Okay Bible Supporters: Support this One

by FreePeace 36 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  FreePeace

  Thanks all for your responses!

  anewperson:

  I appreciate your response and understand where you are coming from. There was a time when I agreed with you. But upon further analysis, the typical JW thinking is not accurate nor realistic.

  The women were not raped but preserved alive as females servants who might or might not be taken as wives later.

  Yes the virgins were preserved alive, but they were also no-doubt severely traumatized seeing their entire families murdered. Then they were made slaves to serve the very ones who murdered their families and friends. I seriously doubt (as a rule--keep reading) any woman who experiences this kind of horrendous inhumanity would be agreeable to marrying the one who murdered her family. But the Midianite girls had no choice. Therefore, it was rape.

  Many Midianite men and women were killed, just as also at Sodom and Gomorrah, but they can all be resurrected (Jn 3:16).

  Simply put, the end does not justify the means. This type of justifiable-homicide thinking is a common JW distortion, even perversion. Just because God can resurrect a person does not absolve Him of the moral reprehensibility of murder. After all, didn’t God give humans Freewill? How can God say he gave us Freewill, and then destroy (murder) us for exercising that Freewill?

  Is it justifiable for me as a father to abuse my son, even injure him physically for some mistake, because I know he will heal? Of course not!

  It is morally reprehensible for any sentient being to harm another sentient being except in self-defense, or to rob another’s right of Freewill. This includes God. After all, He set the standard by giving us Freewill. Since He gave us Freewill, we each have the right to live as we see fit without reprisal, so long as it does not harm another.

  You made a point to call God "evil" for taking their lives and now in fairness will you call God merciful for His plan to restore their lives? Answer this question please.

  This is very interesting point. Have you ever heard of “Stockholm Syndrome?” Basically it is the phenomenon that occurs to some people who have been taken hostage in which they fall in love (so to speak) with their captors. There is quite a bit of info on the web about it. There are 4 conditions necessary for Stockholm Syndrome to occur (taken from http://www.hugcares.org/ph/trauma/stockhol.htm ):

  1. Perceived threat to one's physical or psychological survival and the belief that the captor would carry out the threat.
  2. Perceived small kindness from the captor to the captive.
  (Note: letting the captive live is enough.)
  3. Isolation from perspectives other than those of the captor.
  4. Perceived inability to escape.

  Notice any similarities? By your comment, you are praising a supernatural murderer for showing “mercy” (a “perceived kindness”). Very interesting phenomenon, especially as it relates to cults and God. (Man, I feel an article comin’ on!).

  So to answer your question: No, I will not call God merciful for killing people and then resurrecting them. The end does not justify the means.

  The problem with religion and the Bible is that it blinds one to reality. We must think for ourselves, and not accept some explanation just because it is popular or because we grew up believing it.

  FreePeace
  "The World is my country, and to do good, my religion." --Thomas Paine
  TruthQuest: http://beam.to/truthquest
  Who Am I? -How to Reinvent Yourself After Leaving the WTS
• 

  FreePeace

  SaintSatan,

  I think it's a little premature to bank wholeheartedly in this so called plan. For all you know, all those killed there could already be in heaven, looking down w mild amusement at our silly little arguements. For if they are, god had nothing to do w it, as spirits of persons whose bodies die automatically go to heavenly realms. At least that is one way it can be looked at.

  Good answer!

  JohnJBB123,

  not every event in the Bible can be historically authenticated.

  Your point is well taken. I do not necessarily believe that many of the events in the Bible happened. I wrote the article because of the moral implications about the "loving God" concept. If the events in the Bible are true, then I certainly want no part of such an immoral god as Jehovah.

  funkyderek & puffsrule,

  I agree with your comments about faith. I'm sure some of the fundies have dealt with it before, but many people are lurking, and many of them are still undecided about which direction to go, that is, religious or otherwise. I just want to make sure both sides are addressed, and then they can make up their own mind.

  Tera, Double Eagle and Judith,

  I appreciate your comments. Thanks.

  FreePeace
  "The World is my country, and to do good, my religion." --Thomas Paine
  TruthQuest: http://beam.to/truthquest
  Who Am I? -How to Reinvent Yourself After Leaving the WTS
• 

  Unclepenn1

  >>Paine advocated Deism as a better alternative than the Bible. Deism teaches that there is one God, who created the universe, but does not intervene in man's affairs.

  Kind of like an absentee Father. What a nice God. Creates us and then doesnt care if there are children molested or innocent people slaughtered. Just has other things to do besides caring about right and wrong. Sounds like an ugly God to me.

  >>It also teaches that one be kind to their fellow human being, just as God has shown kindness and love to all creation.

  Showing love to them by abandoning them? People dying of disease and wasting away from starvation. Thanks God!

  Also, you keep using the term 'bible thumper'. What is that? Is it possible that you are slapping a label on people that believe in God and His Son Jesus Christ, and by applying this label it helps to ease your conscience since you are not living for God? I like to put forth logical and reasonable arguments, absent from petty name calling. I would think others willing to discuss things could do the same.

  Penn
• 

  FreePeace

  Hi UnclePenn,

  Not quite sure how to take your post.

  I'm sorry you don't like the term "Bible-thumpers" I used. You are right though, I shouldn't use it. I guess it comes from my deep passion and anger towards the Bible and religion, and all the wrongs that have been perpetrated in the name(s) thereof.

  My logical mind tells me that it is perfectly fine for a person to believe in the Bible and God if they choose, because they have the human right of freewill to do so. I certainly would not want to rob another person of their freewill.

  On the other hand, my rational side can't understand why so many people continue to believe in God and religion when there is no verifiable evidence to prove that God has helped the humans He allegedly created.

