How the TRINITY covers up the murder of Jehovah

by Terry 146 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Terry
    Terry

    Consider looking at the Jesus' Seminar version of the gospels; they show what sayings of Jesus they consider likely, unlikely and not at all.

    Not unlike what process the Catholic Church Fathers undertook to eliminate competing Gospels!

    We never get "what is" we get what some self-apointed authority considers "should be".

    Reflect on this one fact. For one THOUSAND five hundred years the ONLY official Holy Bible in existence contained 73 approved books.

    When the Proetestant Reformation began Luther and his minions took a giant eraser to that heaven ordained number and trashed 7 books of Holy Writ!!

    Gosh. What hubris!

    Essential becomes garbage in the blink of an eye!

    How malleable is absolute Truth!!

  • Terry
    Terry

    Remebering Jesus's exact words?

    Dude, you had no problem quoting Socrate's "exact words", even though its unproven he existsed and all we have are Plato's writings about Sorate's words.

    Let's get our playing fields sorted, shall we?

    The JESUS playing field is life or death, eternity, absolute morality and judgement.

    Socrates? His playing field is epistemology. He questioned what people thought they knew and by asking simple and profound questions indicated they really didn't know what they thought they knew at all.

    JESUS and SOCRATES: who is purported to have the "sayings of everlasting life"?

    JESUS and SOCRATES: who is reputed to be GOD himself?

    JESUS and SOCRATES: whose quotes earn TV evangelists hundreds of million dollars?

    JESUS and SOCRATES: which provokes black and white literalists to say "God said it, I believe it, that settles it!"?

    You see? You can't play the same ballgame in both ballparks. The analogy is fatally flawed.

  • Terry
    Terry

    EXACT words? Odds are that we don't have the EXACT words of all he spoke. But his message? I think the odds are good on that. And we do have a great many manuscripts that are similar and that do not change the meaning of those words in any significant way - or the message of love that is inherent in each of the gospels and letters

    So, you accept these words as PRUDENT and PRACTICAL in a kill and eat world? "LOVE YOUR ENEMIES"..."TURN THE OTHER CHEEK."

    How dead will that get you and how fast?

    We'd have to disband armies and learn to speak Arabic and you'd be wearing a veil real quick, M'lady!!

    Jesus admonition (if he really said such a ridiculous thing!) to Love our Enemies is not only silly, impractical and impracticable---it is dangerous, ill-conceived and counter-productive to life on Earth.

    But, I suspect you've never analyzed the implications. Not really.

  • Terry
    Terry

    Tammy sayeth:

    And yet--amazingly--the very people he hung around with and spoke to every day really had little clue what he was talking about!!

    This is an assumption on your part.

    John 12:16:

    New International Version(©1984)
    At first his disciples did not understand all this. Only after Jesus was glorified did they realize that these things had been written about him and that they had done these things to him.

    Luke 9:43--45

    While everyone was marveling at all that Jesus did, he said to his disciples, [44] "Listen carefully to what I am about to tell you: The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men." [45] But they did not understand what this meant. It was hidden from them, so that they did not grasp it, and they were afraid to ask him about it.

    (John 6:52, 60, 66):

    How can this man give us his flesh to eat?... Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?... From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

    John 2:19:

    19 Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days." 20 They replied, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?"

  • Terry
    Terry

    PSacramento speaketh:

    The bible is great for seeing what is written IN the BIBLE, it gives us an idea about what the followers of God and Jesus heard, wrote, thought, felt and were insipred to write.

    If you don't wanna believe ANYTHING in it, guess what, you don't have to.

    Anybody can read the Bible. Many try.....repeatedly. Even the brightest among us will admit it is put together in a way any editor/publisher could fix easily. But, it isn't.

    It is like going into the house of one of those hoarders where everything is piled everywhere! No context other than haphazard madness!

    Now, having stated the obvious, I go on to say WHY DOES IT COME DOWN TO BELIEVING IT?

    What a crazy thing to require people to do!!

    "Here, this is the most important book on the planet! You won't really understand it. But--by golly--you better be prepared to BELIEVE it!!

    It is like the Health Care Bill that Senators signed into law WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT WAS IN IT!!

    It is a derelection of integrity to buy in totally to something that you cannot intellectually assent to for lack of complete understanding!

    Proverbs 18:13

    He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him!

  • Terry
    Terry

    MEETING JUNKIE NO MORE SAYETH:

    three hundred years later (when scriptures began to be written down.)

    Terry - three hundred years later????!! I believe you are way off on that one. There is an extant portion of the Gospel of John carbon dated to the 1st century - http://www.carm.org/manuscript-evidence

    ****************************************************************************************************************

    Terry replieth:

    I want you to pay VERY CLOSE ATTENTION, please.

