Fables, Farces and Facts (page 6)

pseudoxristos

jst2laws,

WHO SAYS IT IS WHOLE, ENTIRE, FLAWLESS IN THE FIRST PLACE? GOD? NOT A CHANCE!
?
What is important is not who wrote what, who authorized the writing or was it inerrant and unquestionably the word of God. What is important is WHAT HAPPENED BACK THEN, and what generally does it mean.

So, how do we really know WHAT HAPPENED BACK THEN, if the Bible is not WHOLE, ENTIRE and FLAWLESS?

yeudo

"Religion is what the common people see as true, the wise people see as false, and the rulers see as useful."
-Roman philosopher Seneca-

ros

So, how do we really know WHAT HAPPENED BACK THEN, if the Bible is not WHOLE, ENTIRE and FLAWLESS

Why from history and anthropology books that are whole, entire and flawless, of course.

~Ros

jayhawk1

Okay, I guess I deserve that. Allow me to re-ask the question:

If I remember correctly the Earth rotates at roughly 1000 miles per hour, so if the Earth was stopped from rotating for 1 day, wouldn't all creation ON EARTH be thrown to the East at 1000 miles per hour? (See Newton's laws for gravity/motion.)

StinkyPantz

Jayhawk-

Good point. I can't wait for a Bible-believer's answer. Although, it might be something like: God kept everything held down because he can do anything. Gotta love that logic.

jayhawk1

I just thought of something else.

I asked this question once while out in service and this was the answer the car group decided on. Since stopping the Earth would destroy all life on it, and the Sun clearly does not revolve around the Earth, so how did Jehovah make the "Sun stand still." Although not supported by the Bible or Watchtower, the car group decided... DRUM ROLL PLEASE...

PERHAPS THERE WAS A GIANT MIRROR IN THE SKY, OR SOME SORT OF COMET THAT REFLECTED THE LIGHT FROM THE SUN TO THE BATTLE.

Ah yes, that's it! Mystery solved!

pseudoxristos

ros,

Why from history and anthropology books that are whole, entire and flawless, of course.

Well, I don't usually lead my entire life base upon what is written in those history and anthropology books that are whole entire and flawless.

If my eternal existence were based upon a history book, I would examine it very carefully.

yeudo

"It is only the wisest and the stupidest that cannot change."

-- Confucius (c. 551-479? BC), Chinese sage

wasasister

So to answer Wasasister's question from my perspective, the legitimacy of Jesus Christ does not rely on the veracity of a whole, entire, flawless, scribe-Catholic-compiled biblical record. Not imo. If we refused to believe anything that is even occasionally in error (e.g., newspapers, magaines, history books, science books, evolution books, the bible, etc. etc.) then we would be without anything to believe except our own personal observation of nature? Quite limited

First of all, Ros, thank you for your typical, reasoned response. May I further inquire: If the record of Jesus Christ does not depend on what is written in Bible Cannon, upon what does it rely? What, if any, extra-Biblical documentation exists to coorborate the life, quotations, and teachings of Jesus Ben-Joseph?

I do not demand flawless accuracy of the Bible for belief in the Divine nature of Christ....But in order to put faith in Jesus as the Son of God, I must at least believe the Bible to be a fairly accurate record of events.

My question about Mary's faith pertains to a scripture I cannot locate at present, but remember vividly from studying the Greatest Man book: somewhere in Mark, an incident is recounted wherein Jesus' mother and siblings gather outside a house in which he is teaching. They beseach the crowds to deliver their brother/son to them so they can take him home. The implication is that the is mentally imapaired.

Ros: yes, I acknowledge that mothers often underestimate their children. However, few of us have ever had conversations with angels regarding our pregnancies, nor have any of us experienced Divinely Instigated Virgin Births. I don't know about you, but if I had become pregnant without intercourse, I would not quickly forget the event, nor would I tend to dismiss the fruit of my womb. I also would have informed my other children of Big Brother's special nature.

Wasa

jayhawk1

Wasa, you are probably talking about Greatest Man chapters 42 or 48. Mark 3:31-35 or Mark 6:1-4. It is assumed that Mary and his Half-Brothers are not quite convinced by the way Mark 3 reads. Just trying to help, but I prefer staying out of this one.

rocketman

Fascinating thread......I liked Farkel's description of the Samson story. I always did wonder how the Philistines dropped the ball on that one.

Farkel

ros,

Thanks at least for bringing some balance into this crazy thread!

You said:

"To put it in perspective, most mothers don't fully understand their sons and their lives; so why should Jesus' mother be so different (unless you accept the religious pious perspective of everything in the bible record of course)? "

If an angel of God himself came to you and your husband (one Gospel said the angel came to Mary, another said the angel came to Joseph) an angel of GOD, mind you and said you would conceive while still a virgin and then give birth to a man who would "save the people from their sins," and you thus conceived, WHAT MORE EVIDENCE WOULD YOU NEED? :)

After THAT event, if Mary who herself wanted wanted to be saved from her sins was still skeptical (as the Bible implies), she must have been every bit as dense Eve and those Philistine morons who were so stupid they "forgot" to cut Sampson's hair!

Farkel

Fables, Farces and Facts

Share this