Is the baby being thrown out with the bath water?

by Chap 40 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Abaddon

  Chap, your arguments contain so many assumptions and are made at quite a shallow level, without that much in the way of knowledge outside of the Christian tradition. For example, you ask;

  Can you name another person who claimed to be God, the creator of the universe?

  Loads of people have Chap. If you don't know this you need to start studying seriously, as if your argument is that, "well, no one else said they were god therefore I'll listen to what it says Jesus says", that argument is in itself false.
• 

  ashitaka

  God always comes fown to personal belief. My wife believes in God, and that's enough for her. She doesn't need fact. For her, her beliefs are facts that there is a God.

  If you don't know this you need to start studying seriously, as if your argument is that, "well, no one else said they were god therefore I'll listen to what it says Jesus says", that argument is in itself false.

  Right. Can you say "Egypt"? Just because Jesus claimed to worship his father, the 'only true God', doesn't make it so.

  Back to the Invisible Pink Unicorn argument:

  I could profess to believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn, and does this make it reality because I believe it? Shouldn't this be based on at least some fact, as well as faith?

  ash
• 

  Chap

  ashitaka: Have you read my posts; especially my last one? If we compare Jesus to the Egyptian Pharoahs, besides all the miracles and the changed lives Jesus has as a legacy, there is one glaring distinction. The bodies of some of the Pharoahs have been found and they are still dead. Where is the body of Jesus?

  Abaddon: I probably could have phrased the question better as I was responding to funkyderek's question. The people I was referring to are the likes of Buhda, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, Jim Jones, etc. Yeah there are lots of people who claim to be God and usually, they end up in psychiatric wards unless they are in power. (Saddam Hussein, for instance?)
• 

  DJ

  Welcome Chap! I think that we will get along. In Christ, dj
• 

  funkyderek

  Yeah there are lots of people who claim to be God and usually, they end up in psychiatric wards unless they are in power

  Or they end up being executed as blasphemers, and myths and legends grow around them until eventually lots of people believe they were god. and use their own belief as a bizarre sort of circular proof that they are right.
• 

  Abaddon

  DJ:

  Welcome Chap! I think that we will get along. In Christ, dj

  DJ, if you are serious it must be wonderful to find some else who has low standards of proof and an inability to realise they are being presuppositionalists! Sorry to be a little mean, but have you read Chaps 'arguement', or thought about how what he says is amazingly illustrative as to his level of knowledge. Look at his reply to me pointing out loads of people had claimed to be god;

  Abaddon: I probably could have phrased the question better as I was responding to funkyderek's question. The people I was referring to are the likes of Buhda, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, Jim Jones, etc. Yeah there are lots of people who claim to be God and usually, they end up in psychiatric wards unless they are in power. (Saddam Hussein, for instance?)

  Buhdda never claimed to be a god. Muhammad never claimed to be a god. Joseph Smith never claimed to be a god but said that all (white males) could become one. Chap doesn't know what he is talking about.

  On the basis of his logic, and the lack of either psychiatric wards or 'care in the community', maybe Jesus was executed because, even if he had a nice line in "Chicken Soup for the Soul", people thought he was a nut for claiming to be the son of god (although he was probably really pissed that people didn't understand it was a metaphor, especially after the bit with the nails).

  Basically, step one, which Chap consistantly fails to do, is prove the inspiration of the Bible.

  I present to you as a proof that the Bible is not divinely inspired the humble bristlecone pine. These prove not only that there wasn't a flood, but that some trees were standing before the world existed, at least from a Young Earth Creation perspective. If Genesis is not inspired there is no way I think you can show me how to tell the bits that are inspired (if there are any) and the bits that are not inspired, other than OPINION. In which case, I have mine, you have yours, and I seek nor allow any claim of moral superiority on your part or mine based on something as neabulous as 'opinion'.

  The only way you can get out of that proof is by;

  • Showing that dendrochronology when applied to bristlecone pines is unreliable (you can try, but I don't think you can). In this event I have more proofs. Museums of them.
  • Telling me that the appearance of age was put there by god (which is an arguement even most creationists dismiss as silly, as it requires people to believe in a very peculiar sense of humour on the part of the Creator).