    This is how Apologists cleverly manage to stretch the truth without lying by IMPLYING and coaxing you to form CONCLUSIONS which are in error!

    Here is the example from the above apologists website:

    Almost all biblical scholars agree that the New Testament documents were all written before the close of the First Century. If Jesus was crucified in 30 A.D., then that means that the entire New Testament was completed within 70 years. This is important because it means there were plenty of people around when the New Testament documents were penned who could have contested the writings. In other words, those who wrote the documents knew that if they were inaccurate, plenty of people would have pointed it out. But, we have absolutely no ancient documents contemporary with the First Century that contest the New Testament texts.

    Furthermore, another important aspect of this discussion is the fact that we have a fragment of the gospel of John that dates back to around 29 years from the original writing (John Rylands Papyri 125 A.D.). This is extremely close to the original writing date. This is simply unheard of in any other ancient writing and it demonstrates that the Gospel of John is a First Century document

    Okay, you read that, right?

    You would practically have to be a scholar yourself to realize what it is REALLY SAYING and not what it IMPLIES it is saying.

    1.Only a tiny fragment of the "early" copy (not original) of a copy of a copy ACTUALLY EXISTS! About the size of a postage stamp!!

    It is that copy of a copy of a copy the size of the postage stamp WHICH DATES to 125 A.D. (More on HOW in a minute!)

    2.The originals are completely gone! The copies of the originals are completely missing! The postage stamp sized fragment is all we have from the gospel of John only! Zip--Nada else.

    3.Everything else doesn't appear until 300 years afterward!

    The EARLIEST GOSPEL is Mark which is purported to have been written down just before the destruction of Jerusalem 60-70 A.D.. How "recent" is our oldest manuscript fragment of Mark? A.S. 350!

    Now HOW did we date those early manuscripts, anyway?

    The earliest fragment of the New Testament is the Rylands Library Papyrus P52, a piece of the Gospel of John dated to the first half of the 2nd century. For this reason, dating the composition of the texts relies on textual criticism, philological and linguistic evidence, as well as direct references to historical events in the texts instead of dating the physical manuscripts.
  • Terry
    Terry

    If Jesus was only a man, I personally applaud his singlehandedly overturning the legacy of the Semitic worldview up to that point

    Not Jesus! It was PAUL who did this!! This was done by methodically, systematically re-interpreting scripture and history and recontextualizing everything. When the Temple was destroyed and the non-christianized Jews scattered into the Diaspora there were simply NO AUTHORITIES LEFT TO ARGUE the point for the traditional viewpoint. Paul won by default!

  • tec
    tec

    So, you accept these words as PRUDENT and PRACTICAL in a kill and eat world? "LOVE YOUR ENEMIES"..."TURN THE OTHER CHEEK." How dead will that get you and how fast? We'd have to disband armies and learn to speak Arabic and you'd be wearing a veil real quick, M'lady!!

    Perhaps they were words meant to avoid adding to the insanity of this kill and eat world? And yes, I accept them. It might get me dead - but striking back is just as likely, if not more likely, to do the same.

    Jesus admonition (if he really said such a ridiculous thing!) to Love our Enemies is not only silly, impractical and impracticable---it is dangerous, ill-conceived and counter-productive to life on Earth. But, I suspect you've never analyzed the implications. Not really.

    After the conversations we've had on this topic, I'm surprised you can say that to me. Yes, I have analyzed the implications. Loving your enemy 1) frees you from hate and anger and hurt that are to your detriment 2) people respond calmer to love than they do to anger - anger gets their backs up and promotes more anger. Will some innocents die from loving your enemies. Yes. Do more innocents die in the wars that are fought all in the name of whose side is right? Yes.

    That's what we've done for as long as we can date our history. War creates more war. No matter what the cause is.

    Tammy

  • tec
    tec

    Tammy sayeth:

    And yet--amazingly--the very people he hung around with and spoke to every day really had little clue what he was talking about!!

    This is an assumption on your part.

    I knew I should have elaborated and explained. They did not understand everything he spoke about at the time he spoke about it. Jesus spoke in parables, and he taught very differently than their teachers and pharisees. Sometimes he explained in private to his disciples later. Some things they remembered and understood after his death and resurrection.

    The point is, those who remained with him did gain understanding.

    Tammy

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog

    Terry

    When the Proetestant Reformation began Luther and his minions took a giant eraser to that heaven ordained number and trashed 7 books of Holy Writ
    !!

    The Jews never accepted the 7 Apocryphal books. The Jews believe that the Holy Spirit departed from Israel after the time of Malachi, about four centuries before Christ, while the books of the Apocrypha were writen about two centuries before Christ.

    Luther's bible was published September 1522.

    When was the Apocrypha canonized by Rome? See: C ouncil of Trent, 1545 to 1563.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit