Is the Bible Really a Good Guide?

by WTWizard 4 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  WTWizard

  We have all been conditioned by religion to believe that the Bible is some sort of supreme authority. Of course, we all know that the Watchtower Society, after claiming that the Bible is useful as this sort of authority, blatantly fails to follow it.

  What would you expect some supreme authority to have? Its premises should be beneficial to all involved. But, what do you see when you look at the Old Testament, which has most of the rules? Look at the rules. You are supposed to make sacrifices, which waste resources that otherwise could go to the betterment of mankind. The Levites--what value do they create? NONE! All they do is take the tenth portion of the fruitages of others while not creating any themselves. And, all the wars--for what? So that people that do not worship God can all die to let a group of parasitical value destroyers plunder their land and destroy all valuables in their possession. Supreme authority?

  What about the New Testament? It mostly lacks the kind of wanton destruction found in the Old Testament. However, is there any actual and real harm in fornication? Before you automatically say that there is, would you buy a car without test-driving it? Would you buy a house without at least testing the major appliances like the furnace, and inspecting for major problems and whether it will fit your needs and wants? Fornication is nothing more than test-driving a spouse. If things do not work out, one can terminate the engagement before major damage is done. If one blindly marries to avoid fornication, and the mate is impotent or abusive, what then?

  Beyond this issue, Paul advocated going out and proclaiming the message at hardship to the one doing the proclaiming. He himself was a missionary, and suffered much and sacrificed much (which is where the major religions, including the Catholic church, modeled the Crusades after). It is here that anyone that questions God Himself or does something against God (note: not the Filthful and Disgraceful Slavebugger or some organization) will be condemned to Hell. And what is this "God"? Some higher cause that man is supposed to waste resources sacrificing to, that's what. Note that, in proper context, Jesus never once mentioned that people were supposed to waste resources in spreading the Gospel--it would spread itself once more people caught onto the freedom from corrupt religion and government!

  A supreme authority would also have to be free of mysticism. Is the Bible? All one has to do is look at Genesis. A talking snake? The Flood? I don't think so! The Flood doesn't explain why the kangaroo and the taipan snake are only found in Australia, and why one cannot find lions, tigers, and bears together anywhere on the planet (if the Flood were true, there would have been lions, tigers, and bears together near where the Ark landed).

  What about the parting of the Red Sea? Mysticism. True, a strong wind would have been able to push the water back. But, humans are about the same weight as water. Any wind that would be strong enough to push the water back to that depth would have also pushed any human back that is trying to walk against it. You would simply have been blown right back toward Egypt! Yet the Bible treats that event as the truth.

  Finally, the mysticism of going to heaven. Most Christian denominations teach that at least some good people are going to heaven. Most also teach about Hellfire. The truth is that, what would anyone be doing in heaven? How would someone start ruling once they get there? If Jesus is in heaven now, then why didn't he lambaste the Watchtower Society, which he supposedly approved, when they started to deviate? And Slime Schroeder should for sure have disrupted this forum from heaven. The churches are not much better--they do not answer the question about what people are going to do, nor why people are not helped by dead loved ones that go to heaven. That is all a myth designed to get people to obey the rulers of the Church.

  Hellfire is another myth. So the witlesses do not believe in it--they only believe that most people are going to be destroyed soon for not joining (which has failed to come true multiple times--more mysticism). But those believing that one is going to suffer in Hell are just as wrong. Why? How does heat cause suffering? By making it incompatible with life. By injuring living flesh. A spirit does not have any flesh to injure, and hence would not feel any pain no matter how hot it gets. It would also not need air, and would be impossible to poison with poisonous gases. In practice, even if one did make it to hell, one could find it quite bearable since there is no flesh to injure or torture. And, there is no reasonable proof that people live on after they die (and it cannot be proven reasonably).

  I don't think the Bible is any good as an authority. It is full of myths, logical fallacies, and rules that cause waste and value destruction. It is full of stock prayer answerings and blessings that have been referenced so God will not have to deliver additional ones, which makes them mysticism. It is full of malediction for petty infractions of rules that are designed to make people waste value on some higher cause. Aside what Jesus himself wrote, and that's with the caveat that it was not to be taken literally, the Bible is one of the worst pieces of advice to follow. And, the Watchtower Society's littera-trash is probably the one major piece that is even worse.

  It is better to look at it independently. Those philosophers that were warned against ("empty deception") are probably better to follow. Socrates was the first of those. Most of the Bible was modeled after Plato (the need for a bunch of rules). Aristotle disagreed--he felt that rules were mostly spurious and detrimental. Only by independently researching all of the above can you decide whether or not to follow the Bible, or parts thereof.
• 

  JCanon

  Hi WTWizard. Interesting sceptical view about the Bible. But I've found some interesting parallels. One of my favorite is Akhenaten.

