scriptual proof?

by A Paduan 6 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  A Paduan

  Is there such a thing in the sense that it is spoken of? I was thinking of a certain debate I've entered into, scriptual one, and realised that no matter what might be said, hearers of scripture are plainly given to hear it as they will - however it is that I may hear a teaching, another may well not - and it's intended to be that way.

  Free will is just that. On the other hand, "proof" is for making a deal, to buy and sell, seek for a sign etc. "Who has the true religion, do they have proof?" Biblical debate ends up boiling down to opinion. Free will allows us to carry out and live our intention - it's not just cases of 'inadequate historical resources' - we are provided with free will.

  "Take heed then how you hear; for to him who has will more be given"

  ..Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, "Why do you think evil in your hearts?"

  paduan

  Edited by - a paduan on 22 August 2002 10:21:46
• 

  BluesBrother

  I am afraid that you are largely right, Paduan, much as many of us would love to get the final answer to so many things

  When a Bible translater comes across a verse where more than one meaning may be taken from a text that is without punctuation, a trinitarian will translate it to support the trinity because in his mind that is obviously the way it was meant to be

  The non trinity scholar will translate differently, being equally convinced that the context makes the meaning obvious .

  Where does that leave us plebs?
• 

  Satanus

  The bible doesn't prove much. The situation of hundreds of religions based on it, including judaism and islam, demonstrates that fact. The bible is like a deck of cards. All a bible scholar needs to do is pull the right cards (stack the deck?). I think dubs stack their deck quite well.

  SS
• 

  Valis

  I think its all rather simple actually. Sure you have free will and can do whatever you want until the predestined Armageddon event gets here...where you will either live or die, which by the way, Jehovah already knows one way or another. So you have a couple options. Prove Jehovah's point that people can be good little dubbies and live on a paradise earth, or prove his other one that he knew you were going to be naughty all your life and you get what you deserved, and was bound to happen anyway.

  Sincerely,

  District Overbeer of the "gonna be naughty even in the afterlife" class
• 

  A Paduan

  Further to the discussion , I put forward that to desire the type of "proof" that the literal absolutists may seek (and deliver), is an avoidance of and aversion to 'fearing God'. i.e. The hope being that, the condition of being scared of Him is alleviated by "nailing Him down" before "lifting Him up" - via such "proofs".

  This being rather different from the "incredible lightness of being" fear experienced while actively fearing Him - entering the awe of Him. eg. Indiana Jones and his step of faith in Last Crusade.

  This 'fear' is often felt by those "selling all they have" etc., and love interceeds to remove even this fear - and so, on to 'fear Him' again. This explains to me how someone can be daringly nasty, but yet still a coward.

  I hope I have exercised my free will in this hearing.

  paduan

  "Take heed then how you hear; for to him who has will more be given"

  Edited by - a paduan on 23 August 2002 6:32:6
• 

  jgnat

  Nailing Jehovah down. I think you are on to something, Paduan. The debates here on the nature of God and Heaven and afterlife and Future Events have a flavour of futility. Like listening to a Hollywood astrologer or a political pundit. How do we really gage the accuracy until it really happens? I have always meant to clip out some of that drivel and pull it out a year later. Of course, I havent gotten around to doing that yet. Which might explain how Hollywood astrologers and political pundits manage to keep their jobs year after year.

  Debater A proves the nature of God to be such-and-such. Debater B proves Debater B a liar. God in heaven is laughing. Scholars wanted to nail Jesus down, as well. He certainly did not act like a Warrior Messiah King come to Rescue the Jews from the Evil Roman Oppressors. He was pestered with questions on who he was his entire ministry. Jesus responded by describing his actions.

  The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good tidings preached to them. Matthew 11:5 (ASV)

  The salvation Jesus offered was so much less and so much more than what was expected at the time. The unknown future will most likely have that same quality. I fully expect to see a future I did not expect. It seems to me, if I am to model my life after Christ, my mark as a Christian will have a lot more to do with my acts of kindness than my declaration of belief.
• 

  FrankRaven

  Paduan.....good point.But then again religion has no substance when it comes to one's salvation.If we all have to have a religion to have salvation,we all be damned.But Christ told us to follow Him not a Watchtower.

  As for one's opinion..you might have missed it all.Example is Luke 24:39.Christ was resurrected in human form as He died it.Christ said Himself to touch Him and handle Him.For He has flesh and bones for a spirit does not have these things."It's not opinion,it's facts then we see.The Watchtower wants one to believe that Christ came back as a spirit.So if Christ came back as a spirit,He would be reincarnated not resurrected.

  It's not an opinion...The Bible says it,I've read it,therefore I believe it...and it's fact.Not an opinion.Besides.......Since Luke wrote it,as he saw it....he wants us to believe it in faith.....and faith is the substence yet unseen.

  Now I can believe when someone tells me that they have faith.Why not?It's really no arguement there.But if someone tells me that Christ is a spirit,because they read Luke 24:39.So I re-read Luke 24:39.It says that Christ was not a spirit.I read it....it does not say that Christ is a spirit..so I tell them they are in error,because nowhere does it say in Luke 24:39 that Christ is a spirit.So they begin to argue with me...I put up my hand to silent him..then I open to Luke 24:39 and hand him my bible and tell him,"Show me where it says that Jesus is a spirit in Luke 24:39."He can't.End of discussion.

  The truth is this,either the bible is the Final Authority of the Word of God or it's just another romantic fictional book.The difference is faith.