New Worldly Translation

Joined

• started 28 topics
• posted 737 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by New Worldly Translation

• 
  48

  Creation scientist resources

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.creationresearch.org.

  http://www.icr.org.

  http://www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_papers.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  Narkissos - I thought the definition of myth that I had in mind was too rigid after I had posted and thought about it. You're absolutely right that the ancient writers would laugh at some of the attitudes towards scripture we have today. I was just thinking about that point the other day.
  Very interesting about how the legend of Melchizedek was formulated. I'll have to show my father those points as he seems to have an interest in that character.
  The rope analogy was a bit of a non sequitur as I had two thoughts in mind when I was writing. It was more a point about doctrinal, mainstream christians and their ability to take aspects of the bible literally or use scripture as authoritative dogma in light of contemporary science and morals.

  Cheers Narkissos. Thanks for an edifying debate
• 
  48

  Creation scientist resources

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.creationresearch.org.

  http://www.icr.org.

  http://www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_papers.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  The Christian faith rests upon belief in Christ as our saviour and not whether we can interpret every word in the Bible, and I do have faith in Christ

  That's true but it does rely on those scriptures that pertain to Christ and why there was a need for a redeemer.

  I wasn't saying that everything in the bible has to be taken literally and whether the story was real or allegorical it's still seen as an explanation of a tangible aspect of the human condition. Jesus' illustrations were used to explain morals and ethics but the Genesis story, even if allegorical, attempts to explain the first cause of a substantive event. If the story is mythical then what is the real explanation of sin, and how can you be conscious of your spiritual need if you don't have that part of the jigsaw?

  I think I've just realised something from what you said; faith. Faith that Jesus is a redemptive force from a sinful human condition and the details aren't the point. Looking round the world I wouldn't dare argue with that. I think I understand now.
  I think you're right that these type of debates can be a bit pointless but thanks for your explanations and I've learnt a bit more about modern Christian belief from yourself and Narkissos. I think I was a bit harsh in the wording of some of my posts Lovelylil so my apologies, I had a misconception of what you believed.
• 
  57

  Unbelievable comment in Jan 1 2007 WT

  by penny2 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  page 28, paragraph 11 says in part:.

  "it seems that resurrected ones of the 24-elders group may be involved in the communicating of divine truths today.

  " (the 24 elders = "anointed christians in their heavenly positions".).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  Fred Franz is still bossing them about from beyond the grave.
• 
  4

  Betty Butterfield Visits the Kingdom Hall

  by SixofNine in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vr-ib2yviai

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  LOL!

  I wondered how long it would be before Betty sampled JW delights. The part where she connects getting knocked out of bed on a Saturday morning and the magazine being called awake cracked me up
• 
  48

  Creation scientist resources

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.creationresearch.org.

  http://www.icr.org.

  http://www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_papers.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  Thanks for that reply Narkissos. It's very interesting about the role of Genesis in scripture. Maybe I was too influenced by the JW concept of the story. What proof can you supply though that Paul's understanding of Adam as the reason for original sin was mythical in nature. Paul's writings are largely preternatural but I know of no authority that says Paul viewed any of his doctrine as mythical in nature. Semantically why would Paul say 'sin entered into the world through one man', rather than a more general wording. Both statements would have the same sense but one is specifically referencing the Genesis story the other would be a more general concept. Whether Adam was an actual man or the image of all mankind the exegesis of the story is still the same; that man fell into sin and needs a redeemer. I have difficulty fitting this idea with evolutionary biology and the idea that God started it all off knowing it would end with us. There are ramifications for free will if God has perfect precognition of future events and an inevitability for the fall of man. Also if there is no forbidden fruit and expulsion from the garden what did man do that was inherently sinful during the millions of years of evolution?

  It seems from your explanation liberal theology is more a philosophy than anything else. That there is some mystical truth and deep meaning in old texts and that this is constantly revised based on our current understanding. I guess I just have a hard time understanding why you would keep holding on to an ever shortening piece of rope. Although, if I'm understanding correctly, it could mean that christian thinking is actually going full circle and returning to it's ultimate paganistic roots where nature was the principle informant on theology.
• 
  22

  Letters from readers - National Post

  by Toronto_Guy in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  its been a while since i posted here...hope everyone is well.. some in canada may read the national post newspaper...friday they had an editorial entitled "halfway between religion and cult", discussing the blood issue as it relates to the the surviving sextuplets in british columbia, canada.

