Timeless Truths in the Bible

by JosephAlward 39 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  JosephAlward

  Faithful, you didn't address my main point. I'll repeat it below:

  If you want to claim that the Solomon who wrote Ecclesiastes, and who apparently didn’t accept the notion of an afterlife, had already lost his God-given wisdom and understanding, and was the Solomon who had turned toward Ashtoreth and Molech, you’ll have to explain why there is not a single reference to any god besides the god of Genesis creation, “elohiym,” anywhere in Ecclesiastes. There are forty references to “elohiym,” and not one to false gods.

  The absence in Ecclesiastes of any hint that Solomon had turned toward Ashtoreth and Molech, and the repeated reference to only the “true” god of creation, elohiym, is consistent with Solomon still having the near infinite-wisdom and understanding God--according to the 1 Kings 4:29-30 author--had given him.

  Faithful, why do you persist in believing that the Solomon who had written Ecclesiastes was the same Solomon who had turned to other gods, even though there's zero reference to such gods in his writings, while forty times he refers to the god of Genesis creation, elohiym, the same god which gave him wisdom and understanding that was measureless?

  How do you explain the utter lack of reference to the gods he turned to in later life, and his exclusive reference only to elohiym, if it's true as you claim that Solomon had already begun to follow Astoreth and Molech when he was writing Ecclesiastes?

  Joseph F. Alward
  "Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

  http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
• 

  Faithful2Jah

  Because, Joe, Solomon had not turned to those gods to serve them. He still served the God of Israel. He had, however, become influenced by his wives' false religious beliefs. The Saducees of Jesus' day believed as Solomon had begun to believe in his later years. Even though they worshipped only the God of Israel, they rejected the idea of an afterlife. That is why they were sad, you see?
• 

  JosephAlward

  Faithful,

  You are avoiding the central question. If it's true that Solomon had already--as you claim--turned to false gods when he was writing Ecclesiastes, how is it possible he never mentioned them once? It's not as if he didn't mention gods at all, is it? He mentioned the god of creation--elohiym--forty times.

  Joseph F. Alward
  "Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

  http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
• 

  Faithful2Jah

  Joseph: Why I or anyone else ever wastes their time with you I don't know. You have a heart like a stone and a head like a brick.

  I just said, "Solomon had not turned to those gods ... He still served the God of Israel. He had, however, become influenced by his wives' false religious beliefs."

  Like the Saducees, he had become somewhat spiritually confused. But he still worshipped the God of Israel. So of course he would not be speaking of other gods.
• 

  JT

  Joe asked what is your favorite bible text

  there is no doubt in my mind that this is my favorite:

  ########################################
  *** Rbi8 Numbers 5:19-28 ***
  19 “‘And the priest must make her swear, and he must say to the woman: “If no man has lain down with you and if while under your husband you have not turned aside in any uncleanness, be free of the effect of this bitter water that brings a curse. 20 But you, in case you have turned aside while under your husband and in case you have defiled yourself and some man has put in you his seminal emission, besides your husband,—” 21 The priest must now make the woman swear with an oath involving cursing, and the priest must say to the woman: “May Jehovah set you for a cursing and an oath in the midst of your people by Jehovah’s letting your thigh fall away, and your belly swell. 22 And this water that brings a curse must enter into your intestines to cause your belly to swell and the thigh to fall away.” To this the woman must say: “Amen! Amen!”
  23 “‘And the priest must write these cursings in the book and must wipe them out into the bitter water. 24 And he must make the woman drink the bitter water that brings a curse, and the water that brings a curse must enter into her as something bitter. 25 And the priest must take the grain offering of jealousy from the woman’s hand and wave the grain offering to and fro before Jehovah, and he must bring it near the altar. 26 And the priest must grasp some of the grain offering as a remembrancer of it and must make it smoke upon the altar, and afterward he will make the woman drink the water. 27 When he has made her drink the water, it must also occur that if she has defiled herself in that she committed an act of unfaithfulness toward her husband, the water that brings a curse must then enter into her as something bitter, and her belly must swell, and her thigh must fall away, and the woman must become a cursing in among her people. 28 However, if the woman has not defiled herself but she is clean, she must then be free from such punishment; and she must be made pregnant with semen.

  #################

  now this has got to be the best text in the bible

  think about it------- men have for the longest time needed a way to test and find out if the wife has been giving away the "Coochie"

  we all know that you can't trust a woman, they are just prone to be out giving up the "Kitty Cat" the just GOTTA HAVE IT

  and for that reason the "Lord" in all his wisdom saw the need to Inspire and have recorded for all time in his HOLY BOOK the only known test for seeing if the wife has let someone have a "Push in the Whiskers" as Danny Devito would say

  on THE OTHER HAND------- god knew that men could be trusted, that they would NEVER GIVE AWAY THE "Charlie Horse"--that men are loyal to their vows, faithful to thier wives and kids, rarely if ever STEP OUT ON THIER WIVES and for that reason he saw no needed to waste Holy Spirit inspiring some bible writer to record in test for the man who was unfaithful SINCE IT RARELY IF EVER HAPPENED.

  #########

  When you stop and ask yourself, WHO THRUOUT history has gotten more outside of marriage the man or woman-

  it is almost a joke when you read of such a test that is only ONE SIDED
• 

  JosephAlward

  Faithful2Jah writes,

  Solomon had not turned to those gods ... He still served the God of Israel. He had, however, become influenced by his wives' false religious beliefs.