  Akhenaten suddenly converts to monotheistic worship and builds an altar to the god Aten in the middle of Egypt. David Rohl, the author of "New Chronology" uses the KTU 1.78 eclipse dated to the 12th of Akhenaten to try and date that king during the Davidic Period by using a 1012 BCE eclipse. But the conventional eclipse reference is 1375 BCE, in which case the 1st of Akhenaten would fall in 1386BCE.

  Manetho gives us the precise year Joseph became vizer in Egypt, year 17 of Apophis, by which we learn that the Exodus would have occurred at the end of the rule of Amenhotep III. It is quite precise. Per the Bible the ruling king, indeed, died in the Red Sea and thus the year of the Exodus should mark the end of the rule of a pharaoh. Only we know specifically it is Amenhotep III. So we look to the reign of Akhenaten for specific evidence of the Exodus. We don't expect to find written records because all of his were deliberately destroyed.

  But look at the circumstantial evidence? Akhenaten's behavior, converting to monotheism is clearly what one might expect if he underwent the ten plagues. Problem is, the Bible indicates that indeed, after the ten plagues, Egypt would become monotheistic and build an altar to YHWH in a specific location, that is, in the middle of Egypt near it's "boundary." Egypt was quie evenly divided between Upper and Lower Egypt, so that "boundary" would be halfway between. That's where Akhenaten built his city to Aten. It is the famous site of Tel el-Amarna, where the famous Amarna letters come from:

  But you are right. The Bible does indeed hide details and secrets. Secrets lost until it's God's time to reveal them. Here's the Biblical reference that seems like it is a future prophecy but is actually a reference to the time of Moses and the Exodus and Ten Plagues:

  19 In that day there will prove to be an altar to Jehovah in the midst of the land of Egypt[Tel el-Amarna], and a pillar to Jehovah beside its boundary. 20 And it must prove to be for a sign and for a witness to Jehovah of armies in the land of Egypt; for they will cry out to Jehovah because of the oppressors[the Jews in bondage as slaves], and he will send them a savior, even a grand one[the grand savior, obviously, is MOSES], who will actually deliver them. 21 And Jehovah will certainly become known to the Egyptians; and the Egyptians must know Jehovah in that day[known through the Ten Plagues and Red Sea incident], and they must render sacrifice and gift and must make a vow to Jehovah and pay it. 22 And Jehovah will certainly deal Egypt a blow[the Ten Plagues]. There will be a dealing of a blow and a healing; and they must return to Jehovah, and he must let himself be entreated by them and must heal them[i.e. they would become monotheists].

  23 In that day there will come to be a highway out of Egypt to As·syr´i·a, and As·syr´i·a will actually come into Egypt, and Egypt into As·syr´i·a; and they will certainly render service, Egypt with As·syr´i·a. 24 In that day Israel will come to be the third with Egypt and with As·syr´i·a, namely, a blessing in the midst of the earth, 25 because Jehovah of armies will have blessed it, saying: “Blessed be my people, Egypt, and the work of my hands, As·syr´i·a, and my inheritance, Israel.”

  So in my case, I found the Bible more than quite fascinating historically, though you do have to dig past the cryptic references to confirm this. Oh, how does this sit archaeologically, dating the 1st of Akhenaten to 1386 BCE?

  Kathleen Kenyon: Digging Up Jericho, Jericho and the Coming of the Israelites, page 262:

  "As concerns the date of the destruction of Jericho by the Israelites, all that can be said is that the latest Bronze Age occupation should, in my view, be dated to the third quarter of the fourteenth century B.C. This is a date which suits neither the school of scholars which would date the entry of the Israelites into Palestine to c. 1400 B.C. nor the school which prefers a date of c. 1260 B.C."

  The "third quarter of the 14th century B.C." means between 1350-1325 BCE. The Exodus occurs exactly 40 years earlier than the fall of Jericho which per Kenyon would thus fall between 1390-1365 BCE. 1386 BCE, of course, falls within this archaeological period.

  Finally, what about my advanced chronology or those like Preterists and Martin Anstey who believe the 1st of Cyrus should fulfill the "70 weeks" prophecy and thus dated to 455 BCE? Well the Exodus is exactly 19 jubilees earlier than the return from Babylon, so we merely add 931 years to 455 BCE to get the absolute date for the Exodus per the Bible's chronology. 931+455=1386 BCE. Of course, JWs date that event in 1513 BCE, some 127 years too early.

