by smiddy 268 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
It's mind-boggling that people still believe in some ethereal stuff they call spirit in the 21st century.
Christians are very superstitious people.
It can only be defined in negative terms. Appaently it is not visible, not coporeal, not tangible, not a lot of things.
But what the hell is it exactly?
But what the hell is it exactly?
Then? 'Spirit' WAS the best-available science of the day, and conceived of by brilliant minds like Hippocrates, Plato, etc as it WAS the best model of reality they had. However, investigating it's basis and further study LED to the discovery of how sound and communication actually operates, via an improved model of reality. This didn't happen overnight, but millenia.
HOWEVER, anyone who clings to 'spirit' in 2013 is clinging to long-discarded ancient science (which was pretty high-tech stuff in the days the Bible was written), and is basically admitting to be a Luddite, someone who doesn't care about reality but wallows in the ignorance of the past.
'Spirit' IS a thought-stopper, a non-answer, an excuse to NOT discover or accept what IS known beyond doubt, and it's driven by religious thinking as an excuse to do so. Why am I reminded of Bible verses speaking of pigs wanting to wallow in mud, or a dog returning to it's own vomit? (that last analogy fails, though, as a modern Christian THINKS spirit is REAL, and a useful concept, so hasn't even vomited it out yet).
Adam
Yay... the quote box is back : )
Christians do (or SHOULD), that's who! It's not like there's a lack of Biblical justification for making that statement, and some Christians DO make that statement, based on valid scriptural justification and support.
Let me just say, Adamah... that I don't care what 'christians' say. They say all sorts of things, and just because one calls oneself a christian does not make it so... and does not mean that they are listening to CHRIST. Often, they are listening to what their church or religious leaders TELL them. And who are THEY listening to?
The phrase 'blind faith' doesn't appear ANYWHERE in the Bible: it's a man-made term that is of fairly-recent origin from non-theological sources, and is unnecessarily-redundant (with the use of a questionable intensifier 'blind', since the Bible often speaks in terms of the STRENGTH of faith (weak/strong), but as is typical of the Bible, it 'shotguns' on the evidentiary basis (the methods) for building that faith, i.e. unseen faith granted via 'Holy Ghost' VS Biblically-based knowledge of the nature of God VS learning of the men of faith and Jesus. It's a MESS, but the answer of the apologetist is to say ALL methods are valid and not mutually-exclusive, although anyone who thinks about it SHOULD realize that not ALL approaches can be right: you claim your voice tells you what is right and feels free to cherry-pick scriptures, which contradicts the Bible itself which assures readers that "ALL scripture is inspired, and beneficial", serving as the basis on which to build faith, etc. How can your voice AND the Bible be right?
(And here's where you claim they DON'T contradict.... sigh.... )
You can roll your eyes and sigh, but it just makes you look foolish. Because I am not about to say that. Though in actualty it is often someone's interpretation of what is written that contradicts what is true. Like thinking that the verse 'all scripture is inspired and beneficial' means that the entire bible is inspired and inerrant. A, not all of the bible is scripture or inspired. Some of it is letters, or history taking, or investigative accounts (like Luke, who states that he investigated things... not that he received them via the spirit : inspired) B, there is nothing in Paul's statement there, that states that scripture is inerrant, or not subject to misinterpretation, mistranslation, and so... scribal errors (lying pen of the scribes) C, that statement does not say that the scriptures are then the basis on which to build faith. Only that scripture is beneficial... and it goes on to say what it is beneficial/useful for... teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. In any case, that verse does not mean what you (and granted, many parts of 'christianity') say it means. And you don't have to take my word for it. You can ask for ears to hear, and for you eyes to be opened (so NOT being blind, spiritually... indeed blindness is the exact opposite is what Christ teaches us to be). I suppose i am curious as to why you would take THEIR word for the meaning (men and religion)?
Hebrews 11:1 defines Christian faith, "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for, and certain of what we do not see."
Note it's a two-part definition, where the first part refers to having confidence in what we WISH/DREAM will happen, and the second part demands certainty in UNSEEN evidence.
No need to change the word from hope... to wish/dream. Hope works just find. Note that you say unseen evidence; meaning there is still evidence... it is just not seen, in the physical.
If Hebrews 11:1 doesn't seem like a foolish approach to life to you, DEMANDING that one place confidence in unproven and unrealistic pipe-dreams and fantasies, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn you may be interested in purchasing, which I recently bought from the WTBTS.
Cute. But oddly enough, and contrary to your position, my Lord called me OUT of the wts, and ANY religon, so as to not put my faith in MEN, but in HIM. HE has not led me wrong. Not once.
As you SHOULD know by now, the 'not seeing' phrase in Hebrews 11:1 doesn't refer to a limitation on visual perceptions only, but also refers to being imperceptible by all of our sensory capabilities, eg not being seen by the eyes, not heard heard by ears, not felt by our
skin. Biblical faith by definition is NOT based on perceptible phenomena: if it's perceptible by your sensory organs, it's not contributing to your belief in God and Jesus by FAITH, but by direct experience, by SEEN evidence. While SEEN evidence CAN support one's belief
in God, it does NOT build one's faith.
