I kinda like that it's not totally doctrinally accurate. I mean who cares about being doctrinally accurate? That makes its own point in itself.
Oops I was just thinking that to myself, didn't mean to post out loud.
I kinda like that it's not totally doctrinally accurate. I mean who cares about being doctrinally accurate? That makes its own point in itself.
Oops I was just thinking that to myself, didn't mean to post out loud.
after some considerable thought i have decided that i will no longer post on this forum because i want to return to jehovah.
thank you for all the kindness and many interesting discussions over the years.
i wish you all well in the future and the decisions you make.
It has unfortunatley been drawn to my attention that this place may be a nest of apostates. (Let the reader use discernment) And that some people hide what they really are. I am no human apostate. It turns out for good this time. I wish all well, and that we may all prove what we really are (although I don't agree with the reality/appearance distinction, don't tell them that). Thank you Simon thank you all.
Adios
That's great. Who did it?
so again we go to the quality of evidence used by the wt.. you can read the article here - https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/awake-no5-2016-october/did-jesus-really-exist/.
you see the wt refer to experts with quotes.
as is usually the case the credentials are not represented, just that they are experts (so take their word).
Their heart is not in it any more and it shows.
You'd think, among the thousands of people at headquarters, they'd manage to muster up a few individuals who care enough about religious and biblical issues to produce something worth publishing on the topic. Apparently not.
They're much more interested in producing policy books and articles on shunning, avoiding education, remaining loyal, branch facilities, feats of translation, how you can send them money in a dozen different ways. They just don't give a damn about Jeusus and whether he exists or ever existed.
so again we go to the quality of evidence used by the wt.. you can read the article here - https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/awake-no5-2016-october/did-jesus-really-exist/.
you see the wt refer to experts with quotes.
as is usually the case the credentials are not represented, just that they are experts (so take their word).
Isn't it customary, when asking a question like this, to first explain why the question arises in the first place? There is no sense, anywhere in this magazine, as to who has been asking this question in the first place, who supports the idea, how it originated, or the arguments involved.
They quote Einstein not once, but twice. The same quote, taking up space in a very short article, already devoid of any real content.
boondoggles and preppers watchtower style!
a religion of doom and luxury!.
in 1866, the times of london wrote:.
Vassarion was very interesting but the interview was poor. He didn't even ask about sex or money.
shouldn't they say thanks for" holding down the fort" until we take over?.
Because they are the scarlet coloured wild beast?
so again we go to the quality of evidence used by the wt.. you can read the article here - https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/awake-no5-2016-october/did-jesus-really-exist/.
you see the wt refer to experts with quotes.
as is usually the case the credentials are not represented, just that they are experts (so take their word).
I take it they don't engage scholars who doubt the existence of a historical Jesus: Robert M Price, Earl Doherty, Richard Carrier, Raphael Lataster, Thomas L Thompson, Thomas L Brodie.
so real quick, i know this comes up now and then and i've looked over some of the posts from the past but here's the thing.. when i was a jw i drank all the cool aid, i was 100% and so i have all my own arguments (from the jw's) for why the bible is inspired.
i no longer believe this but i'd really like to read something that is pretty much 100% academic on this subject.
i want to read what scholars have to say about the authenticity of the bible and it's claim at being the inspired word of god.
Excellent episode:
Does the New Testament say that Jesus is God?
so real quick, i know this comes up now and then and i've looked over some of the posts from the past but here's the thing.. when i was a jw i drank all the cool aid, i was 100% and so i have all my own arguments (from the jw's) for why the bible is inspired.
i no longer believe this but i'd really like to read something that is pretty much 100% academic on this subject.
i want to read what scholars have to say about the authenticity of the bible and it's claim at being the inspired word of god.
Robert M Price the Bible Geek he is the best! I've listened to all his podcasts.
And don't forget his lesser known podcast The Human Bible!