How the TRINITY covers up the murder of Jehovah

by Terry 146 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Terry

  How deaf and stupid to attach our thinking to either it happend or didnt happen. We dont know.

  Does this mean we should shut the book (Any book) we read because its not compatible with our thinking.

  FALSE DICHOTOMY!

  It isn't an either/or situation.

  You were born with a brain. Use it!

  Folk tales and myths helped ignorant, pre-Enlightenment people in superstitious times cope with the world they lived in. It was a short and brutal life.

  Hanging...clinging...desperately to a Saviour who rescues from death was about all they had to get them through the long, dark night!

  You live in Post-Enlightenment times where life spans are expanding, medicine and technology are better than miraculous and your saggy tits can be shaped into firm battering rams!

  In short--you can actually take the time to learn FACTS about the real world and make decisions informed by rational choices.

  Waiting around in Jehovah's bus station for the Armageddon express and pining away for the love of Jesus just makes you a pathetic victim of a life never lived and opportunities never taken!!

  Besides, the Jesus we have in America today wants you to be rich and attend a mega-church.

  Make a choice that means something!~!
• 

  Terry

  Just a small point,Terry, and I am not too certain I have this right, but I think that Islam views itself as worshipping the original god, the same god that Abraham thought he was worshipping true, but not really the God that YHVH became under later Jewish belief.

  The Jehovah who adopted only the sons of one part of Abraham's offspring is a Jewish (Israeli) invention.

  The Semites shaped the God they worshipped into a ferocious deity of enormous power and magnitude because they were an insignificant tribe without importance afloat in a sea of mighty nations with insuperable military might. The Semite God, YHVH, chose ONLY them, the Jews!

  How special this made them!! Automatically everything they could take with their own hands belonged to them by divine right!! What a gratifying justification for any foul, monstrous deed they may undertake!!

  If they got roughed up, captured or assimilated---the only explanation was that their owner/husband/deity was "correcting" them!

  Theirs was a theory that proved everything!

  The Arabs were certainly semites with a connected history with the Jews (people of the Book).

  If the Jews couldn't use such a gargantuan force as JEHOVAH they (the arabs) certainly could.......redesigned a bit, of course--to suit their own interests!

  Just as Joseph Smith looked around at Christendom and saw a need not being filled.....and produced a "flawless" book (of Mormon), so too, Muhammed looked around at his own day and time and saw the need for ALLAH and the Koran!

  The "divine" inspiration was attended by fabulous exaggerations as to his (Muhammed's) inability to read or write, etc. The ignorant, divided Arabs swallowed the story whole and the once fractured people rose up to sweep the Earth with mighty armies of righteous Jihad!

  Self-confidence an utter belief in a black and white absolute works wonders!!
• 

  Terry

  The "Grand Climax" to Jehovah's sadism is the "Revelation", seven vials poured into the earth, like pouring salt on slugs, followed by the ultimate bloodbath, up to the bridles of the horses for hundreds of miles. What a nice god.

  If we're ever going to evolve from primitive neanderthals to human beings, it's time to pull the plug on the Bible and all these fear cults.

  The Revelation muscle-flexing of God-the-Father is imaginary, futuristic and metaphysical dreamworks.

  The New Testament God needs Viagra to get it up. John has to imagine God's erection for him!

  The Jews under Roman authority don't need protection so much as they need escape. The God-the-Father character is closer to

  to Greco-Roman than anything Old Testament.

  I think this quote from HAROLD BLOOM is quite telling:

  And then I remember taking as an undergraduate--out of real curiosity--a course in New Testament Greek and read the entire Greek Testament and got to know it pretty well and got more and more puzzled by something: How can it possibly be that we don't have an Aramaic Gospel of Jesus Christ? All the scholars agree that he spoke Aramaic to his disciples, who would have known no other language, and to the crowds in Galilee, who clustered around him, and they knew no other language. If you believed that this particular personage from Nazareth, whom I refer to in the book as a "more or less historical figure"--if you believed that this was indeed God or the son of God or the anointed Messiah, how can you fail to preserve the actual words, sentences, that he had spoken? How could you not commemorate his discourses literally? Why is there no Aramaic gospel? And what makes me especially suspicious from the start is, as you know, scattered through the gospels are some seven or eight Aramaic phrases, which have been put in more or less, as it were, to spice it up or authenticate it, though it's never explained why they are there. That they did not preserve an Aramaic gospel makes me very suspicious indeed.
• 

  Terry

  Of surpassing interest: Jesus & Yahweh by Harold Bloom. Pick up a copy.
• 

  cyberjesus

  thanks for writing terry
• 

  Terry

  You are more than welcome, Cyber-Yeshua :)
• 

  PSacramento

  That they did not preserve an Aramaic gospel makes me very suspicious indeed.

  A fair question.

  Well, for one thing, the earlist writings we have were aimed at gentiles and Jews outside of Jerusalem, Greek would make sense.

  But why NO aramaic or hebrew gospel?

  Well, considering that the scribes were Hebrew and viewed Jesus and his teachings as outside the Law, why would they take note of it?

  As for his followers, if theyr were typical of the time and we assume they were, the most common way to transmit anythign was through words/stories/songs, just like the Hebrew bible was transmitted for centuries before it was put into writing.

  Of course, there is also the possibility of their being one and that it was translated to the more popular language of the day, Greek.

  In short, there are many theories but no one really knows for sure so to suggest on way OR ANOTHER is to speculate and voice an opinion.
• 

  StAnn

  Terry, actually, I'm not missing the point. The attributes of the God of the Old Testament are still part of the God of the New Testament. He's not a "flat character." But your post was interesting, even though i disagree with your conclusions.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  How can it possibly be that we don't have an Aramaic Gospel of Jesus Christ?

  The Gospel Matthew was originally written in Aramaic or Hebrew. We have no ancient extant copies in that language, that I know of. Just Greek translations. Another thing, a great many Jews spoke Greek. If you were to write a Gospel for an audience of greatest size, you would have written it in Greek. Look at the Septuagint Old Testament, it was widely circulated at that time, and was already several centuries old.

  BTS
• 

  tec

  Terry, actually, I'm not missing the point. The attributes of the God of the Old Testament are still part of the God of the New Testament. He's not a "flat character." But your post was interesting, even though i disagree with your conclusions.

  As are the attributes of the God of the NT also found in the God of the OT. For example, when Jesus quotes mercy over sacrifice, that is taken from the OT scriptures.

  The Israelites were told and given what they could handle at that time. (Moses gave them certain laws that made allowances for their hard-heartedness) We can handle more now, and so we are given more, and more is expected of us.

  Tammy