Odd again, that we are told to ask for eyes to see, and ears to hear. You are right in that this does not refer to our physical senses... but our spiritual eyes and ears, as we ARE spirit.
So that faith is not blind and deaf... but is simply not in the physical things of this world; but in the spiritual.
Faith is heard.
Hebrews 11:1 IS describing BLIND FAITH, since it describes INVISIBLE/undiscernable/undetectable/evidence. By definition, that places the evidence upon which Biblical faith is based as OUTSIDE the realm of science's ability to detect it. For if it WERE perceivable/detectable/measureable, it wouldn't be subject to FAITH, but VERIFIABLE.
Undetectable by the tools that we have, yes... because the tools we have are designed to measure the physical... at least they are designed such to date.
But there is also the spiritual.
Science has not discovered everything... and some things are heard/seen/verified... in the spirit.
You DO realize that you're demonstrating your OWN ignorance of basic medical terms here, since 'auditory hallucinations' is NOT a diagnosis, but a SYMPTOM (which you may or may not even experience; I see now you've flip-flopped on that claim, denying experiencing auditory hallucinations above).
Point being, you relied on an invalid untrue belief to reach a faulty conclusion to make an allegation which just isn't true: I didn't diagnose you with jack (which would be silly anyway, even if I COULD/WOULD; for one, I don't give away services for FREE).
I didn't flip flop on anything. I never claimed to have auditory hallucinations to begin with. Hallucination is YOUR diagnosis. That is what YOU have taken from what I said. So you HAVE diagnosed me, and you speak to me with that diagnosis already accepted by YOU.
Since that conclusion is based on flawed assumptions, and 'negative motives' is a value judgment in itself, why should I accept YOUR moral judgment?
I don't think most people even understand WHY they do what they do; most people don't have malicious motives to account for their actions.
i'm not sure i understand what you are saying here... but no problem. I can rephrase my question. Why do you seek to apply one motive to me, over another? Why do you say that I am trying to be 'special' (showing off, teasing others, etc... as you have stated) rather than trying to 'help' others who are seeking or asking questions?
See, that's a fundamental limitation of ALL forms of communications: the interpretation is not under the direct control of the speaker, and speakers often communicate messages without even realizing what they're revealing; likewise, people are prone to hearing what they want to hear.
True.
Sigh, the infamous Christian persecution complex is kicking into high-gear, I see?
Not at all. Just truth, even if you don't see it yourself. And I'm not crying about it, or even caring. Just stating it. That is a tactic that is used, and has been used on me before. Shame someone into silence; scare them into silence (as the wts does, regarding partaking); mock them into silence; etc.
Oh, and did you ever consider I'm trying to HELP prevent you from repeating the same mistake you made by joining a cult, in the first place? If you still believe in Jesus, you're prone to joining OTHER groups, since belief in Jesus and God is fundamentally associated
with setting people up for blind obedience to someone who claims having been delegated Divine Authority to issue orders in His name.
Well, that is nice of you...but I do think you have missed some things that I have been saying.
First, you should know I did not join the wts, or any cult for that matter. I studied for two years, I almost joined... but in the end, I did not. I could not. And since Christ, the Spirit of Truth, has told me that He is calling His people OUT of her (religion), and did indeed call me out AND warn me about listening/joining any other parts of 'christianity', (like He did when I started listening to the mormons just after I ended things with the wts)... well, then, I can just continue to listen to Him, and not be in danger of joining these other groups.
He has taught me that, Adamah. Christ. Because I listen to HIM... I am not in danger of that.
NOPE: why in the HELL would I even say THAT? I said that the DEPICTION of God's character changed with time, not that "God changed with time". It would be SILLY for me to claim that God changed with time, since, perhaps you forget that I'm an ATHEIST which means I DON'T believe in ANY God(s)? HOW could something I don't even believe exists CHANGE with time?
Okay, I'm going to chalk this up to a misunderstanding, because I am no longer entirely sure what the original point was supposed to be.
You clearly missed MY counter-point that Paul was saying that YOU, Tammy, need to base YOUR faith on the basis of reflecting on the Torah's accounts of the men of faith second-hand, and taking THEIR accounts of experiences as a matter of FAITH. Paul is saying that YOU need to trust that their accounts are accurate, and YOU need to base your faith upon the Bible's reporting of THEIR experiences with God. That's WHY Paul offers these stories as exemplary for building faith. Elsewhere the Bible offers OTHER ways to build faith, but since Paul clearly defines Biblical use of faith, his letter carries weight.
You are misunderstanding the chapter. But I don't know if there is anything more that I can say to you, or share, to get you to see it for what it is. Maybe.
Hebrews 11:1 says what faith is: knowing; confidence; assurance.
2/3 (66%) ain't bad (well, actually it constitutes a FAILING grade in many courses), but Hebrews 11:1 does NOT mention "knowledge" (gnosis). Now GRANTED, there are OTHER scriptures which mention building faith by gaining a knowledge of God, but it ain't Hebrews 11.
Knowing, as in not merely thinking that something might be true, or thinking that it is probably true... but knowing that it IS true.