  If you do believe in the 'appearance of age', you are a presuppositionalist, i.e., you believe the Bible is true because you believe the Bible is true, not because of any proof, and if you are a presuppositionalist, there's no point in talking to you as you have selected a philosophy of dust that you are welcome to but that I have no truck with (other than vaugely annoyed exasperation).

  Obviously these things pertain to Chap to, so he should (doesn't have to but he has no arguement to me otherwise) first address the proof of Biblical inspiration before he posits things like "Is the baby being thrown out with the bath water?". It's like saying "Are you guys just clinging onto a bunch of unprovable fairy tales as you are too educationally or intellectually compromised to rigourously re-examine the beliefs you have from the ground up without any pre-exisitng assumptions?" to you; utter rubbish unless I can prove it.
• 

  DJ

  Abbaddon,

  Don't get yourself upset. I never said that I agree with everything that Chap posted. I merely welcomed him as a brother. I don't believe in lock step conformity, therefore I do not have to agree with him about all things. He seems to grasp the basics and I welcomed that. As for the quote about.....Joseph Smith, etc. I think he would have done better to put David Koresh types but I don't see it as a point of contention. Take care dj
• 

  Valis

  Hey most of you people who don't believe the bible have a problem with your will.

  What is the problem with our will?

  Its not that you can't believe its that you won't believe.

  Won't believe in fairy tales if that's what you mean.

  Before you downtalk something why not check the evidence. Pick up a bible and read

  Spent way too much of my life doing that!

  Sincerely,

  Districtb Overbeer
• 

  Chap

  Let me clear something up.

  I think the original question was something to the effect of "why out of all the demigods and miracle workers did I pick Jesus Christ to be the truth?"

  My answer was to ask the question, "who else claimed to be God, the creator of all things?"

  Abaddon: I probably could have phrased the question better as I was responding to funkyderek's question. The people I was referring to are the likes of Buhda, Mohammad, Joseph Smith, Jim Jones, etc. Yeah there are lots of people who claim to be God and usually, they end up in psychiatric wards unless they are in power. (Saddam Hussein, for instance?)

  The reason why I named the above people is because I knew they did not claim to be God but some had a huge following. I'm not sure if David Koresh said he was God or not and I couldn't think of his name when I wrote the above statement. The second sentence was of a different thought.

  Or they end up being executed as blasphemers, and myths and legends grow around them until eventually lots of people believe they were god. and use their own belief as a bizarre sort of circular proof that they are right.

  funkyderek: The ruling Jewish authorities didn't bother to judge Jesus by the Mosaic Law because they loved their positions and didn't care if Jesus was their Messiah. By their interpretation of scripture, the Messiah was supposed to overcome the Roman government so Israel would rule. Pilate wanted to set Jesus free but succumbed to mob rule. By putting Jesus to death, the following prophesy was fulfilled. Isaiah was written before Christ as the dead sea scroll finding proves.

  Isaiah 52:13-53:12
  Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. [14] As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: [15] So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.
  [53:1] Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? [2] For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. [3] He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
  [4] Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. [5] But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. [6] All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. [7] He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. [8] He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. [9] And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
  [10] Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. [11] He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. [12] Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

  Christianity is based on the fact that Jesus rose from the dead. All the Pharisees or the Romans had to do was produce the body and Christianity would have been stopped in its tracks.
• 

  pseudoxristos

  Chap,
  

  Christianity is based on the fact that Jesus rose from the dead. All the Pharisees or the Romans had to do was produce the body and Christianity would have been stopped in its tracks.

  This statement is ridiculous.

  By the time that the Christian movement became large enough for the Pharisees or Romans to notice, the body was long gone. Most of the writings were not produce until late in the first century at best. They were more likely produced early second century. They weren't accepted as canonical until the fourth century.

  There is no way that the Pharisees or Romans would even care about an incoherent group of Jews with a few strange ideas.

  The NT is presented as fact concerning Jesus and the Christian faith. These facts are meant to convince its readers that Jesus is the Christ and that the Christian faith is the only true religion. When skeptics start pointing out problems with these so-called facts, those who still want to believe will switch modes from reliance on facts to reliance on faith.

  It seems pointless to continue the discussion. You're going to believe what you want.

  pseudo