by whereami 161 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
I gotta be honest here NC, being familiar with the bible and KNOWING it are two very different things.
Many here still have the concepts that they had as JW's in regards to the bible which is strange since they have left behind everything else that made them JW's ( except perhaps in the case of some that "we are right and you are wrong" POV).
Well that is a bit offensive to me PS. The bible was the most important book to me for most of my life. Perhaps my understanding of it does not match your current understanding, but to argue that I don't KNOW it because I don't think it says what you think it says is unfounded.
And I'd like to add that before I was a JW I was a chrisitian that read my bible. I have studied it in many contexts. I do KNOW the bible.
I didn't single you out NC.
I don't know how much or how little you know of the bible.
I dare say that Bioflex is "familiar" with the theory of evolution, which doesn't mean he/she KNOWS it.
I don't view someone knowing the bible as knowing it because they agree with my view on it, far from that.
Sorry if I offended you, it was not my intent.
BUT since you did mention yourself, I am wondering how many hours of formal study you have of the bible?
I notice you are taking classes in anthropology, yes?
Have you taken in in bible studies?
Many, many bible studies PS. I attended many churches, took part in their bible studies, listened to Christian radio which often had structured and progressive bible studies, I bought books at Christian stores and went through the bible, I prayed often for understanding, I could find chapter and verse when the JW's showed up. My prayers had begun focusing on the teaching of hellfire, I was disturbed, they showed up and pointed to scriptures that did NOT teach hellfire. I then looked into that from other perspectives and found that not all bible based religions taught hellfire, but they spoke to me first. So that was the answer to my prayers---right?
That was the biased way I viewed the world. If there was truth, it was in the bible. Now I dismiss the bible.
NC
Interesting, must have been a facinating journey.
I am curious as to what you dismiss the bible as being though.
JonathanH " The world was only a better place for straight white men. Everyone else I'm pretty sure would rather live today than a hundred years ago."
Far more straight white men have been oppressed than have been oppressors. They have suffered terrible injuries and deaths in war for the entire existence of the human race. At one time the average age expectancy for a working man was 40 years. They were worked to death in ship yards, mines and factories. Perhaps reading up on the suffering endured by white men and women during the Spanish inquisition would be educational.
By the way, white men were used as slaves long before black men. Homosexuality was embraced and encourage in both, Greece , Rome and many other cultures, thousands of years ago. Christianity was largely responsible for prejudice developing.
The history of the human race has been one of suffering and exploitation. Just as many white men have been victims of others greed and lust for power as any other human.
Why do I bother to point this out? Because long as people try to claim victim status by blaming the white bogey man, progress will be hampered. How about a little praise for the huge improvement in longevity and quality of life as a direct result of white men’s inventions and their service to humanity. Let’s have a little balance here.
Morality is often a cultural thing and collectively decided by society according to its needs and aims.
To PS.
So much in the bible can be disproven. Creation for instance. The flood. And much of it contradicts itself. God is a genocidal, murderous individual who also claims to be love. I decided instead of dismissing, or explaining, or justifying such a paradox, I would look at it for what it was. Would I consider Hitler love? No. And I would hold a god to a much higher standard.
Now some may argue that we should look at the prevailing message of the bible and not the details. Okay. But what is that message? People that argue that point wish to choose exactly what message they will take and disregard the rest. Salvation. That is the basic message. Who says so? There is so much more than salvation in the bible, who is to say that if I choose to take away a message of destruction that is less valid than taking away a message of salvation?
Why does one trump the other? We can match scripture to scripture to prove that we have gathered the "right" message--but it is all there. I am not wrong for taking away a message of destruction, hate, murder, punishment anymore than another person is wrong for taking away a message of love, kindness, forgiveness and charity. As I said, It is ALL there. I would even go so far as to say the bulk of the bible focuses on the hateful stuff---therefore I could outmatch the love and forgiveness scriptures.