Faith is KNOWING. Not just thinking... not just hoping... but knowing. Being SURE.
It certainly does not say that faith is based on nothing. It doesn't even speak about what faith is based ON.
It IMPLIES that we increase our faith by learning about the men of old (who were held in high esteem based ON their faith, which Paul clearly says was based on UNSEEN evidence in their examples, a demonstration of trust for which they earned God's approval), but that's not explicitly stated. Paul offers examples of how they HAD to use faith by acting on God's promising of some unseen future event to occur, eg Noah's Flood), but AGAIN, YOU as the reader are EXPECTED to build YOUR faith based on second-hand accounts of THEIR experiences and showing faith, NOT by YOUR OWN direct experience (which isn't even classified as acting on faith).
Well... "implies" is subjective... like seemingly, or evidently.
If one wants to increase their faith... then one can ASK Christ to increase their faith, as the apostles asked Christ. To give them ears to hear and eyes to see.
The scriptures can help, yes, while we are still walking by sight... before we learn to walk by faith (which is not in what is SEEN, as the scriptures are... but is in what is unseen, as the Spirit who speaks IS) They can help point us to the One who is NOT seen, but He is heard. In faith, and in spirit.
Paul defines faith, explains how these elders were recognized by God for their faith, and offered as EXAMPLES of faith, even with Hebrews 11 referred to as the "Faith Hall of Fame"! I never CLAIMED that they were listed as the only examples as the exclusive means for building faith: otherwise you wouldn't need the rest of the Bible and the Gospels.
Adamah, if the scriptures and the bible is all that was needed... what point is there in the Spirit? What point in Christ? In listening, and hearing? Why did He never say, all you need are the scriptures... instead of saying the opposite, "you diligently search the scriptures because you think that by them you have eternal life, but you refuse to come to ME... to have life?"
Your view may well be corroborated by some branches of the religion of christianity, as well as by some parts of the bible (if you ignore context and other parts)... but it is not corroborated by Christ. The ONE to whom a christian is supposed to listen TO.
And you are missing a point... the scritpures are SEEN.
Going with "internal validation" of the Bible, huh?
Do yourself a favor and look up what 'weasel word' means, since 'jibe' is NOT a weasel word. It just ISN'T, no way, no how.
Okay, I can receive that.
So what is it called when you add an adjective to lead the reader into seeing something your way? Because that is what you did.
Peace,
tammy
Faith is KNOWING. Not just thinking... not just hoping... but knowing. Being SURE.
Those are just word's that have become fashionable among christians because faith is actually embarassing to them among rational people.
Your faith might have been embarassing to you, Cofty, but mine is not to me.
Peace,
tammy
It's risible.
If you "knew" something you would not need faith. Even Paul admits as much.
Have the courage to celebrate your blind faith for what it really is.
Stop pretending there is the slightest thing rational about it.
We just have a difference of opinion Tammy. And that's okay.
It IS okay, yes!
In my opinion, god should do what the bible says he did before - show himself or give us a tangible sign.
In all the times that He did that... here we still are. How many people witnessed miracles, saw and heard Christ... and still did not believe; convincing themselves instead that he was a fraud, or that he had a demon, etc? I mean, look at how quickly the Israelites lost their faith. They had just been rescued from slavery and all that went with that; but Moses goes up the mountain and is gone for just a little while, when they begin to grumble and doubt, and decide to build their golden calf, so that they would have something to SEE... because of their lack of faith.
You feel he will talk to anyone in the spirit. But, the problem is, so many people don't know anything about your Jesus or the spirit you speak of.
He does... and as to the problem, it is man who has created that problem, in what he has taught his children, and their children, etc, etc. That is how the children pay for the sins of the fathers, because they are left with the world their fathers taught and made for them. Not because God punishes children for the sins of their fathers.
What about the billions alive who don't even know about the things you preach? God certainly could show himself and not just talk in spirit if he exists and is almighty. The fact that he doesn't is a big problem for me and others. But, it's not something we all have to agree on.
I understand your concern... and that might be a big one, if everyone 'else' went to hell, or some such thing. But that is not true. That is a lie, even though it has been taught by 'christianity' for a very long time.
Happy Friday everyone.
And to you, and if you are in Canada or the States, have a great long weekend! Peace, tammy
How many people witnessed miracles
Nobody. Not one.
Superstitious people back then imagined they had seen miracles, and today superstitious people still do.
When god takes a break from whispering nonsense in your ear and heals an amputee come back for a chat.
No, that is not what Paul taught, Cofty... though it is what much of 'christianity' teaches that he taught.
Abraham did not 'think' God might or probably exist. He KNEW God existed, and He put FAITH in what He HEARD from God. He believed what God told Him, and HE obeyed. No doubt in God
THAT is faith.
Peace,
tammy
Abraham did not 'think' God might or probably exist. He KNEW God existed, and He put FAITH in what He HEARD from God. He believed what God told Him, and HE obeyed...
...and prepared to murder his son.
Oh and he raped Hagar and then threw her and Ishmael out into the wilderness to die.
That's faith for you.
