several days have passed...
i think challam has a case of cognitive disonence, for no answer is forthcoming
If the bible is god's handbook for man, why is it such gobbledegook?
by Aussie Oz 112 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Chalam
I dunno-what was the question?!
Blessings,
Stephen
-
chrisjoel
When i left JWs i made it my lifes ambition to investigate other churches and beliefs. The more i saw the more i hated faiths. It just seemed to be a kind of a lifestyle ppl choose to have something to give their lives meaning. So i decided to make a decision on the Bible and after yrs of reading and thinking about it i decided It has to be more fable then fact.
To say that it would have been EASY for god to have made the bible easliy understood, I think, doesnt lend itself to understanding god because the god of the bible isnt easliy understood HE is complex. Very very complex. That he would have insured the BIBLE be unequivocally understood seems to contradict his biblical personality..again God is portrayed as a very complex guy who doesnt tell anyone the answer to many questions as to why it is what it is....O sure u can get lots of stuff out of the bible that tells you how god answers prayers and how he loved the world so much but the hard questions are left out and God is silent on so much its not even worth discussing because PPL NEED something to believe.
Having said that I am not ready to say there is absolutely no god. I just dont know. The FACT remains however that, the bible can and is interpreted in so many many different ways that , if we are being honest ....REALLY HONEST, we have to admit that the author probably isnt GOD.
-
Chalam
OK, nice and simple :)
John 3:16-18 (New International Version)
16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, [ a ] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.
Or here :)
Romans 10:9-13 (New International Version)
9 That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. 11 As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." [ a ] 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." [ b ]
Footnotes:- Romans 10:11 Isaiah 28:16
- Romans 10:13 Joel 2:32
Or here :)
Acts 16:30-32 (New International Version)
30 He then brought them out and asked, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
31 They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household." 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house.
And here :)
Acts 4:10-12 (New International Version)
10 then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. 11 He is
" 'the stone you builders rejected,
which has become the capstone.' 12 Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."What could be simpler?
Blessings,
Stephen
-
Aussie Oz
Look mate, i was going to rip strips off you for what you just cut and pasted, but i realize you are unable to do anything else. I am really disapointed that you deliberatly chose to quote the bible as an answer even though you know very well that i have asked you not too. I find that to be typical arrogant christian behaviour and shows that you have no respect for other peoples wishes.
That you chose to do so drives me further away from the bible and from those who claim to understand it, rather than making me reconsider it.
Very good, god loves me and sent jesus... i fail to how that is an answer to why the rest of the bible is so hard to understand. Why is it written by men who knew not what they were penning, in vision, signs, portents, hallucinations, prophecy, literalism, figurativness, etc when when all he had to do was announce his love and introduce jesus to the world. I have not been questioning the percieved message of the bible, but the format which 'god' chose to use.
Again, i have asked repeatedly for you to NOT QUOTE SCRIPTURE as an answer. I DO NOT TRUST THAT BOOK, NO AMOUNT OF QUOTING is going to suddenly make me change my mind. All you ARE doing is driving me further away from it and those that follow it by your repeated inability and unwillingness to respect my wishes and secondly, to form a logical answer.
From here on in, i ask you to please refrain from comenting on my threads unless you can do so without biblical cut and paste.
oz.
-
transhuman68
Oz, I have been reading the Bible more in the nine months since I started lurking here than I had in the last twenty years. Sure, it makes no sense but it's a good read, and it's fun to make it play any tune you want. Don't chuck away your bible: it's part of your WASP heritage.
-
Chalam
Aussie Oz If the bible is god's handbook for man, why is it such gobbledegook?
I am really disapointed that you deliberatly chose to quote the bible as an answer even though you know very well that i have asked you not too.
So you want to know why you think the bible is gobbledegook but you are unwilling to read a few plain and simple verses from it or discuss them?!
Anyhow, all the best :)
Blessings,
Stephen
-
GromitSK
I am not sure why Oz was described as an atheist earlier in the thread - I don't know whether he is or not but just because a person doesn't accept Jesus, or Christianity or the Bible, surely that doesn't imply they are an atheist?
-
Aussie Oz
Challam,
I dont want to know WHY i think it is 'gobbledegook'. I BELIEVE it is 'gobbledegook'. That is, that most of it is wordy, pompous and largely incomprehensible. That it is full of strange visions, hallucinations... you know the rest.
I have read the simple verses you quoted and i do not see an answer in them.
My aim has not been to have a nice little discussion of the bibles message Stephen. If i have questions about doctrine or a particular understanding of some passage i will openly discuss that, scripture included.
My aim has been to provoke discussion as to why God chose to make it an extraordinary jumble that mankind has had to argue over its meaning and use. To ask why he did this instead of making a simple guide of it that all mankind could understand and agree on.
Christianity claim that the bible is the divine word of god to mankind where he reveals his plan, purpose and execution of such. Yet, they are at the same time not able to explain why god chose this divine word to be so confusing. I realize that the simple message of jesus is just that, simple. I do not question that. I question the other 99.99% of the books format.
There was no need to quote scripture or discuss any chapter and verse, as this is not a question of doctrine or teaching. It is ok to admit that maybe you, or nobody knows why it is gobbledegook, to just say that to you its not gobbledegook at all, that you trust it even though there may be stuff you dont get. Whatever.
I would have hoped that you may have been able to understand that if i do not trust the bible and do not see god as love, that quoting a scripture to me that says god IS love would not somehow change my mind. That i would be annoyed by such an inconsiderate reply.
I figure you feel the bible is 100% understandable, not open to interpretation, has no hidden information, that the wild beasts of visions are easy to understand, that what i see as 'gobbledegook', you do not.
So be it.
oz
-
Broken Promises
GromitSK,
It was me who Stephen called an atheist, simply because I used an image from a website that called itself “proud atheist”. I had not said anything about being an atheist, because I am not. But Stephen’s leap in logic is just one example of his inability to discuss anything involving logic and sound reason.