For Terry - So That it Will "Make Sense"

by Perry 235 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Perry

    Jeff, You're soooo cuddly sometimes.

    Of course the keywords for religion is 'faith' or 'belief'- that throws logic, common sense, respect for structured argument to the wind to begin with, doesn't it?

    Of course not. Jeff, your Science god would never require faith of you? Or, would he?

    For example, in a 1979 interview with *Dr. Donald Fisher, the state paleontologist for New York, Luther Sunderland, asked him: [Fossils Date the Rocks]"How do you date fossils?" His reply: "By the Cambrian rocks in which they were found." Sunderland then asked him if this were not circular reasoning, and *Fisher replied, "Of course, how else are you going to do it?" (Bible Science Newsletter, December 1986, p. 6.)

    [Rocks Date the Fossils] "The rocks do date the fossils, [Fossils Date the Rocks] but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning . . because circularity is inherent in the derivation of time scales."—*J.E. O'Rourke, "Pragmatism vs. Materialism in Stratigraphy," American Journal of science, January 1976.

    [Rocks Date the Fossils] "Trilobites of many kinds are common in Paleozoic rocks. About half the fossils of the Paleozoic are trilobites. But trilobites aren't found in rocks younger than the Permian period".- University of Hawaii website

    [Fossils Date theRocks] The succession of organism as has been determined by a study of theory remains buried in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of organisms that they contain."—*R.H. Rastall, article "Geology," Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 10 (14th ed.; 1956), p. 168.

    Stratigraphy is the oldest of the relative dating methods that archaeologists use to date things. Stratigraphy is based on the law of superposition—like a layer cake, the lowest layers must have been formed first. - [Rocks Date the Fossils]

    [Fossils Date the Rocks] "The paleontologist's wheel of authority turned full circle when he put this process into reverse and used his fossils to determine tops and bottoms for himself. In the course of time he came to rule upon stratigraphic order, and gaps within it, on a worldwide basis."—*F.K. North, "the Geological Time Scale," in Royal Society of Canada Special Publication, 8:5 (1964).

    How do we know this picture represents millions of years Jeff?

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog


    DD: Those who don't want it, are those who don't want it because has not created this desire within them. How could someone who is totally depraved want something holy, righteous and good? IF it were God's will that these persons choose him, then they most certainly would, when he caused them to do so.

    I guess your problem is with the Potter's freedom?


    Yes, I agree. Who can resist the calling of God? I tried believe me, and I lost. But we also choose. The Word lays claim to both.

    I don't have a problem with that, I think we both agree that God's choice is the cause and our choice is the effect. I'm a whosoever as well.

  • leavingwt


    I guess your problem is with the Potter's freedom?

    It would be of no value for me to have a 'problem' with an all-powerful God, would it not? His plan cannot be thwarted. If he chooses me, I'll see you in Heaven. If he doesn't, I'll roast in Hell with my friends. No need to have problems with things we cannot change. In the meantime, I do my best to live by the Golden Rule.

  • startingover


    I would really like to know the location of hell, can you tell me?

    Also, why didn't god just forgive A & E, was it really such an unforgivable transgression. Oh, I forgot they were perfect, but in another thread another believer says the bible doesn't say they were perfect. Now I'm confused.

  • PSacramento
    I would really like to know the location of hell, can you tell me?

    Jersey comes to mind ;)

  • leavingwt
    Jersey comes to mind ;)

    Any Watchtower facility, Kingdom Hall or District Convention.

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog


    I do my best to live by the Golden Rule.

    There is nothing wrong with the "Golden Rule". It's just that I fall so short of living it (not that I don't try, like most people), but, living by faith gives the Golden Rule so much more meaning.

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog


    Jersey comes to mind ;)

    Does that mean I'm never getting outa here?

  • Terry

    Sorry about my disappearance. My laptop battery died and my internal computer date switched itself to October 2003. I couldn't get in to this or any other password site!

    Now, back to Perry's question. (Would you die to save your daughter's life?)

    Perry, try to follow with me on this.

    God is the parent. The offspring is Jesus.

    God doesn't die to save Jesus.

    Jesus dies to save his human brothers and sisters.

    So, the analogy behind your question is what the British call "wonky."

    That aside, you are missing a very important and fundamental part of the Salvation story.

    Humans die because of God in the first place.

    God witheld continued life from humans which was a power He possessed.

    Did God "so love Adam and Eve that he sent his only begotten son...?"


    There were millions of dead humans in the grave by the time Jesus was sent to die.

    So, there are 3 things you have to keep straight in your head, Perry.

    1.Mankind dies because God doesn't keep them from dying. God views them as "deserving" death.

    2.God has many, many (infinite!) options for "saving" mankind from permanent death. The ONLY option he selected involved DEATH. The death of Jesus.

    3.Jesus died and came back to life. The sacrifice was TEMPORARY. Who lost what? God "lost" his only son? Yeah, for 3 days only! Jesus lost his life? Yeah, for 3 days only! When humans die they don't come back in 3 days. There is no eye for an eye balance at play.

    Now, Perry, in view of the above list I return to the real problem of God's PLAN of salvation.

    1.God CHOOSES to view humans (beginning with Adam and Eve) as only worthy of death. He calls the reason for this "sin." Doesn't matter what God calls it----it is GOD HIMSELF CHOOSING to allow humans to die.

    2.At the same time that God is allowing generation after generation of humans to die (not to mention destroying all by 8 people in the flood) God is simultaneously working on a PLAN to save mankind??? This is illogical. I don't think this is anything at all but poor storytelling.

    3.Because of "sin" man is worthless, wretched, lost, in the clutches of Satan and utterly deserving of death----BUT! God is said to "LOVE" these undeserving wretches and want to save them. Huh? What is God saving them from other than God's OWN DETERMINATION TO LET THEM DIE?

    4.Suddenly, God's PLAN kicks in when Jesus is born and "God so LOVED the world (?) he sent His only begotten son...." What has changed from the Garden of Eden at this point in time?? How is mankind now WORTHY of being loved and saved?? On what just basis can they now avail themselves of Jesus?

    5.The unfounded (no logic, no justice, no precedent) PLAN of God allows god's son to die (temporarily). This is called a "Ransom".

    6.The same worthless wretches suddenly have the convenient ABILITY (despite their evil sinful nature) to accept this plan and exercise (out of nothing) FAITH!

    You see how deep these problems are?

    Why is God saving mankind from his own determination to let them die and why is this so-called plan in effect at the time of Jesus forward rather than at the moment BEFORE any baby-making would start??

  • JWoods

    I tried to answer it this way, Terry -

    While we are waiting, I will answer for myself: If it would really save her, and there were no other way, then yes - of course.
    However, if I were GOD - then I would not have to.

    I got told to go away. Guess I over-simplified my answer.

Share this