Posts by opusdei1972

63

Where was the dead body of Jesus? Did the disciples disappear it?

by opusdei1972 in

i am currently an skeptic, but i have to admit that i can't assure that all the stuff of early christianity was false.. for instance, we know that the genuine letters of paul were written before the destruction of jerusalem.

so, paul affirmed that jesus resurrected, though he was not there when it supposedly happened.

but, if jesus did not resurrect, why didn't the jews expose this falsehood?.

opusdei1972

As Bart Ehrman pointed out, the existence of Jesus must be historical....but the christian argument is that his body disappeared. So, if this was an argument used before 70 AD, it could get many followers. I am tried to understand it.

63

Where was the dead body of Jesus? Did the disciples disappear it?

by opusdei1972 in

i am currently an skeptic, but i have to admit that i can't assure that all the stuff of early christianity was false.. for instance, we know that the genuine letters of paul were written before the destruction of jerusalem.

so, paul affirmed that jesus resurrected, though he was not there when it supposedly happened.

but, if jesus did not resurrect, why didn't the jews expose this falsehood?.

opusdei1972

I am currently an skeptic, but I have to admit that I can't assure that all the stuff of early christianity was false.

For instance, we know that the genuine letters of Paul were written before the destruction of Jerusalem. So, Paul affirmed that Jesus resurrected, though he was not there when it supposedly happened. But, if Jesus did not resurrect, why didn't the Jews expose this falsehood?. Of course, after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, it was very difficult to know for sure where the tomb was. However, in Paul's time, the Jews could expose it. Unless the disciples of Jesus disappeared the body, but it would be a big dishonesty.

Any thoughts?

104

If you don't believe in God, Jesus, and everything in the Bible, you are willfully ignorant.

by defender of truth in

ablebodiedman posted~ 10 mins ago (8/16/2014).

post 741 of 741. .

"i absolutely 100% believe in god, jesus christ and everything recorded in the bible.. the reason why is because of the overwhelming amount of evidence.. there is so much evidence that it has taken me years to examine what has cemented my own convictions.".

opusdei1972

BackseatDevil The problem emerges when religious organizations like the Watchtower use the tales of the Old Testament, to justify mind control over thousands of people.

104

If you don't believe in God, Jesus, and everything in the Bible, you are willfully ignorant.

by defender of truth in

ablebodiedman posted~ 10 mins ago (8/16/2014).

post 741 of 741. .

"i absolutely 100% believe in god, jesus christ and everything recorded in the bible.. the reason why is because of the overwhelming amount of evidence.. there is so much evidence that it has taken me years to examine what has cemented my own convictions.".

opusdei1972

I think he is the ignorant. Many of the Bible prophecies are false. But, about the histories of Genesis and Exodus we have many absurdities.

According to the Bible, Adam was created no more 6100 years ago. How could we have human fossils that are many thousand of years before "creation" of Adam and Eve?. All the geological and paleontological evidence PROVES beyond the slightest scintilla of a doubt that THERE WAS A WORLD BEFORE ADAM. Most of the dating techniques of scientists -- uranium-argon, potassium-thorium, racemization and thermaluminescence -- as well as observation and logic conclusively show that the rocks under our feet, the bones of ancient animals, and even the charcoal campfires of Paleo-Indians, Neanderthal man, and other ancient hominid remains, are MUCH OLDER than 6,000 years.

How could we get, from couples of animals coming from the mountains of Ararat, the great current diversity of species in the Amazon Jungle ? The two flood-surviving members of each species don’t provide enough genetic variation to guarantee their futuristic representation in the ecosphere. More specifically, diseases and genetic defects had a great chance of pushing them into extinction due to the lack of essential variety at the molecular level.

There is no evidence that the events described in Exodus ever happened. As the archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman noted:

[W]e have no clue, not even a single word, about the early Israelites in Egypt: neither in monumental inscriptions on the walls of temples, nor in tomb inscriptions, nor in papyri. Israel is absent – as a possible foe of Egypt, as a friend, or as an enslaved nation

Most historians today agree that at best, the stay in Egypt and the Exodus occurred in a few families and that their private story was expanded and “nationalized” to fit the needs of theological ideology.

Israeli archaeologist Ze’ev Herzog, provides the current consensus view on the historicity of the Exodus:

The Israelites never were in Egypt. They never came from abroad. This whole chain is broken. It is not a historical one. It is a later legendary reconstruction – made in the seventh century [BCE] – of a history that never happened.

68

Outrageous propaganda. "Treat your disfellowshipped loved ones like they're dead, but without mourning them." NOV 2014 study Watchtower

by Watchtower-Free in

.

opusdei1972

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. (Richard Dawkins)

In the past I thought the above words were blasphemous, but now I know they are actualy true. Note how the Watchtower Society justifies its hard line by using the Old Testament.

25

Watchtower November 2014: Witnesses can't donate blood

by opusdei1972 in

let us read a recent watchtower publication:.

many medical professionals and other advocates of blood transfusion appeal to people to donate blood in hopes of saving lives.

however, jehovahs holy people acknowledge that the creator has the right to say how blood is to be treated.

opusdei1972

BU2B For instance, albumin is a fraction taken from Plasma. Plasma is one of the four components forbidden by the GB. But, the Governing Body allows the use of albumin. To get albumin you need blood donors. Furthermore, albumin is used to produce erythropoietin, which is used by Witnesses:

Questions From Readers

Would it be proper to accept a vaccination or some other medical injection containing albumin derived from human blood?