  Where do you get support for your statement, above, that “Solomon had not turned to those gods”? What do you think the verse below says?

  As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods (1 Kings 11:4-6)

  On the matter of why Solomon, in all of his writings, never explained to his readers that he had rejected afterlife because he had partly turned away from the God of Israel and adopted some of the teachings of the gods Astoreth and Molech, Faithful offered this explanation (emphasis added):

  Like the Saducees, he had become somewhat spiritually confused. But he still worshipped the God of Israel. So of course he would not be speaking of other gods.

  What logic leads you to conclude that Solomon “of course... would not be speaking of other gods”? Do you perhaps believe that Solomon would not want anyone to know that he worshiped other gods, or that their influence on him was not relevant, or pivotal? Or, he didn’t want to show disrespect for the god you claim he still worshiped?
  
  Those reasons seem silly, if that’s what you had in mind, for Solomon had already waved a large red flag in the faces of all readers for all time when he made it perfectly clear that he had rejected a central teaching of the God of Israel, namely, that there was an afterlife. Thus, Solomon was partly rejecting the God of Israel by rejecting some of the Word of God; this is quite a slap in the face of the God of Israel, so why would he be shy about explaining to his readers why he had rejected this extremely important teaching?

  Why, after rejecting God’s teaching about afterlife in a very high-profile manner, would Solomon not bother to explain to his readers in his writings that the gods Astoreth and Molech, through his wife, had led him to this belief, if that is in fact what had already happened to him at that point? These gods had an immense influence on his attitude about life and afterlife, so if he had held these attitudes at the time of his writing, he would have let the reader know about those gods, about this pivotal event in his life, and how they played such an important role in his life, wouldn’t he? Of course he would.

  Why would he not mention this, at least once, if that actually had happened already at the time of his writings? Saying, “Of course, he would never do such a thing,” is just silly, Faithful. It takes more than just hopeful, all-believing faith to make an argument, Faithful; you need to use objectivity and a certain measure of logic to explain why he would “of course” never do such a thing.

  Joseph F. Alward
  "Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

  http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
• 

  Faithful2Jah

  Joe wrote>>>>>> Where do you get support for your statement, above, that “Solomon had not turned to those gods”? What do you think the verse below says?

  "As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not FULLY devoted to the Lord his God."

  This obviously means that Solomon remained a worshipper of the God of Israel, but not FULLY. Do you know what the words "not fully" mean Joe? No I didn't think so. I'm again done talking to you. Every time I do I am amazed at your inability to understand the English language.
• 

  JosephAlward

  Faithful2Jah writes,

  Solomon had not turned to those gods ... He still served the God of Israel. He had, however, become influenced by his wives' false religious beliefs.

  Where do you get support for your statement, above, that “Solomon had not turned to those gods”? What do you think the verse below says?

  As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods (1 Kings 11:4-6)

  Faithful responds:

  This obviously means that Solomon remained a worshipper of the God of Israel, but not FULLY. Do you know what the words "not fully" mean Joe? No I didn't think so. I'm again done talking to you. Every time I do I am amazed at your inability to understand the English language.

  If you're done talking to me, it's not because I can't understand English, and everyone on this board knows it. You made a mistatement, and I questioned you about it, and you respond in anger, and pretend that my question was about Solomon being "fully" a worshiper of God.

  You said that "Solomon had not turned to those gods," but you know that that is exactly what 1 Kings 11:4-6 said had happened:

  "As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods

  Just admit you were wrong, and move on, Faithful, and then you can be done talking to me.

  Joseph F. Alward
  "Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

  http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html
• 

  peacefulpete

  I think Joseph was originally pointing out that in the Bible are sage passages worthy of contemplation.Intelligent men and women of all ages can assist us in understanding the world if we ponder their conclusions,right or manifestly wrong.This in no way infers belief in hocus pocus that flies in the face of reason.

  There is no archaelogical evidence of a unite kingdom of Isreal.There is no record of a hero King David or Solomon in any extra Bibical sources.In fact all paleontological evidence(which has greatly increased in recent decades)reveals a loose confederation of seminomadic tribes at best.There is no evidence of a powerful Capital at Jerusalem until many years later than the supposed time of Solomon.The Solomon story with his superhuman wisdom and gold covered temple etc. mirror other Mesopotamian King legends.The only reason to believe that Solomon ever existed is found in the hearts of believers. The Jewish priests of the 5th,6th,7th cent. B.C. were avid compilers of proverbs and truisms,only a very small fraction of which eventually became incorporated into what we now call the "wisdom books" of the Bible.The proverbs were chosen because in their opinion they reflected timeless truths.And that is after all what this thread was about.
• 

  RWC

  Joseph,

  Your interpretation of Ecclesiates that the writer is telling us there is no afterlife is incorrect.You need to read the last verse: 12:14- For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.

  This judgment is in the afterlife. Soloman is telling us in Ecclesiates to enjoy your lot in life because God gave you that life as a gift. However, life can be hard and if you try to find worth in wordly things you will be disappointed.

  Also, there is evidence that David was a real person. On a a stone tablet of one of the people he defeated ( I can't recall the nation, but have a reference for it), He is mentioned as defeating their army. He is named and he is described as the King of Isreal.