Jwfacts, Why Do You Equate Miracles With Magic?

by Recovery 398 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  King Solomon

  Now there are those that use the argument that David is said to have studied omens, magic, and as well as Daniel when he was educated in the practices of the Babylonians. But notice the distinction that has to be made when one is arguing from this viewpoint. Daniel and David are thought to have studied, not practiced such things. Jehovah does not say 'YOU must not study magic or omens'. He says 'YOU must not practice it.'

  Now here's an illustration. Imagine that your license as an attorney has been suspended temporarily and you are ordered by the district attorney to not practice any form of law, as your license is now suspended. Would you violate the law if you study your old college law books, examine precedent court cases, and learn new techniques by watching other lawyers present their cases? Of course not. You were instructed to not practice law.

  The illustration/point is completely moot because there are many Jehovah's Witnesses who are doctors and who have prominent jobs in the medical field. To become a doctor, an extensive background is needed in Biology. And what does a great portion of biological instruction consist of? Evolution. So is it wrong for JW's to go to schools where they will have to learn about evolution (something contrary to the Bible)? Of course not. The point of Daniel and David learning magic is clearly fallacious and the true 'weak argument' as all can now see.

  Recovery, I'm randomly extracting your comments, since it's frankly too fatiguing to wade thru the nonsense you posted. So I grabbed the above, as it's exemplary of your absurdity.

  Having been licensed to PRACTICE my profession in a State (which is required by law), I can assure you the education and training process involves actually PRACTICING the skills under the tutelage of a LICENSED professional, before being allowed to sit for testing to be licensed to practice under one's own license.

  In fact, that's a REQUIREMENT: the professors offering training MUST be licensed to practice in order to teach others, in order for students to PRACTICE under the umbrella of their license while in training.

  PS your ignorance is showing again when you discussed DAs: District Attorneys have no ability to restrict another lawyer's practice. That is the SOLE responsibility and authority of the State Board (whether the State Bar, a group of attorneys and non-lawyers who are appointed by the Governor to manage the licensing and regulation of lawyers; in the case of physicians, there's a State Medical Board, comprised mostly of lawyers licensed in the state to administer administrative and judicial matters such as complaints reported about physicians, etc). District Attorney represent the Gov't in prosecution of criminal offenses.

  And for the record, a great portion of biogical sciences education does NOT involve "learning evolution". In my case, a 300-level course in evolution wasn't encountered in my biological sciences curriculum until the 3rd year of undergrad education (not that evolution doesn't appear before then: it MUST, as evolution IS the unifiying theory underlying biological sciences. Without it, you simply have a massive amount of facts and figures that aren't unified into a comprehensible form).

  So YOUR argument is a FAIL, and reflects YOUR ignorance.
• 

  Recovery

  Elderelite: LOL its laughable to cite the source of something as the determining factor. THe reality is you cant know the source. You can CLAIM a source, but if its the same acts that lead to the same end results you have assume the same source.

  Its like saying flipping a light switch in a room is to use electricity and flipping the same light switch another day is using water. Its stupid on every level.

  Wow, what a wacky illustration. Surely, you did not get the point at all. Let me illustrate it again for you. You have two identical ovens, side by side. One is conventional, the other is convectional. Surely, when you are baking, you will note that there are some recipes that call for different instructions when using a conventional or a convectional oven. Now why is that, elderelite? In fact when baking, if you are using a conventional oven you might have to use a completely different temperature than if you were using a convectional oven. Both ovens are identical in model and both get the job of baking done. So why do some recipes call for different instructions for two seemingly identical ovens who simply have a different SOURCE of energy (speaking on a molecular level)? Is it because that source is important and makes a big difference? Hmmmm.
• 

  Recovery

  KingSolomon wants to argue over who has the authority to restrict an attorney from practicing law and who does not. The source of the suspension of the aforementioned license is not crucial to my illustration or the point I was making and therefore it does not invalidate my illustration. It doesn't matter if the attorney is restricted by the DA, the mayor, the governor, Michael Jackson, or the state board. The point of the illustration is the VIOLATION of the prohibition, not the AUTHORITY behind it.

  So here's a simple question for you KingSolomon: If a lawyer's license is suspended and they continue studying law have they violated the prohibition from the state? Yes or no?
• 

  elderelite

  Lol and your own illistration shows the flaw.

  Its an identical source of power. Electrcity. Its used differently in an normal electric oven compared to a convection oven. Clearly it is you who dont understand my young friend.
• 

  jgnat

  Elderite/Recovery, if I might rephrase....Recovery is suggesting that a miraculous/magical event, which may have similar result, are sourced by completely different powers. It might follow that such forces would be opposite, and equal, since they can give the same result. Kind of like this:

  So to modify the illustration, one would be a light switch and the other would be the tap? We still have the problem of similar results. Would it be better to illustrate two light switches, on completely different circuits?
• 

  breakfast of champions

  My magic is like the Amana Radar Range!
• 

  Recovery

  So you are saying that how the electricity is used makes the difference and the distinction between the two ovens, correct?

  So I am saying that how the supernatural force is used makes the difference and the distinction between miracles and magic.

  A miracle's supernatural force is under the manipulation of God, a magic's supernatural force is under the manipulation of something other than God.

  The "How" is the defining difference as you showed us quite clearly, elderelite.
• 

  rather be in hades

  was it a miracle that gonzalo campos was moved up to ministerial servant and later elder, all while he was sodomizing children?
• 

  breakfast of champions

  ^^^^^ that definitely qualifies as a miracle!
• 

  jwfacts

  Recovery, I am just starting to realise that you are deceitful and sly, twisting words and intentions. You make the claim:

  Jehovah says "YOU must not look for omens, and YOU must not practice magic." (Lev 19:26)

  Jwfacts says: All the people in the Bible DID practice magic and there was no distinction between the practice of magic and miracles performed of God, directly contradicting God's word.

  I did not say "all the people in the Bible". Just one of your lies. You are also being misleading to say I claim there is no distiction between the magic and miracles of God. I didn't say God practices magic and miracles, I said a miracle could be defined as magic.

  You throw in the word "Etymological origins" to appear educated, and then avoid quoting the core definition of magic, to be deceitful. Magic is an event of supernatural origins. Therefore a miracle is magic.

  You are taking Lev 19:26 out of context. It refers to magic from sources other than God. By your definition, that Scripture condemns every JW that has done a magic trick, because it is magic, when that is not the intention of the Scripture at all.

  Finally, the Sparlock article does not promote children becoming involved in the occult, as you are implying, but that the magic of fantasy is not wrong. Your insistence otherwise is deceitful, and hypocritical, since you admitted to watching Disney shows that include magic, because you know that the magic of fantasy does not equate to occultism.

  I do hope the dishonest way you present information is simply because you are "brainwashed", and that you are not as deliberately deceptive are you appear to be.