  i decided to respond, and to my suprise it become the "letter of the day", published in this weekend's edition of the post.

  below is what i wrote.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  Excellent letter Toronto Guy

  It will make a lot of people think. While most people view JW's as largely benign the issue of letting their kids die over the blood issue did cause anger in my experience.
• 
  48

  Creation scientist resources

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.creationresearch.org.

  http://www.icr.org.

  http://www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_papers.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  Lovelylil - Thankyou for that clear and concise explanation. I cannot disagree with anything you wrote, although that's not my understanding of how evolution works I can't discount your viewpoint. I just had another question if that's ok? Do you believe in Christs redemptive factor, and if so why was this needed?
  I wouldn't ask you to reject your belief in God as the creation of the universe is something no-one can answer, so maybe a creator god did make it. The concept of God you put forward though is nowhere to be found in the OT or the NT, so I would ask why you accept the bible, or parts of it, to guide you?
  The NT writers viewed the OT scriptures as literal and this therefore must have influenced their writings. In fact a non-literal viewpoint of scripture wasn't put forward till Augustine in the 4th century. If you accept the NT scriptures you must also accept the writers influences and thought process which was a literal view of scripture.
• 
  48

  Creation scientist resources

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  http://www.creationresearch.org.

  http://www.icr.org.

  http://www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_papers.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  Narkissos - The definition of dogma is a principle taught or advanced for belief, which was the aim of the writers of scripture. Unfortunately the contemporary meaning of the word has taken on a more rigid connotation.
  I think it was very clear in my original post what part of scripture depends on early Genesis. If you take the Adam and Eve story as literal then the whole of scripture depends on it as it recounts how man fell into sin and the later need for a ransom saviour. If you don't take the story in Genesis as fact then you have to invent another story of your own, or somebody else's making, in it's place. It's easy to take bible passages in retrospect but at the time they were viewed as fact and while centuries later much of Judaism viewed them as allegorical, Jewish apocrypha still held to the old view and Christianity and it's writers took their doctrine from the apocrypha. That's why the Jews and the Christians view of what the messianic role was supposed to be was so different. The original point was about evolution and evolution says nothing about the concept of sin, it's purely a biological process and indifferent to any anthropic principles people care to add on to it.

  There is such a thing as liberal Christianity, which welcomes Bible criticism, and it is not as inconsistent as you may think

  Could you expand on that Narkissos and how it isn't inconsistent. I'd appreciate it because it genuinely confuses me. If you take a pick and mix attitude to the bible why pick any of it at all? Is it purely a self serving excercise to pick the bits you like the sound of and leave out the rest? You're using your own contemporary criteria for choosing your moral and ethical code. If their was anything genuinely original in OT or NT writings about moral philosophy or ethics there could be some argument for this, but there isn't.

  Lovelil - I never mentioned anything about the age of the Earth and you've dodged the question. The question was how you reconcile belief in evolution with religious belief?

  Onacruse - Thanks for the grammatical correction. I knew that sentence didn't sound quite right but I couldn't think how to rearrange the words to sound better.
• 
  2

  Just finished a great book

  by New Worldly Translation in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  i've just finished the prince of the marshes by rory stewart.

  it's an account of his time as deputy governer of provinces in iraq and his disillusionment with the direction of the coalition and their misunderstanding of the middle east.

  he's one of the few western writers who gives an honest and knowledgable account and opinon of what's going on and he manages to do it without seeming judgemental to either side.. for people not interested in politics his book the places in between is one of the best travel accounts i've read.

  1. 
  2. 
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  I've just finished the Prince of the Marshes by Rory Stewart. It's an account of his time as deputy governer of provinces in Iraq and his disillusionment with the direction of the coalition and their misunderstanding of the middle east. He's one of the few western writers who gives an honest and knowledgable account and opinon of what's going on and he manages to do it without seeming judgemental to either side.

  For people not interested in politics his book The Places In Between is one of the best travel accounts I've read. It traces the authors trek on foot across Afghanistan, which was part of a larger 6000 mile journey on foot that he made. It's a perfect little gem of a book and funny too. Made me realise how little we know about that country, and also how little Afghanis know about what's going on in the country due to their remoteness and disparate nature.

  http://www.rorystewartbooks.com/index.htm
• 
  36

  100 things to do before you die

  by fifi40 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  what would you put on the list, here is a starter.

  1. arrive late in the evening to venice's st marks square (this has to be your first visit).

  2. be present at the birth of a child.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  New Worldly Translation

  9. Call a doctor