Look at Psalm 139:
1: Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
Salvation
2: But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
Salvation
3: And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
Salvation
4: The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
Destruction
5: Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
Destruction
6: For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
Destruction AND Salvation
So if I come away with a message of judgement and destruction, that is just as valid as someone else coming away with a message of forgiveness and salvation.
Why is this? Why such jealousy? Why such insecurity? Why the willingness to wipe out entire races of people---Men, women, children, babies? Well the Israelites wanted the LAND! That's all. It's so simple. It makes much more sense than saying a God who IS love would just wipe people out. NO. Humans that want land wipe people out and that is a story as old as time and spans the globe. There is nothing special or divine in it--it is simply an ugly aspect to being human. And trust me---THEY all claimed to have divine backing too---so nothing special there either.
Then there is the simple HUMANESS of this god. Think about the laws on sex. Think about the emphasis on female viriginity. Why not the emphasis on MALE virginity? Oh sure, the scriptures apply to both men and women, but in practice, on who do the laws apply? Women. Why? Because women can be biologically identified as virgins--men cannot. Now if there was an all knowing god, this would not be a problem. But if that god were an invention of humans, he would have human limitations, therefore there is no special punishment for a man that is not a virgin marrying. OH BUT IF A MAIDEN is found not to be a virgin on her wedding night--well that is an entirely different story. Very human.
That is just some of it, but I find the portrayal of this god to be quite human, quite flawed, quite contradictory, and always working in the interests of the people that serve him---or more accurately the people he serves as they invented him to justify all they wanted to do.
So along comes Jesus with a slightly different message, but in total agreement with the old message. Contradictory, yes, but that's what humans do. He did not dismiss the old message, he read from it and extended it.
So if it is okay to look at the bloodthirst in the bible and say well that doesn't pertain to me, it is also proper to look at the warm fuzzy stuff and say well THAT is the part that doesn't apply. And if we get to simply pick and choose what we will take away, what we will emphasize and what we will dismiss, then the bible is a completely unreliable source. It is approached in a completely subjective manner, but if there IS a god, he is who he is and it would not be up to humans to interpret that--only to accept it. But humans don't accept it, they continue to mold and recreate this god---just as they did from its beginning and they will continue to do until it goes the way of Thor.
The bible writers could not foresee science, so their ideas remained tenacious until humans gained knowledge that could disprove much of what they had to say. GOD would have foreseen science and his word would have been foolproof.
I say if there is a spirit realm, it would be much more like the pagan nature worshipping people's realm. It's more organic and instinctive. So if we have something within that is connected to something beyond, it seems much more likely to be along those lines than this book that has been imposed the world over---even when it was counterintuitive. And I base this statement on simple intuition and instinct. What comes naturally. I can't prove it nor do I care to. It just seems more logical to me.
NC
I would suggest you read " Is God a moral monster?" because it seems some of the issues you have with God are because of what we have read and interpreted in the bible.
On doubt that God is painted in a very unflattering way in some OT books/passages and it most certainly was a very huge issure for me as well and even for some early Christians like Marcione.
Yours are not issues to be dismissed but I wonder if you have read the apologetisc about them and what your thoughts were?
@cofty : i guess i now realize where the problem lies now, you claim i am ignorant about evolution - bioflex
Yes that is evident from what you have written
but let me ask you, are you well educated about the bible?
Yes very well educated. I was an evangelical for 9 years after I left the borg. I could not begin to count how many commentaries and systematic theologies I have studied. How many books about evolution written by real scientists have you read. Please name a few.
Just what makes you think the books you want to suggest to me are spot on accurate?
Evidence
if there is anything i have learnt in this discussion its that many scientists have their doubts about evolution
No they don't. No scientists in any relvant field of study doubt the fact of evolution.
in science you have to prove something before it is regarded as credible and none of your evolution books can boldly prove all it states.
Yes they can every single word.
Now if you want to discuss evolution start a new thread please.
