The apparent contradiction of John 3:13

by EdenOne 43 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    Every book written by man on such subjects is bullshit. Ergo, the Bible is bullshit. Read Genesis through Malachi and Matthew through Revelation. (Not to mention the other bullshit books that never made it in the 66 bulshit book).

    Who made the first weapon of war? Man or God?

    The swirling "sword" in the Garden of Eden was not made by Adam. Adam didn't even know what a "sword" was. God did, though. The bullshit stories started in Genesis, you know. How can you trust anything full of such bullshit, anyway?

    Farkel, with Sparkle

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    EdenOne,

    I don't know what you've already read. It would take some time to find the source but I recall reading that Jews never believed in a resurrection until about one hundred years before Jesus' birth. Just in time one would think. The Pharisees did and the Saducees did not. Jews believed that what happened on this earth in your life mattered. Faithfulness to God was your duty, even if there was no reward.

    Jesus would not suddenly believe something not Jewish. Well, in WT land he would! He assumes his audience knows the core subjects from scriptures and study.

    I can understand being agnostic and atheist. Why call yourself Christian without the full Christ? Perhaps I recall WT teaching incorrectly b/c I thought Jesus was higher during my time than was the case. Cecil B. DeMille and Radio City Music Hall Christmas show had an impact. I could swear that altho they taught the Trinity was wrong, Jesus was more than an angel.

    We should post our WT years the way alumni post their graduating year. WT 45-90. It would make communication easier. Law books are published in hard bound volumes. Only the courts keep deciding cases and the company can't print an entire new edition every time a case is decided. There are supplements and pocket parts. We need such a system to keep up with the ever changing doctrines.

    If this keeps up, Jesus will soon be the person Gandhi and Thomas Jefferson admired. He will be one of many good people who taught people things. Jesus as social worker will be the next role He plays. To be fair, a mainstream Bible study discussed the pre-existing scripture and some people screamed that the church covers it up, hoping we will not see it.

  • EdenOne
    EdenOne

    Band on the Run,

    I recall reading that Jews never believed in a resurrection until about one hundred years before Jesus' birth.

    I disagree with you.

    There are three accounts in the old testament of resurrections. One performed bythe prophet Elijah (1 Kings 17:22) ; Another one by the prophet Elisha (2 Kings 4:32-35); And another one of a man who came back to life when he was accidentally thrown into a grave where the bones of prophet Elisha were. (2 Kings 13:21). Granted, these were resurrections back into the earthly realm, but at least the Jews were very familiar with the concept of "resurrection".

    Even the pre-covenant ancient patriarchs held that hope.

    Abraham believed in resurrection. Paul reasoned that was the reason why he was willing to sacrifice Isaac and find it compatible with Jehovah's promise that his "seed" would come through Isaac. "Abraham reasoned that if Isaac died, God was able to bring him back to life again. And in a sense, Abraham did receive his son back from the dead." (Hebrews 11:9)

    However, another patriarch, Job, provides a surprising insight about resurrection, in two Bible passages. The first is well-known to the Witnesses as it is often used. The second one is usually glanced over, but bears a surprise:

    Job 14:13, 14 " Oh that You would hide me in Sheol, That You would conceal me until Your wrath returns to You, That You would set a limit for me and remember me! If a man dies, will he live again? All the days of my struggle I will wait Until my change comes. You will call, and I will answer You; You will long for the work of Your hands."

    Job 19:25, 26 - "For I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last he will stand upon the earth. Even after my skin is destroyed, Yet from my flesh I shall see God; Whom I myself shall behold, And whom my eyes will see and not another."

    The first text is clear in displaying Job's belief in a resurrection. But the second text is surprising in the sense that he believes that upon resurrection he will leave his flesh behind and he will contemplate God in his presence. It appears that Job understood that this was to take place in an heavenly realm. This is something that the GB conveniently glances over.

    Although both pre and post-Law covenant Jews believed in resurrection, they weren't dogmatic about what it consisted of, and instead they focused on living a good, righteous life. However they did belive that the faithful Jews had some hope of a life after death; This is hinted at the expression that faithful men, upon death, were "gathered to their people", as was the case of Abraham (Genesis 25:8), Ishmael (Genesis 25:17), Isaac (Genesis 35:29), Jacob (Genesis 49:33), Moses and Aaron (Deuteronomy 32:50), King Josiah (2 kings 22:20); Conversely, certain sins described in the Law resulted in someone being executed, with the particularity of being "cut off from his people" - which the Jews referred to with the term "kareit", which denotes a "spiritual excision", the loss of his lot in the world to come.

    Daniel was reassured of his future resurrection (Daniel 12:2); Nehemiah believed in a future reward after his death (Nehemiah 5:19).

    The ancient Jewish belief in the "world to come" is expressed by the term OLAM HA-BA. The saducees rejected resurrection because they said it was not in the Torah (Genesis to Deuteronomy); The Pharisees accepted it because they thought it was implied in it.

    Eden

  • *lost*
    *lost*

    Eden

  • EdenOne
    EdenOne

    Bobcat,

    thanks for the references

    Eden

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    So by your reasoning all education people are evil and all ignorant people are saints. Jesus did not think so. He accepted Mary Magdalene's money. Paul's family paid for his education.

    Your facts are incorrect. I won't embarass you by going into detail. There is no reason why people should know such things.

    Read a book. It won't kill you.

    I do have a heart and a soul. Once I was dirt poor then I was wealthy. I am the same person. Travelling through vastly different classes, I don't see education or wealth as evil. There are many poor evil people. My experience taught me that the individual person matters, not their social class or education.

    You sound just like the GB, putting down education. There is nothing wrong with education and sophistication. Nothing. I will agree with you that the central core issue is a person's heart. Next time you need emergency surgery, find an md with no medical training. I know very little about Biblical scholarship. Many people know far more. I respect the people who know more. They are not evil compared to me. When you are sued and all your assets will be lost, go fetch the stupidest lawyer in the world. IN fact, why not a grade school drop-out. Education does not make you better but it is not evil. Jews and Christians believe smarts come from God.

  • EdenOne
    EdenOne

    Band on the Run,

    I fail to see who are you adressing to with your last post and how it relates with the topic. Can you please clarify?

    Thanks

    Eden

  • *lost*
    *lost*

    Band - most people have a very overall negative view of Lawyers too,

    as being rather arrogant, dis-honest blood sucking parasites who think they are better than everyone else, that not all are just and moral stand up fighters for truth, rights and justice.

    ( of course not by any means suggesting that applies to you, just adding it by way of discussion and how peoples views can differ wildly on subjects)

    good for you that your wealthy now though.

  • flamegrilled
    flamegrilled

    Oops. I think this topic derailed

    Eden - I like you points on Job 19 and have wondered about that myself, although the language still sounds as though he expected to see God (in the form of the redeemer) on earth and in the flesh.

    For I know that my Redeemer lives, and at the last he will stand upon the earth.

    [so this meeting would be as a result of the redeemer standing on earth, not Job going to another realm]

    Even after my skin is destroyed,

    [after the first death]

    Yet from my flesh I shall see God

    [so the flesh would have to be restored and the the resurrection earthly]

    King James: And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God

    So to me it sounds like it describes a restoring of the flesh, rather than a transformation to spirit.

    FG

  • Fernando
    Fernando

    What prologos said.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit