by AlanF 26 Replies latest jw friends
Alan,
That is a an enlightening refutation of fundies' points. I have to say, I didn't know any of that.
Java,
Your analogy of building on sand and the waves knocking out the foundation describes my experience. When a jw, I just stopped reading so many items in the news and some books, because they undermined my "faith." Now, I read them all. Have a lot of learning to do.
Patio
I think also that many fundamentalist Christians are not familiar with how the Bible came into being and what its purpose is. The Bible was compiled to demonstrate to Christians what the church believed to be the "norm" of faith. There are tons of Christian written material that was used by the early church but finally around 3 or 4 centuries after Christ the church decided upon those books that are in the New Testament although I believe the Ethopian Coptic Church has some extra books in their canon that most other Christians do not.
The purpose of the Bible is really not to comment on science. It is to demonstrate to the world what Christians believe about God.
Jeff S.
Hi Jeff, it's like the "good old days" having several friends back in one corner of cyber space again.
The purpose of the Bible is really not to comment on science. It is to demonstrate to the world what Christians believe about God.
You are a scientist who teaches at a Christian college, and your comments about the Bible and science are well put. Religion, be it Christian or non-Christian, is built on faith. Religious faith can help people struggle with the God question, why are we here, and what's next. Religious faith is not provable; if something is proven, it's science, not faith.
Many fundamentalist are "not familiar with how the Bible came into being," and they're unfamiliar with science as well. They see science as a threat and put it into the corner of demons. If scripture says it rained 40 days and nights after Noah built a boat to save the world as we know it, the fundamentalist will defend the indefensible at great cost to others of faith. Holy books demonstrate the faith of believers before us. They are not magic, and they certainly are not science. Indeed, science is a different animal than it was a few thousands years ago. Using faulty science to prove the Bible's authority only weakens it's place in Christian faith.
It's great seeing you here, Jeff!
--JAVA counting time at the Coffee Shop
To Jan,
It's certainly true how much ignorance there is in sacred texts. I had no idea that the Quran was explicit in supporting Flat-Earthism. Given that it is supportive of much of the Bible, that's a pretty good bit of evidence that the ancients understood the Bible to support Flat-Earthism. Of course, this apparent support is not conclusive. I find it frustrating that the Bible remains just vague and fuzzy enough that you can't tell for certain what the original writers meant. Perhaps that's a measure of their cleverness, and why the Bible has survived for so long -- it's fuzzy enough that it doesn't really say anything sold about many things.
I'm not at all surprised that Moslem Fundies use excuses similar to those that Christian Fundies use. The mindset is identical.
I don't know that the Bible writers were so ignorant as to think that locusts had four legs. My feeling is that the passage in question is as metaphorical as the passages in Job that the earth has "socket pedestals" (NWT).
I like your observations on the abuses of monotheistic religions. My suspicion is that in the West, such abuses will be tolerated only so long. I'm beginning to look into how to use government power to stop these things in the U.S. I hope that these efforts will spread and stop abuses around the world, but probably they won't.
To Jelly,
Thanks for your comments. I've long understood that lousy arguments make for lousy belivers. Too bad for them, lousy believers don't understand this.
To BadAssociate
Yeah, ShiningOne cut and pasted, as he always does. This time he just used a pile of junk from a typical Fundy source, probably the ICR. He doesn't really understand the material, but because it seems to support his emotional needs, he uses it.
Yes, Fundies are the same the world over, no matter what religion -- braindead and proud of it.
To JAVA
Thanks for the excellent comments. Who are you?
To patio34,
You've found exactly what so many ex-JWs like me have: dig deep into many Watchtower teachings and you find a core of nonsense. I was amazed to find that, without exception, every time I looked carefully into some WTS teaching that "felt funny", there was good reason it felt funny -- the teaching was bullshit.
To Jeff
I wish I could agree with you about the purpose of the Bible but I cannot. I see no more purpose in it than I see in Tolstoy's writing of War and Peace. But I also see no less -- to teach people a certain lesson based on accumulated experience.
There is no question that the Bible contains great literature. Robert Alter, in his several books, has expounded on how great the storytelling is in the Genesis narratives, and with his guidance, I have to agree. But being great literature is not being inspired, any more than Tolstoy was inspired.
AlanF
BADASSOCIATE:
Aren't you itching anymore? Did you use flea powder?
Ozzie (one squirt and they're gone!)
Alan,
Who are you?
I was on the philia list before it became a list serve when the members cc each other. That must have been 5 or 6 years ago. In fact you invited me to the list, there might have been 12 or 18 on it at that time. I was doing grad work then, and just found the Internet--in the days before windows! Norman and friend stopped by our place in Dayton for a day when he was in the States a few months ago.
--JAVA, counting time at the Coffee Shop
Ah! That's going a long way back alright. Please email me and tell me your real name so I can put it all together: [email protected] .
AlanF
Hi Alan-
The Bible is a compilation of books that the church chose as representing the norm of the Christian faith. This was done mostly in response to certain groups that the church viewed as heretical and to discourage individuals from following those individuals' writings. So, the purpose of developing the Bible canon from the view of the church is to demonstrate to individuals in the church at outside of the church what the Christian faith teaches and believes about God according to the tradition that was given to the church from the apostles.
Now, as far as the Bible being "inspired" that is a different issue entirely in many respects. If one does not believe that the individuals who developed the Bible canon were directed by God to do so, then I would not expect that person to believe the Bible is anything other than a compilation of books chosen by men. Also, the typical fundamentalist arguments that supposedly "prove" that the Bible is inspired are extremely weak. The Bible is not a science book and to use science to "prove" the inspiration of the Bible just demonstrates how ignorant these individuals are of science and the history of Christianity.
Jeff S.
Jeff S.
Jeffrey:
There are several Biblical canons depending on which religion or branch of Christianity one looks at:
<quote><i>Roman Catholics include fifteen more books or parts of books, and that is their canon; Greek Orthodox churches use most of these books, and these comprise their canon. The Jewish tradition is that of the Hebrew Bible only, of course, corresponding to the thirty-nine books of the Protestants. East Syrian Christians include fewer books than other Christians in the New Testament, while the Ethiopian churches use quite a few more books in both the Old Testament and New Testament.
The third American President, Thomas Jefferson, questioning the miracles of the New Testament while approving some of Jesus' moral sentiments, produced a thin volume which is called "The Jefferson Bible," edited literally with a razor and paste.[2]
One wonders, what is God's canon?</i></quote>
From an article by Larry A. Taylor here: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/larry_taylor/canon.html#fn1. I find it odd the JWs accept the Protestant canon as adapted from the Roman Catholic and Hebrew versions of the Old and New Testaments (Hebrew and Greek Scriptures) when supposedly apostacy had already infected these Christian churches long before the books to be canonized had been selected. Did not this apostacy affect their choices? Why do they accept the Jewish canon, again solidified after the formation of Christianity, and according to some, in response to the new competing religion? The Jewish canon is not the same as the Septuaguint that Christ would have been familiar with. Has the Watchtower ever looked at all extant Christian texts in an effort to see what "God's Organization" should include in its canon, including those recently discovered Gnostic texts? What about those texts that have been lost because one or another apostate Church didn't deem them sufficiently important to devote scripes to copy them? Does God work through apostates?
Just a few questions I have.
CPiolo
Uh, Jave, you were in our little exclusive cc-philia? Wow! Brings back memories.
Pls send me an email at [email protected] so I can learn your real name. I seem to have misplaced my old mails from that time.
Btw, anyone in touch with JR, the man who took the initiative to Philia back then?
- Jan
--
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"
-- Albert Einstein
