Response to RWC's Atheist Questions

by Liberty 38 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Liberty

  Hi RWC,

  I'm sure you're a very nice person and I don't want to get into an argument but rather a civil debate. I just wanted to point out that as ex-JWs many of us are a little obsessed with truth (not to be confused with "The Truth" tm) and that after being burned by the Watchtower Society and hating ourselves for being so stupid to have fallen for its BS we have now become highly skeptical of the Bible as well. In my own search for truth, though I am but a poor ameteur researcher, I discovered that science and history can quickly destroy the apologetics of literalist Bible supporters.

  You ask Atheists where we get our morals but did you ever seriously research where your Bible got its rituals, beliefs, and laws. Even a shallow study of history will show very quickly that the Hebrews were predated by many Middle Eastern cultures. These older cultures provided the Hebrews (who eventually became the Isrealites) with all of their morals, laws, and beliefs long before any of your Bible was written. The Bible is a relatively young book and logic tells us that new books usually borrow their ideas from older books and not the other way around.

  History also shows that the Hebrews were a very minor force in the region and that many superior cultures conquered and dominated them leading to influence flowing from master to slave and not the other way around. The Egyptians contributed the removal of the foreskin, dietary taboos, monotheism, and other major philosophical influences to the Hebrew culture long before there was a Bible. Other superior cultures then continued to influence the development of the Hebrews as they each conquered and ruled the region in turn. The truth is that your moral code came from so called pagan cultures and not God.

  Don't believe me. I challenge you to research it for yourself. Are you a lover of real truth? All you have to lose are your prejudices and preconcieved notions. Why not risk seeing reality? You are a Christian only due to the accident of your birth culture. Transend this limitation and look for objective reality beyond your cultural prejudices. If your original beliefs are really true you will find them in your search. Are you afraid of what you might find if you look to hard? A friendly challenge because I want you to free yourself.
• 

  peacefulpete

  A refreshing break from the axegrinders. former P.O. missionary, Bethelite.Is the contention that JWs are unique in their confusion?Bibical literalism is in it's death throes.Our educated age is no longer content with the traditional interpretation of history. Modern scholarship has revealed the ancient "pagan" sources of the Jewish mythologies. Did you know that nearly every Jewish tale has a parallel in more ancient religious legends? Even the names of the characters and locations are often unchanged.Science has proven evolution on every level to all but the most "faithful". But these facts had been recognised for decades by people willing to do the research. Of course the earlier work was easier to ignore or discredit because of it's unpopularity. All of us on this site were guilty of this. With this insight ,how can we best help the world ? Argueing over interpretation of scripture? Publishing the personal wrongs we're exposed to? The WT authors are as much victims as its readers.They are confused and so do as anyone confused does, keep repeating the comforting "facts" that have been unquestioned by believers for generations. " Better times are coming ,your suffering is not unnoticed,be faithful,be busy,be loving,be ready."
  Most would agree that these statements are innoccuous. I see the developments as positive. More yet is needed of course.But a wholesale abandonment of the doctrine of divine intervention would right now unquestionably result in devastation in the lives of many.Some truly cannot conceive a purposeful life without God. This is not the exclusive fault of any religion, but the result of millenia of cultural and perhaps biological evolution. Perhaps it is best that this change be gradual. Many have not heard of alternatives to theistic religion. The efforts of compassionate humanists have been up till now inadaquate. If we could only redirect the zeal of former JWs to the field of human rights and volunteerism! Give support to humanist organizations who are now trying to impress on the world that being human is reason enough to care.

  Books suggested:
  canaanite myth and hebrew epic,frank moore cross

  the mythic past,thomas l thompson
  the treasures of darkness:a history of mesopotamian religion,thornkild jacobsen

  (soon to be released)the secret origins of the bible ,tim callahan

  who wrote the gospels?,randel helms

  how we believe:the search for god in an age of reason,michael shermer

  *A preface to morals,walter lippmann

  living without religion,paul kurtz

  Some authors are more sucessful than others at suppressing the emotional element to the topic.Recognise that even a fool can be right sometimes.
• 

  RWC

  Liberty,

  I accept your post in the spirit in which it was sent. I have heard alot of these arguments in the past and am always happy to do research on them. The more research I do, the more convinced I am of my faith. I did quite a bit of soul searching in my life and will continue to do so. For the record, I have never been a JW and do not believe they are Christian. I can understand the questioning that so many here have done once they leave that faith and the hurt that generally follows from being rejected by their family for doing so. I get the impression that that hurt leads some to forgo all religion and God in general which I beleive is an understandable but regretable reaction.

  So to answer your challenge. I would be happy to research your arguments some more and I will engage in the civil debate. It will be fun and enlightening.

  God Bless
• 

  artful

  Peacefulpete.

  You have presented some very interesting info here. You comment that 'being human is reason enough to care' is very true!

  I am interested in reading the reference material for two of your comments. Could you please indicate in which of the books you mentioned the following info can be found:

  1. 'Did you know that nearly every Jewish tale has a parallel in more ancient religious legends? Even the names of the characters and locations are often unchanged.'
  2. 'Science has proven evolution on every level to all but the most "faithful".'