  Finally, if you like science and archaeology, the very latest we have related to absolute dating is RC14 dating from Rehov. Basically, it is presumed by archaeologists that cereals are the best way to date an event if they are found burned at the time of a destructive level. That is their best chance at dating something to a precise period. Previously RC14 only got them to within 90-100 years of any event like this, thus samples found at Rehov at the level associated with Shishak's invasion has a range of 918-823 BCE for 95.4% testing. But it was discovered recently that when you multi-test a single sample the weighted average accummulates around the very center of the range, as can be seen by the chart below. Thus it is believed the very middle of the range is closest to the "true date" of that event. Meaning, you could theoretically narrow this event to within a year or so, and certainly within less than ten years.

  http://www.geocities.com/ed_maruyama/rehov872.html [Rehov testing]

  http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/REHOVPROB.JPG (comparison 871 vs 925 BCE)

  RESULT? 871 BCE. That's the scientifically highest probable date for that event. Now that dating does not agree with the current secular dating for Shishak's invasion, now dated to 925 BCE. BUT...since we can calculate directly Solomon's rule from the date of the Exodus, which would be from 910-870 BCE, we can determine the year of Shishak's invasion near the very end of Solomon's rule in year 5 of the co-ruler Rehoboam. Year 39 of Solomon falls in 871 BCE! Precisely where the scientific dating points to as well!

  SO... some find the Bible useless, perhaps because they don't know what to look for or because they don't understand it. While others, like myself, find it completely reliable. Sure what is left today can't cover all the events in the Bible's ancient past, but some are covered, like Shishak's invasion date and the conversion to monotheism after the Ten Plagues. In the meantime, nothing can be disproven either.

  So two different opinions about the value of the Bible. I respect the sceptics, but they often fall short of doing a truely through investigation so oftentimes their results are erroeneous, fraudulent or incompetent. Unfortunately, some who even claim the Bible is true, like JWs, sometimes misrepresent what is in the Bible, adding to the Bible's poor reputation as an accurate historical record or reliable book of prophecy. Case in point, they use the secular date of 539 BCE as their "pivotal date" for the fall of Babylon, instead of using the Biblical dating for the 1st of Cyrus in fulfillment of the 70-weeks prophecy that would date that event to 455 BCE. Others like Martin Anstey though, managed to ignore the secular records from this period and hold steadfast to the Biblical dating. NOW, the VAT4956 confirms precisely that, indeed, the 1st of Cyrus fell in 455 BCE before complex revisions.

  So that's another thing. Scientists, archaeologists and others, some who know the truth, love to LIE about it, misrepresenting history and facts, ignoring the critical evidence supporting the Bible, and then claim the Bible is incorrect. A lot of flash over substance. When they get cornered on some key issues in show down, then they turn tail and run, like Carl Olof Jonsson who wrote extensively about chronology in two recent books, who refuses to answer any challenges by me. Some think he has good reason to refuse to debate with me because I'm "crazy" but others can see, obviously, I might know too much and it's better not to debate than to debate and lose face.

  Plato and Aristotle were involved with Xenophon in the Greek Period revisions, with Socrates and Aristotle being former lovers. This is probably a well kept secret from olden times and its still too embarassing to bring out now, hence the phony allegiance to the current revised timeline. Scientists may be smart, but they are also deceitful and can be bought off by the highest bidder. Few things exit in the modern world without FUNDING, and that goes for most archaeological programs.

  I'm glad at least I'm honest. And it's wonderful to see the Bible confirmed when it can be by science and archaeology and astronomy!

  Different experiences. Same book.

  JC
• 

  DoomVoyager

  www.skepticsannotatedbible.com
  
  
  The Bible is the worst book I've ever read.
• 

  Spook

  The flaw in Jcannon's reasoning is that it is backwards from what the scholars are actually arguing. The connection they have found (if any) is that Israel took monotheism from Egypt, not the other way around. If there is any connection at all (doubtful, from linguistic anthropology) it is one that frowns upon biblical literalism and fits better with the rest of the scholarship on the Jewish religion (In that, like every other religion on the planet, it took ideas from previous traditions.)

  As an introduction, check out some of the scholars below

  1. Freud, S. (1939). Moses and Monotheism: Three Essays.
  2. Gunther Siegmund Stent, Paradoxes of Free Will.
  3. Jan Assmann, Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism.
  4. N. Shupak, The Monotheism of Moses and the Monotheism of Akhenaten.
  5. Dominic Montserrat, Akhenaten: sex, Fantasy, and Ancient Egypt. .
  6. William F. Albright, From the Patriarchs to Moses II. Moses out of Egypt. The Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 36, No. 2 (May, 1973), pp. 48-76. doi 10.2307/3211050

  My next door neighbor and good friend is a UK educated Archaeoligist from the University of Edinburough. We've discussed Rohl quite a bit. His minority opinions on this subject are interesting but have been opposed because it creates more chronological problems than it attempts to answer.

  My Criticisms of Rohl aside, he did provide me with a first view of an argument against a global deluge that is great to use against JW's. He points out the the word "har" in Hebrew (mountain) also can refer to cities and city "mounds." This is good to use against Jehovah's Witnesses because they frequently use "har" to refer to Yahweh's "government" or "city."
• 

  2050

  I agree with JCanon, he hit the nail on the head.