by Fisherman 57 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Fisherman:
It takes a half million papers and philosophical appeals to christian thinkers to try to prove an argument?
No. There are half a million (and likely more) papers that demonstrate that 'Bible chronology' is wrong, but it isn't necessary to consider all of them. But cofty aptly demonstrated that there is a preponderance of evidence against your position.
The by-bull has been proven to be a forgery.
Like the book of Daniel.
And, of course know to have 2 variants on subjects.
Fisherman:
Obliviously cofty doesn’t have to believe JC or the Bible but in order to debunk the belief of those that do, you need to prove that humans existed before when Bible chronology says so and that has not been done. So the belief stands.
Fallacy: shifting the burden of proof. Also a false dichotomy.
"Fallacy: shifting the burden of proof"
You're the one making the ridiculous claim that Adam and Eve were real people, Jesus was descended from them and humans are only 6000 years old. The burden of proof is on you to provide evidence to show it's true, not the other way around.
Indeed. Even if it could not be demonstrated that scientific dating methods are reliable, or if it could be demonstrated that scientific dating methods are not reliable, neither would constitute evidence that ‘Bible chronology’ is correct.
" you need to prove that humans existed before when Bible chronology says so and that has not been done."
The degree of ignorance needed to make that statement is STAGERING !
Since Jesus validated the creation of Adam and Eve as historical people and JC’s own lineage is traced all the way back to Adam, Bible chronology is certified as true and there must be something wrong with scientific dating.
I taught Christian theology for 10 years after I got my education upon leaving the Watchtower. That is the stupidest thing I ever heard.
While many Jews do indeed teach (and believe) that Adam and Eve were historical--for they believe their graves are found at Machpelah or the modern cite of The Cave of the Patriarchs/Ibrahimi Mosque--Jews also teach that the narrative of the Garden of Eden (Gan Eden) is mythology.
When Jesus makes reference to it (Matthew 12:3, 5; 19;4; 22:31; Mark 12:10, 26; Luke 6:3), he does so NOT as if he is making an example of the past or of history. He is always discussing Torah, making a specific reference to a statement in the law itself, supporting a point he is making by adding: "Have you not read...?" or "Is it not written...?" He is a rabbi teaching Torah, not history.
The narratives in Torah, after all, are not historical narratives. All of them are there to teach the Jews Torah, the Law. If they were historical narratives, they would be in the Talmud, such as the most historical narrative about Abraham in all of Judaism, namely, Abraham and the Idol Shop. That narrative does not appear in Genesis or any part of the Torah or in the Hebrew Bible at all. It is in the Talmud. Why? Because the only narratives in the Torah teach references that illustrate points on carrying out the Mosaic Law. Actual Jewish history about the Patriarchs is not found there.
Jews kept their history separate from the Scriptures. The Scriptures is a religious book, not a history book.
Jesus was a rabbi, not a historian. So when he was debating with other rabbis and scribes, they debated religion--not history.
The religion of the Jehovah's Witnesses counts the events in Genesis (which is in the Torah) as historical narrative. These narratives are not historical. They are either mythology, legend, or folklore. And they are chosen only because they illustrate to Jews how to carry out the Mosaic Law. (For example, Genesis chapter 1 teaches the Jews to keep the Sabbath. Since God is seen keeping Sabbath, and man and woman are made in God's image, then Jews must keep the Sabbath. Get it?)
If the narrative had no such direct bearing on keeping the Torah, it did not get placed into it. The Torah was composed and finalized around the time of the Babylonian Exile. Around the same time, other narratives of the Patriarchs, like the above-mentioned Abraham and the Idol Shop, began to be assembled in the foundational writings of what would eventually become the Babylonian Talmud. More Jews know this story about Abraham than they do any narrative in Genesis.
One last point, one need only read the Church Fathers--writings assembled before the New Testament was universally circulated and canonized--to note that the first Christians agreed with the Jews that the story of the Garden of Eden was symbolic. This is why the author of Acts constantly refers to the cross of Christ as a "tree" (in Greek, xylon--see Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29). The idea was that the "Tree of Life" in the Garden of Eden was the Cross of Christ, and that Jesus was the "New Adam" who gave his "flesh and blood" and the "fruit" that gave everlasting life. When Jesus gave Mary as his mother into the care of his beloved disciple, she become the "New Eve" for the Church at large--and thus entry to the Garden was ended since it was symbolic, and the whole thing was now over as far as Christians were concerned. This inspired Christian writers to continue to use the symbol of the "tree" ever after, especially since a cross is wood and looks like a tree.--Gal 3:13; 1 Pe 2:24.
You can't make any Bible chronology out of something that the early Church said was symbolic. You have to be an idiot or someone who just doesn't or won't read the Church Fathers.
I know the Watchtower didn't do that, because they're a cult.
But even atheists and agnostic know history. It's what they call "critical/analytical study."
Duh.
"That is the stupidest thing I ever heard."
And yet its arguably not even the stupidest thing he's said this month.