Frankly, each Christian must personally decide on this................Many find this noteworthy, since some vaccines that are not prepared from blood may contain a relatively small amount of plasma albumin that was used or added to stabilize the ingredients in the preparation. Currently a small amount of albumin is also used in injections of the synthetic hormone EPO (erythropoietin). Some Witnesses have accepted injections of EPO because it can hasten red blood cell production and so may relieve a physician of a feeling that a blood transfusion might be needed. (The Watchtower 10/1/1994, p. 31)

Note that though a small amount of albumin is used in EPO, you need many donors to produce it. In a private letter, the Governing Body has admitted the following:

...it is our understanding in many situations that blood from many donors would be needed to get sufficient amount of a required fraction for treatment......therefore, a Christian would carefully evaluate this possibility in determining whether to submit to having a minor fraction extracted from his blood (quoted from http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com.br/2012/03/jehovahs-witnesses-can-donate-blood.html )

So, though Witnesses are forbidden to donate blood, they can use fractions taken from many donors. A double Standard theology.

25

Watchtower November 2014: Witnesses can't donate blood

by opusdei1972 in

let us read a recent watchtower publication:.

many medical professionals and other advocates of blood transfusion appeal to people to donate blood in hopes of saving lives.

however, jehovahs holy people acknowledge that the creator has the right to say how blood is to be treated.

opusdei1972

The GB says that "any sort of blood" is sacred, but how can they prove that a red cell is still blood and albumin is not?. We know that Witnesses are permitted to use albumin, which is in Plasma.

25

Watchtower November 2014: Witnesses can't donate blood

by opusdei1972 in

let us read a recent watchtower publication:.

many medical professionals and other advocates of blood transfusion appeal to people to donate blood in hopes of saving lives.

however, jehovahs holy people acknowledge that the creator has the right to say how blood is to be treated.

opusdei1972

Let us read a recent Watchtower publication:

Many medical professionals and other advocates of blood transfusion appeal to people to donate blood in hopes of saving lives. However, Jehovah’s holy people acknowledge that the Creator has the right to say how blood is to be treated. To him, “any sort of blood” is sacred. We must be determined to obey his law on blood. By our holy conduct, we prove to him that we deeply appreciate the lifesaving power of Jesus’ blood —the only blood that makes possible the forgiveness of sin and everlasting life.—John 3:16. (The Watchtower November 2014, Study Edition, article: "Why We Must Be Holy", paragraph 15)

So, it is clear that the Governing Body is taking a firm position on the blood ban again. However, if "any sort of blood" is sacred, how can the governing body let Witnesses to accept blood fractions of "the four primary components" coming from donors who are not Witnesses?. But by the above words the governing body is suggesting that it is better to reject all blood. Now note the contradiction by reading a past publication:

Jehovah’s Witnesses hold that accepting whole blood or any of those four primary components violates God’s law....... However, since blood can be processed beyond those primary components, questions arise about fractions derived from the primary blood components......when it comes to fractions of any of the primary components, each Christian, after careful and prayerful meditation, must conscientiously decide for himself. (Question From Readers , w04 6/15 pp. 29-31 )

8

Early christians : Were they chosen ?, if so, what about those who were not?

by opusdei1972 in

it is a hard task to understand what christ and early christians had in mind.

but i noted that in the gospels appears the word "elect" (greek eklektos).

it seems that early christians thought that they were chosen by god.

opusdei1972

It is a hard task to understand what Christ and early christians had in mind. But I noted that in the Gospels appears the word "elect" (greek eklektos). It seems that early christians thought that they were chosen by God. But if they thought that they were chosen, it means that not all people had the same opportunity to gain salvation. So, early christian thought they were in a vip club. For instance:

if you continue in your faith, established and firm, and do not move from the hope held out in the gospel. This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant. (Col 1:23)

Were not indians in the American Continent (Mexico, Peru, north america)?...what about chinese people ? So it seems that Paul thought that the END was very close and the earth was flat, in which only Europe, Asia and Africa existed. Note that only 1400 years later, american indians knew about Jesus and were forced to believe in the Catholic Faith. Furthermore, a later addition in Mark said:

Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. (Mark 16:16)

If I believe, this means that I choose to believe and not that I have been chosen. Worse, if I don't believe, I will be condemned. So, those american indians who rejected the Spanish Catholic priests who forced them with guns to believe in Jesus, will be condemned.

On the other hand, suppose that Mark told us accurately what Christ said in chaper 13. So, we have this statement:

And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days. (Mark 13:20)

This statement makes sense only if you want to save the flesh of the elect on earth. However, Paul said that the elect will meet Jesus in the air and so they always be (2 Th. 4:17).

For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect. (Mark 13:22)

So, if the elect can be seduced by signs and wonders, why God permits false prophets to do those great miracles?

And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven. (Mark 13:27)

I can hardly understand it. But may be it means that the elect will be taken from the earth to be led to heaven, but it contradicts verse 20.

WHAT A MESS !!!

26

E-Watchman? Thoughts?

by thedepressedsoul in

i stumbled upon the website e-watchman today and while i didn't have time to read over everything i found this thoughts so far quite interesting.

recently when reading matthew i can't help but feel that jesus warnings about the pharisees also applied to the gb and elders.

actually everytime jesus brought them up i realized how similar they are.

opusdei1972

In doing so he has insinuated that he is Ezekiel, Jah's modern day watchman.

But...Ezekiel was a false prophet....so by this way Robert King is following Ezekiel's steps.