March WT: Dumb That Takes Your Breath Away?

metatron

The cover article is "The Bible-Is It Really God's Inspired Word?".

This has got to be a new low in Watchtower superficiality. How do we know that Isaiah and Daniel were authentic despite the claims of critics?

Because Jesus says so. (pg 6). That's it! If any of you have trouble understanding the idea of circular reasoning, this is an astounding example.

The Bible is inspired and true .........................................because the Bible says so. This is dumb(th) that is breathtaking.

metatron

VM44

Do you have a scan of the article that could be posted?

Blue Grass

This has got to be a new low in Watchtower superficiality. How do we know that Isaiah and Daniel were authentic despite the claims of critics?

Because Jesus says so. (pg 6). That's it! If any of you have trouble understanding the idea of circular reasoning, this is an astounding example.

I understand where you're coming from, but when you consider the fact that the gospels and Daniel/Isaiah were written hundreds of years apart and were not originally contained in a single book, the example you posted isn't circular reasoning. The gospels and Daniel/Isaiah are technically two different sources of information and using one to confirm the other isn't circular reason.

VM44

Walter Martin, when asked a similar question on the radio, stated that the Bible isn't one book, but rather 66 books.

I believe his "Seven Campus Curses" tape contains his telling of the story.

Farkel

:I understand where you're coming from, but when you consider the fact that the gospels and Daniel/Isaiah were written hundreds of years apart and were not originally contained in a single book, the example you posted isn't circular reasoning.

Sure it is. It's using itself to validate itself. When one character (Jesus) from the Bible says another character from the Bible (Daniel/Isaiah) existed and someone uses that as proof, that is circular reasoning.

Farkel

TD

JW's and kindred groups claim that the 66 book compilation of scripture we know today as the "Bible" is in reality a single contiguous book from cover to cover.

I think the real circularity occurs when anyone (JW or not) quotes from anywhere in that compilation to prove this idea.

For example, a favorite with JW's is 2 Tim 3:16, but that is a circular prior assumption that the 66 book compilation we know today as the "Bible" is the "scripture" that Paul was making (prophetic) reference to.

Blue Grass

When one character (Jesus) from the Bible says another character from the Bible (Daniel/Isaiah) existed and someone uses that as proof, that is circular reasoning.

You completely missed my point. The gospels and Daniel/Isaiah were not originally part of the same book. They were written hundreds of years apart by different authors. Just because they were compiled into one book hundreds of years later doesn't change the fact that they are historically two different writings.

Farkel

:You completely missed my point. The gospels and Daniel/Isaiah were not originally part of the same book. They were written hundreds of years apart by different authors. Just because they were compiled into one book hundreds of years later doesn't change the fact that they are historically two different writings.

I did get your point and your point was wrong. Your reason for thinking and stating it was not circular reasoning was your point. It doesn't matter when they were written, they are both part of the Bible.

You sound like you are still a JW in your thinking. It takes a while for the brain cells to grow back.

Farkel

TheOldHippie

TD said that "For example, a favorite with JW's is 2 Tim 3:16, but that is a circular prior assumption that the 66 book compilation we know today as the "Bible" is the "scripture" that Paul was making (prophetic) reference to."

I have never seen that connection made; each occurence where it has been referenced to, it has been added that at Paul's time, the 37 books of the OT were available, so his reference is to the OT. Never have I heard the assumption made that this could possibly refer to the 66 books of the Bible - many of which were yet to be written at the time Paul made his statement.

The Scotsman

This is not circular reasoning - your viewing the bible as 1 book

The 66 books of the bible are from different times, different writers and different locations - so using 1 of these to confirm another is fine by me.

Though not to say that WT do not use circular reasoning - of course they do - just not this time, in my opinion.

March WT: Dumb That Takes Your Breath Away?

Share this