  Cheers
  Artful

  "Beliefs Burden. Ideas Inspire".
• 

  SixofNine

  But a wholesale abandonment of the doctrine of divine intervention would right now unquestionably result in devastation in the lives of many.Some truly cannot conceive a purposeful life without God.

  And about those of us who seem to do fine with that abandonment of doctrine? We're ok because we are such incredibly advance humans?
• 

  Liberty

  Good to hear from you RWC,

  I am curious about the extent to which you believe in the literalness of the Bible. Do you think the Noah story is true, for example? Do you accept creation through evolution or a more literalist view? My computer is at work so I can't always get back to my postings but will try to preserve a dialogue if possible.

  If you have evidence that doesn't just circle back to belief in the Bible I am very interested. I have found nothing from the objective extra-biblical evidence which supports a belief in a literal Bible history. I don't mean stuff like the accurate locations of towns described in the Bible but big stuff like the Flood which the sciences I am familiar with dispute. Thanks for your response. I am intersted in knowing why you believe in what you believe. What supplimental-beyond-the-Bible evidence do you use to support your beliefs.
• 

  Carmel

  Liberty,

  I enjoyed your post both for its content and for its tone. I would caution, however, in your follow up you fall into the trap of those that argue evolution vs. creationism of implying that Evolution is in an explanation of the origin of life. Natural Selection as adumbrated by Darwin did not address the ultimate origin of life, only how new species evolved from previous gene pools. Creationists often out of ignorance fail to understand the fundamental distinction.

  Thanks

  carmel
• 

  RWC

  Liberty,

  As for my beliefs, I do believe that God created the universe and all that is in it. I do not know if he did it in seven twenty four hour days or if as the Bible says in his position a "day" may be thousands of years. The theory of evolution does support the idea that some species have evolved over the years, but as has been pointed out here, it cannot and doesn't attempt to explain the origin of life.

  As for extrabiblical sources, these exist which cooberate the Biblical history. I will give you some of these in a later post.

  I do not know if Noah was a world wide flood in the sense that the entire world was covered. A reading of the Bible even if taken literally doesn't require that view. Without knowing the extent of the world's population or where they lived at the time of the flood we really don't know how big the flood needed to be to accomplish the purpose as set out in the Bible.

  I will add specific sites in a later post when I have more time.

  God Bless
• 

  rem

  [qoute]Without knowing the extent of the world's population or where they lived at the time of the flood we really don't know how big the flood needed to be to accomplish the purpose as set out in the Bible.Actually we do know this, at least the areas of the earth that humans lived during the supposed time of the flood. Actually, practiacally the entire earth was populated by 13,000 years ago, South America being one of the last areas of human population. Other areas of the earth were populated by humans (and I'm not talking about Neanderthals or other species - I'm talking about modern Homo sapiens) much, much earlier. Humans have been spread around the earth for some time - much longer than the Genesis account of Adam and Eve or the Tower of Babel would have you believe.

  A really good, scholarly book about this is Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond. It's a facinating book (a Pulitzer Prize winner) and I recommend it wholeheartedly.

  rem

  "We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking." - Mark Twain[/quote]
• 

  aChristian

  RWC,

  Rem is right. Paleontologists, anthropologists and archaeologists all assure us that mankind has widely populated our earth for far longer than anyone can possibly stretch the Bible's dating for Noah's flood.

  For instance, anthropologists date the first settlement of the Americas by modern men to 15,000 B.P. (Before the Present) and their first settlements in Australia to 35,000 B.P. A simple reading of the Bible's own internal chronological historical records, anchored to a 587 BCE date for Jerusalem's destruction by Babylon, produces a date of about 2350 BCE for Noah's flood.

  In an attempt to explain how Noah's flood may not have covered the whole earth, but still destroyed all human life on it, outside of the ark, some Christians have suggested that there may be "gaps" in the post flood genealogies recorded in Genesis chapter 11, and, if there are, they say this would allow us to date the flood much earlier than 4,350 years ago. However, though this explanation may appear to solve the scientific conflicts I have here referred to, it creates other ones which are just as difficult to explain for advocates of an anthropologically universal flood which they supposedly only drowned the land of Noah many thousands of years before the Bible itself seems to clearly indicate Noah's flood occurred.

  What scientific problems am I referring to? These. The same scientists who tell us modern man has widely populated the earth for at least several tens of thousands of years also tell us that the things people living at the time of Noah (and their distant ancestors!) were involved in, according to the Bible, did not take place anywhere on earth prior to 10,000 years ago. These things include raising crops, herding animals, forging tools of copper and iron and building cities. (Read Genesis, beginning with chapter 4.)

  So, anyone who says that Noah's flood could have destroyed all human life on earth except Noah and his family, at any time in mankind's history, and also maintains that the Bible's historical accounts contained in Genesis chapter 4 and afterwards are accurate, finds himself in a major clear conflict with the findings of modern science. I think that when such a thing happens, any honest Christian will be compelled to consider the possibility that his interpretation of the Genesis account of Noah's flood is in error.

  It seems to me that the only reasonable position for a Christian to take on this issue is to understand that the flood of Noah's day, whenever it occurred, was neither geographically nor anthropologically universal.