jgnat It is hard to believe that a God who created us can not intervene due to weakness. Indeed, those who are atheists have good arguments for their position. Of course, I prefer other hypothesis, but we end up always in spectulations . This is why people like the Witnesses are very scared about "independent thinking", because they would discover that all their prepared "answers" to explain God and life are weak, so they would be like us, knowing nothing about the afterlife (if even there is one).
opusdei1972
JoinedPosts by opusdei1972
-
64
What christians don't want to admit
by opusdei1972 inwhen i left the wt organization, i continued to believe in the bible, so i wanted to confirm and refine, as much as possible, my faith that the true god is in the bible.
so i began to discuss with skilled christians, who were also ex-witnesses.
but i was surprised when some of them tried to relax my fundamentalist position on the literalness of the genesis account.
-
-
-
64
What christians don't want to admit
by opusdei1972 inwhen i left the wt organization, i continued to believe in the bible, so i wanted to confirm and refine, as much as possible, my faith that the true god is in the bible.
so i began to discuss with skilled christians, who were also ex-witnesses.
but i was surprised when some of them tried to relax my fundamentalist position on the literalness of the genesis account.
-
-
opusdei1972
jgnat --The bible isn't God. This is where those who insist on an inerrant bible to bolster their faith in God get in trouble. Prove the bible fallible, and down goes God, too.
I agree with you: The errancy of the Bible does not prove that God does not exist, it only proves that God is not responsible for what is written there.
However, there are other arguments in which atheists base their disbelief. And I see that I can't give an answer. For instance, if God created us to enjoy this world, why does He permit biological illness? Why does he permit that a natural disaster can destroy an entire population in a region? So, if God created us, it seems clear that He is not worried about our fleshy life.....So, Does he want our worship?...It seems that He is absent in many aspects.
-
64
What christians don't want to admit
by opusdei1972 inwhen i left the wt organization, i continued to believe in the bible, so i wanted to confirm and refine, as much as possible, my faith that the true god is in the bible.
so i began to discuss with skilled christians, who were also ex-witnesses.
but i was surprised when some of them tried to relax my fundamentalist position on the literalness of the genesis account.
-
-
opusdei1972
Hi James Brown:
The Watchtower Society quoted the scientist R.H. Brown, who is/was an Adventist (may be he is dead) of the Adventist Andrews University , to defend the 6000 years of human creation. I was reading some articles published by R. H. Brown, and I found one in which he commented about the book entitled "THE AGE OF THE EARTH", whose author is G. Brent Dalrymple. Let us read what Brown said:
Dalrymple makes a good case for an age of about 4.5 billion years for the material of which the earth, moon, and meteorites are composed. He evidently believes that he has thoroughly discredited special creationism. His treatment in The Age of the Earth has made it much more difficult to plausibly explain radiometric data on the basis of a creation of the entire Solar System, or the physical matter in planet Earth, within the last few thousand years. In my opinion, the defense of such a position is a losing battle. (Origins 19(2):87-90 (1992).)
Note that Brown, an Adventist, had to admit that the defense of a 6 literal days of creation is "a losing battle". But, what was Brown's argument in favor to 6000 years of man existence?.....Brown said that the Flood changed the concentration of carbon-14 in carbon-12, because before the Flood there was much more carbon-12 on account of the great number of animals in the planet. Accordingly, Brown said that the carbon-14 technique could not give the right dates for fossils before the Flood. However, the global Flood did not happen, so Brown used a false assumption to discredit the radiocarbon dates.
-
64
What christians don't want to admit
by opusdei1972 inwhen i left the wt organization, i continued to believe in the bible, so i wanted to confirm and refine, as much as possible, my faith that the true god is in the bible.
so i began to discuss with skilled christians, who were also ex-witnesses.
but i was surprised when some of them tried to relax my fundamentalist position on the literalness of the genesis account.
-
-
opusdei1972
James Brown: "If there is scientific proof that Adam was not the first man,..."
The scientific proof is based on radiometric dating, dendrochronology (to calibrate radiocarbon technique) and ADN arguments. Modern men were here in this planet 50 000 years ago at least, and if you regard Neanderthals as men, they are much older.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1009371/Neanderthals-the-Latest-News-Year-In-Review-2004
But the Bible says Adam was created 6000 years ago. If there were men before Adam, Adam was not the father of all men. Also, the American man came to America more than 15000 years ago.
-
64
What christians don't want to admit
by opusdei1972 inwhen i left the wt organization, i continued to believe in the bible, so i wanted to confirm and refine, as much as possible, my faith that the true god is in the bible.
so i began to discuss with skilled christians, who were also ex-witnesses.
but i was surprised when some of them tried to relax my fundamentalist position on the literalness of the genesis account.
