all the halabaloo and wickedness in the world. However, the book goes on to say that God wants to be our master rather than the other way around. The means of which God becomes your master is THROUGH the spirit of Christ. The Spirit of Peace.
Two Kinds of Wisdom
James 3 - 13 Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life , by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. 14 But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. 15 Such “wisdom” does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. 16 For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.
17 But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere. 18 Peacemakers who sow in peace reap a harvest of righteousness.
Do you want to be remembered as a peacemaker or a tombstone?
-Sab
-
NewChapter
In what way or ways do you believe the god described in the bible is finite and limited?
Well first of all, that creation story. It has been completely debunked. However if I were a bronze-aged nomad thinking about my origins, then it would have really made sense. Had this god not been limited, he could have given a simple version of evolution. but he couldn't---cuz evolution had not been invented yet---so he was only able to give a bronze-aged guess, because he was limited by bronze-age knowledge, because bronze-aged humans created him.
I already can hear some believer's response to this. Ancient Israelites would not have understood---blah, blah. Okay, maybe they would not have understood the science of it, but certainly a simplified version could have been offered that while not going into great detail, would not have come into direct conflict over the truth of it. This is All Powerful God afterall---and we humans do it for children all the time. But he wasn't all powerful, so that's the explanation.
The worldwide flood. And IMPOSSIBLITY. But they didn't know that 3000 years ago, so they could make up stories like that. Had their god really been all wise, he would have known better.
Consider how this god handled rape vicitms! He allowed rapists to purchase them from their fathers and marry them. Now an all-knowing god would have realized that this was barbaric---but this is just the kind of thing you would expect from a paternalistic, backward society. And since they created this god, this god was limited to their worldview when it came to morals.
Virginity! Yes, there was a 'test' for women's virgiinity. But not a man's. Biologically---you understand. If virginity was such a coveted commodity, then I think this god could have figured out a way for both female and male virginity to be obvious. But he didn't. Because he didn't exist. So bronze-aged humans made him up and worked with what evolution gave them. Women have a hymen, men don't, so there was no penalty for a nonvirgin male marrying---because there was no virginity test. Very limiting.
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
Ir doesn't upset me in the least. Maybe Jesus wept, maybe he didn't. but he wept over a ficiton, and a made up god. Weep away. Remember the Israelites also wept over the death of a pagan god every year---in YAWEH's TEMPLE! Tears happen. Why would this affect me in any way?
-
ziddina
"I have answered this question more than once, but you never accept it, you simply refute and discount. Should I answer it again?..." Sab, above
Yes, Sab, try again, because you haven't gotten it right in the ONE attempt you made...
-
cantleave
You and I have a soul, who created it?
I don't see any evidence of a soul, who created it? It is an idea constructed by our ancestors.
-
Andrew Sh
NewChapter
I have taken the libery of taking the relevant bits from your reply 8853 above to start a new thread entitled:
"Creation, Evolution, the Flood and science - Is the Bible without error?"
Haven't had a chance to reply to your points on it yet though.
Regards
Andrew
-
tec
Cantleave, did you understand what I tried to e x plain about faith being in the man, rather than the book?
Lets say you read a book about Ghandi, and loved the man through what you read about him. Is your love for the book, or is your love for the man the book told you about?
Peace,
tammy
-
cantleave
Hi Tec,
I think your Ghandi analogy is fundamentally flawed. We have an enormous archive of historical/contemporary documents, films and diaries referring to what Ghandi achieved. They give us a real picture of the man, his strengths and his weaknesses. His achievements and failures.
If all we knew about Ghandi was based on one biography written by one person, we would not get a complete picture of the man. We would have biased understanding, created by the perspective of that author. This would result in our evaluation of the man reflecting the biases of the author.
I really do not want to be glib about this but here's my take on it.
I think Miss Marple is bloody wonderful. She is not only an astute, wise and sweet old lady, who like me enjoys tea and scones in rural English tea shop, she is also a kick-ass crime solver. But I also know that she is a creation of Agatha Christie, a fictional chararcter endowed with those wonderful qualities by the author.
I could quite easily envisage someone building a cult / religion around Miss Marple. All the characteristics of Miss Marple would be derived by what was written in the Agatha Christie books. They would be the basis on which the new cult was based. The love of the book would have resulted in a Marple cult, because the character has been written in an endearing and compelling way. The love of the character is based on the writings that created that character.
This is the way I see Christianity. Christ is known only by what is written in the bible. The religion of Christianity is based on those writings and therefore, faith built around Jesus is squarely built on the writings about him.
-
tec
You have some flaws in your reasoning too, cantleave. We're all going to have flaws in an analogy that we use. But the basic point should be the same. When you learn about someone from a book, or many books as is the case, it is the person being spoken about who you love or place your faith in... and not the book itself.
We have an enormous archive on Ghandi because Ghandi is quite recent, and perhaps also because far more people are literate. He was also political, was he not?
But we have more than one source for Christ as well... just because many of those sources are placed in the bible, does not mean that we have only one source, or just one biography. That is an error in thinking. So there are multiple witnesses to Christ, and many of the other accounts were not placed in the bible either. He was not created out of thin air. People knew him and walked with Him. So this is the difference between Him and your Miss Marple analogy. You know that she is a fictional character and can trace her origins to the imagination of her creator. You cannot do this with Christ because there is no evidence that he was ever a fictional character created by someone's imagination.
I agree that the historicity of Jesus is another thread though.
Peace,
tammy