Posts by bohm

47

Is the Bible God's word? Help please.....

by Freeandclear in

jw
friends

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.

bohm

Hi Freeandclear,

If you are looking for middle-of-the-road stuff I would recommend Israel Finkelstein's "The bible unearthed" for the OT and "Misquoting Jesus" (or another book by Bart Ehrman; he write the same in all his books ;-) ) for the NT.

Perhaps even better Yale has their courses on the OT and NT available online.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtQ2TS1CiDY&list=PL279CFA55C51E75E0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V006bX4mlu4&list=PLfbxB0kKayCQ2Hf6JlCCDN6z47ySYxsCW

they should give a good overview of the mainstream academic view. Start with the NT, the lecturer (Dale Martin, a Christian) is really entertaining.

31

AWAKE! NO. 5 2016 - Did Jesus Really Exist?

by ttdtt in

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).

bohm

SBF:

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.

I think this is a very precise observation.. I think this is the general tactic for the WT, they never try to frame the argument (context, history, who believes it, why, etc.) but just introduce it like "Some people say/believe.." (always "some") and then pile on their counter arguments without explaining the other position in details. I think the best example is "evolution" and "the theory of evolution" which I think the WTBs in 100 years has still not defined even once.

31

AWAKE! NO. 5 2016 - Did Jesus Really Exist?

by ttdtt in

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).

bohm

I have always been amazed at how the WT will quote Einstein in support of their positions whenever possible but ignore most of what he believed:

31

AWAKE! NO. 5 2016 - Did Jesus Really Exist?

by ttdtt in

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).

bohm

Yah that was predictably awfull. I dont doubt jesus existed, but it is amazing the wt cant even make a good argument when they are right.

10

Warwick Photo Gallery 5 (September 2015 - Feb. 2016)

by wifibandit in

full set: http://imgur.com/a/1ru5z .

sample:.

.

bohm

I actually thought it would be bigger. Any idea about how many it will house?

12

Brighton Convention Being Discussed

by konceptual99 in

jw
friends

whilst browsing my local football team's fan forum, i spied this thread.... http://www.northstandchat.com/showthread.php?340338-10-000-expected-at-the-amex.