-
-
opusdei1972
This behavior surprised God; and he asked what was the cause of this his procedure; and why he, that before delighted in that conversation, did now fly from it, and avoid it. When he made no reply, as conscious to himself that he had transgressed the command of God, God said, "I had before determined about you both, how you might lead a happy life, without any affliction, and care, and vexation of soul; and that all things which might contribute to your enjoyment and pleasure should grow up by my providence, of their own accord, without your own labor and pains-taking; which state of labor and pains-taking would soon bring on old age, and death would not be at any remote distance: but now thou hast abused this my good-will, and hast disobeyed my commands; for thy silence is not the sign of thy virtue, but of thy evil conscience." However, Adam excused his sin, and entreated God not to be angry at him, and laid the blame of what was done upon his wife; and said that he was deceived by her, and thence became an offender; while she again accused the serpent. But God allotted him punishment, because he weakly submitted to the counsel of his wife; and said the ground should not henceforth yield its fruits of its own accord, but that when it should be harassed by their labor, it should bring forth some of its fruits, and refuse to bring forth others. He also made Eve liable to the inconveniency of breeding, and the sharp pains of bringing forth children; and this because she persuaded Adam with the same arguments wherewith the serpent had persuaded her, and had thereby brought him into a calamitous condition. He also deprived the serpent of speech, out of indignation at his malicious disposition towards Adam. Besides this, he inserted poison under his tongue, and made him an enemy to men; and suggested to them, that they should direct their strokes against his head, that being the place wherein lay his mischievous designs towards men, and it being easiest to take vengeance on him, that way. And when he had deprived him of the use of his feet, he made him to go rolling all along, and dragging himself upon the ground. And when God had appointed these penalties for them, he removed Adam and Eve out of the garden into another place. (THE ANTIQUITIES OF THE JEWS, book I)
From the above words of Josephus we may know that Pharisees of the first century believed that Adam was a literal person. So, Paul had to believe it, as shown in his letters.
-
64
What christians don't want to admit
by opusdei1972 inwhen i left the wt organization, i continued to believe in the bible, so i wanted to confirm and refine, as much as possible, my faith that the true god is in the bible.
so i began to discuss with skilled christians, who were also ex-witnesses.
but i was surprised when some of them tried to relax my fundamentalist position on the literalness of the genesis account.
-
-
opusdei1972
The same happened with Adam, before the scientific proofs against his existence, the churches said that he was a literal man, but now their best scholars say : "no, he is the symbol of human being". The same happened with the parouxia, Jesus said it would happen in his generation, but this prophecy failed, then the preterists say now that he truly came back in 70 AD, but invisible. Also, we currently know that the global flood was imposible in 2300 BCE, so christian scholars now have to say that it was local or we must take it as an allegory. Therefore, what I see is that we must allegorize everything to save the Bible.
-
64
What christians don't want to admit
by opusdei1972 inwhen i left the wt organization, i continued to believe in the bible, so i wanted to confirm and refine, as much as possible, my faith that the true god is in the bible.
so i began to discuss with skilled christians, who were also ex-witnesses.
but i was surprised when some of them tried to relax my fundamentalist position on the literalness of the genesis account.
-
-
opusdei1972
I should not call those christians who believe that Adam and Eve existed as fundamentalist, because they are simply believing in what the Genesis account says, and in what Paul also read therefrom. Nothing else!.
This is why I insist in this: If they did not exist, the doctrine of original sin is a lie, and we die because it is our mortal nature, so we don't need Jesus.
-
64
What christians don't want to admit
by opusdei1972 inwhen i left the wt organization, i continued to believe in the bible, so i wanted to confirm and refine, as much as possible, my faith that the true god is in the bible.
so i began to discuss with skilled christians, who were also ex-witnesses.
but i was surprised when some of them tried to relax my fundamentalist position on the literalness of the genesis account.
-
-
opusdei1972
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. (John 3:18)
So, if this were true, it means that an inocent muslim, who born in "the wrong" country, will be burned in hell, at worse, or will not resurrect at best.
-
64
What christians don't want to admit
by opusdei1972 inwhen i left the wt organization, i continued to believe in the bible, so i wanted to confirm and refine, as much as possible, my faith that the true god is in the bible.
so i began to discuss with skilled christians, who were also ex-witnesses.
but i was surprised when some of them tried to relax my fundamentalist position on the literalness of the genesis account.
-
-
opusdei1972
jgnat: I think Jesus died for his beliefs and thereby inspired a world-spanning religion.
I think so, I respect Jesus because I believe he died for his beliefs, but I think his followers did not respect him when they wrote many words that he did not say.
-
64
What christians don't want to admit
by opusdei1972 inwhen i left the wt organization, i continued to believe in the bible, so i wanted to confirm and refine, as much as possible, my faith that the true god is in the bible.
so i began to discuss with skilled christians, who were also ex-witnesses.
but i was surprised when some of them tried to relax my fundamentalist position on the literalness of the genesis account.
-
-
opusdei1972
jgnat....well, Evangelicals, such as I know them here in Brazil and from webpages, believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. ...But I thought you were not a christian, due to some comments I read from you. May be I misunderstood you.