  I once believed in God and the Bible with all my heart. But after doing so much good, He was not there when I needed Him most. That only opened my eyes to reality.

  Thanks for your reply.

  FreePeace
  "The World is my country, and to do good, my religion." --Thomas Paine
  TruthQuest: http://beam.to/truthquest
  Who Am I? -How to Reinvent Yourself After Leaving the WTS
• 

  FreePeace

  UnclePenn,

  Actually in going back and re-reading my post, I did not use "Bible-Thumpers," I used "Bible-Thumping posts."

  But I started the use of the term (at least on this thread), so I take responsibility.

  FreePeace
  "The World is my country, and to do good, my religion." --Thomas Paine
  TruthQuest: http://beam.to/truthquest
  Who Am I? -How to Reinvent Yourself After Leaving the WTS
• 

  Budda Belly

  Come on UnclePenn....

  "Bible-Thumper" as a nickname should be
  an honor for you.

  I once was a "Bible Thumper"...

  Would you like me to read Psalms 83:18 just once
  more again?

  How many times do you quote and push
  John 3:16 as a must read for those you
  feel you must convert to Jesus?

  Thanks FreePeace for posting a great topic.

  BB
• 

  You Know

  Although I left the board a few days ago, for the reasons previously stated, I do reserve for myself the occasional response to the rare serious challenge. Myself, being one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, it’s hard to ignore these types of questions. While it hardly seems necessary to go into depth, a few basic reminders regarding Jehovah’s position, his purposes, as well as his judicial decisions may help to clarify matters.

  First, it is necessary to situate the Bible’s many recorded wars and skirmishes involving the Israelites within the context of the universal war that erupted in Eden between Jehovah’s family and those who would later come under satanic influence. From the human race’s very beginning then there has existed a continual state of warfare emanating from the spirit realm. At times that warfare manifests itself in actual physical warfare in the human sphere. In the days when God was using Israel, having entrusted them with his sacred pronouncements, as well as carrying the lineage prophesied to produce the Christ, the surrounding nations were always used by the Devil to harass and oppose God’s developing purpose.

  In the case of the Midianites cunningly using their own women as prostitutes, to lure the Hebrew men into a situation where Jehovah would himself punish the nation, Jehovah was fully within his right as sovereign to bring punishment upon Midian. In the Hebrew Law, if a person falsely accused another of a capital crime, or if anyone tried to seduce an Israelite into worshipping false gods, which was of course also a capital crime, and he was found out, then the punishment that would have been meted out to the falsely accused or the one misled was instead meted out to the accuser. So, in the case where the entire nation of Median participated in a plot to seduce the Israelites so as to bring upon them Jehovah’s curse, it is entirely in keeping with Jehovah’s perfect justice that the perpetrators also suffer the penalty prescribed under Jewish Law for intended murder. Because it was not merely an act of fornication in the heat of passion, but was really a conspiracy to knowingly commit genocide against the Jews. The reason the virgins were spared is that they obviously did not directly participate in the orgy, and by those women the race of the Midianites would not be entirely snuffed out.

  The thing to keep in mind too, is that those Cannanite nations that were annihilated, not that Median was considered part of Cannan, but the point is, that they did not necessarily come under Jehovah’s everlasting condemnation. True, as a race and people, they are all gone. But, as individuals, each one has the potential to come back during the resurrection of the dead. So, really, those ancient people have already paid their debt toward Jehovah God. Those who died at God’s command would have eventually died anyway. So from Jehovah’s standpoint it is not too terribly important whether someone lives a few ticks more or less. Solomon once said there is a time for war and a time for peace, a time to kill and a time to heal. So, those were periods that were times for war and killing. Eventually will come Jehovah’s time to effect a healing and peace.

  What is noteworthy though, especially in this forum, is that at 2nd Peter the 2nd chapter, as well as in Jude, apostates are said to have “rushed into the course of Balaam.” That’s because apostates have some knowledge of the truth, just as Balaam knew something about Jehovah. So it is interesting that the Christian Bible writers make that connection with Balaam, as it is evident that apostates are intent on using their knowledge, albeit limited, in order to cunningly set stumbling blocks before others. In the case of Balaam-like apostate Christians, though, Jehovah’s judgments are that such predators suffer an everlasting destruction. That’s because those who fall victim to the apostate’s machinations are also in line for everlasting destruction. So, again, the punishment fits the crime.

  In the end, Jehovah will once again command his servants to annihilate the Devil’s entire brood, including the Big D himself. Of course, by then, all Israel will be in the spirit realm where the demons reside, so there can take place the ass whoop’n of all time.

  As for the poster who objected to Jehovah putting Bathsheba’s child to death. The reason that was so was because the child was an heir to the throne and a potential progenitor of the Messiah. Jehovah, even though he mercifully spared David from death, was not bound by David’s sin to allow an illegitimate son to sit upon His throne.

  / You Know
• 

  SixofNine

  You Know, you are stupid man with low reading comprehension and a penchant for making shit up in order to make your idiotic beliefs have a semblance of logic.

  The above would not be so horrible, except for the fact that you are meanspirited to boot.

  In a word- scum.
• 

  You Know

  Typically, the apostate can only lash out in some personal attack. Let's face it Bozo, when it comes to the Scriptures, you are in way over your head! LOL / You Know
• 

  SexyTeen

  You Know: I was under the impression that the first child of David and Bathsheba was not put to death directly by the hand of Jehovah. The child was born sick and died of natural causes, maybe because of the effects that the emotions of Bathsheba had on the womb. But I don't know if I read that in any publications or if I heard it somewhere else.