The Inherent Goodness Fallacy

by comforter 68 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  comforter

  HS

  ???Back to Psalm 58:3. Please note that this Psalm does not use the term sinful but the word wicked ( perverts NWT ) to describe those behaving this way since birth. That is why I suggested you research ancient Hebrew society and grammar a little more carefully, as it is I am quite sure by your response, that if you have Gesenius on your shelf it is still sitting mylar wrapped and unopened.???

  The verse does not have to use the term sinful. My argument says the word wicked may mean sinful in this context. It certainly can mean this in the Christian Greek bible. The Jews associated being wicked with a number of things. That seem to be the point you miss.

  And Comforter does not know what good Gesenius' grammar will do in this case. Do you mean Gesenius' lexicon instead?

  And for a definition of good and bad, scroll up the page. I provided one to larc.

  larc

  I believe the bible is infallible and inerrant. Mass destruction is a good thing when those killed are destroyed by a divine command and when those annihilated do not deserve to live anyway because of their wicked actions.
• 

  SYN

  Christians do no such thing. Drunks, homosexuals, fornicators, greedy persons, revilers or adulterers will not inherit God's kingdom

  Check, check, check....GEE, I guess I won't be spending Eternity on one planet with a bunch of uptight brickwall-style Dubs after all! EXCELLENT!
• 

  hillary_step

  Comforter,

  The verse does not have to use the term sinful. My argument says the word wicked may mean sinful in this context. It certainly can mean this in the Christian Greek bible. The Jews associated being wicked with a number of things. That seem to be the point you miss.

  The Hebrew word used here for 'wicked' is not even close to the one used for 'sinful', nor is its context, that is why I went to the trouble of showing you its tight rendition in a number of transaltions, and that is why the NWT translates it as 'pervert', a much stronger sense than 'sinful'.

  And Comforter does not know what good Gesenius' grammar will do in this case. Do you mean Gesenius' lexicon instead?

  No I do not, I mean 'Gesenius' Hebrew GRAMMAR' pub. Clarendon Press. What good it will do is that the usages and meaning of the Hebrew word for 'wicked' are explained. What is more important than your personal 'argument' about Psalm 58:3, is surely what the Psalmist himself meant. He did not mean what you are 'arguing' that he did, and it is not a huge problem to research the language and see your error.

  Best - HS

  Edited by - hillary_step on 15 July 2002 11:37:55

  Edited by - hillary_step on 15 July 2002 11:42:41
• 

  comforter

  HS

  I did not say that the Hebrew rendered wicked is the one for sinful. You are getting Sinn und Bedeutung mixed up, sir. While you might be right about the Hebrew word when it comes to der Sinn, I think you fail to understand the Bedeutung of the word. You also overlook the fact that a theological second-level "unpacking" of das Wort may expand upon and amplify die Bedeutung. You are myopic on this point.

  The psalmist did believe that men are sinful from conception and immersed in error from the womb. Instead of crowing about what Gesenius says, let us see some proof from you that contained in the source itself. What exactly are Gesenius' comments on this passage? Are you a Hebrew expert?

  Comforter
• 

  hillary_step

  The psalmist did believe that men are sinful from conception and immersed in error from the womb

  The point which you have consistently missed to the point where I believe it is deliberate, is that the Hebrew word for 'sinful' and 'wicked' are totally different both in meaning and grammatical use. In Psalm 58:3 as you noted yourself, the Hebrew 'sinful' is not being used, yet you ascribe the Psalmist as having meant 'sinful'. What are you playing at?

  HS
• 

  Crazy151drinker

  I was going to read all of this drivel until I spotted this in the first paragraph:

  "Comforter is not saying that people are totally depraved. "

  Please do not refer to yourself in the 3rd person, you are not God.
• 

  SpiceItUp

  But all humans are inclined toward evil because of Adam and Eve. Therefore I do not trust this world and the bad advice that worldly counselors often give. It is simply wrong to believe that we just have to accept people as they are, warts and all, when it comes to morals.

  With that statement conforter I have a question for you.....

  If ALL humans are inclined toward evil then wouldn't the ALL part include any founders/members of the Jehovah Witnesses as well? And since obviously they are included (unless they aren't human...lol) how can you TRUST them to tell you what you should do or believe in?

  Please answer if you can!

  Spice
• 

  comforter

  ???The point which you have consistently missed to the point where I believe it is deliberate, is that the Hebrew word for 'sinful' and 'wicked' are totally different both in meaning and grammatical use.???

  Sinn = sense. Bedeutung = referent. Then a third aspect to this issue is the second-level theological abstraction formulated from the data being prescinded from, sir. What you fail to see is that a word can have a Sinn which differs from the Bedeutung (which is not a grammatical use, as you say) and the unpacked amplification or theological expansion on the word. If you knew anything about systematic theology, you would grasp the sense of what was just said, with alacrity. Since you do not, you don't. By the way, my use of Bedeutung is consistent with the Fregean spin on the word in 'ber Sinn und Bedeutung' of 1892.

  ???In Psalm 58:3 as you noted yourself, the Hebrew 'sinful' is not being used, yet you ascribe the Psalmist as having meant 'sinful'. What are you playing at???

  Let me give you a theological example. Theologians will define OT concept of sin as a breach of the covenant.

  They are not saying that the Hebrew word for sin MEANS a breach of the covenant. Only that a second-level abstraction of the semantic data leads one to conclude that sin = breach of Berit. Now do you got it?

  Edited by - comforter on 15 July 2002 14:19:3
• 

  comforter

  Dear crazy

  Jesus referred to himself in the third person and he is not God.

  Spice

  If you go back to earlier posts, you see that I said all humans are inclined to be evil. That includes me, governing body and you. So I know governing body or the founders of jw not perfect. But using your reasoning, I would not trust my sweet mama, myself, my papa or anybody else to provide good guidance. What I do is compare what governing body say to what Bible say and go from there.

  Edited by - comforter on 15 July 2002 14:24:52
• 

  SpiceItUp

  But using your reasoning, I would not trust my sweet mama, myself, my papa or anybody else to provide good guidance.

  Guess what I don't trust anybody...I'm about as paranoid as they come. After all when your parents, religion, and everybody else lets you down why should you trust them or even yourself for initially trusting them.

  As for the good guidance Im sooo glad that the governing body gave my father permission to beat me...Oh what Christian love and guidance that is!

  Spice