Posts by Nate Merit

12

New Fun Game! "Name that Watchtower Book"!

by Nathan Natas in

here's how it works: i post an unaltered exerpt from a watchtower publication, and you tell me the title of the book.. sounds like fun?.

you bet!.

here's your first stumper:suppose a farmer owned a sheep that had been bad, and was condemned to die.

Nate Merit

Hi VM44! This is for you because we asked the same sorts of questions.

13

ONCE MORE for STEV and others who espouse historical-grammatical method

by Nate Merit in

use that brain of yours stev.

they didnt interpret the bible that way stev.

"i think those are good questions to ask no matter what book is being read.".

Hello Stev

You wrote:

"I am not able to address how the NT writers use the OT. There are books by authors who are expert in this field, which I am not."

It's not a matter of inability Stev, it's your unwillingness to face the simple fact that THE APOSTLES DO NOT USE THE HISTORICAL-GRAMMATICAL METHOD. You must be used to people who can't debate. You're begging the entire question. Fundamentalists continually tell me the historical-grammatical sense of Scripture is The Method, but they are assuming the very thing that is to be proved!

Surely, if the h-g method of interpretation is the correct one, we would expect Jesus to use it? Alas for fundies, he never ONCE used ANY Scripture according to its actual context. Study your Bible for a change and see for yourself. There's no reason to take my word for it. Use that brain of yours Stev. The apostles do not use this method either. Again, STUDY your bible, STUDY TO SHOW THYSELF APPROVED UNTO GOD, A WORKMAN THAT NEEDETH NOT TO BE ASHAMED, RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH.

Do you need a list of OT quotations in the NT? I can supply you with one and you can do some study. Or you can move your fingers around, get some exercise, and do a Google search yourself. Perhaps once you've done so you and I can have an intelligent discussion. Until then, its all going to roll downhill. I have posted elsewhere on this same topic. You might want to read that as well. I can't keep reinventing the wheel for fundiots who ignore their own bible and keep asking the same questions and making the same statements ovver and over and over and over and over and over and over. Here's the facts Stev my man! Jesus never used the h-g method. The Apostles didn't use the h-g method. The early church didn't use the h-g method. That's the facts pal. Donlt be dancing the fundy shuffle with me. I eat fundiots for breakfast and crap em out while i have a smoke! I have already posted in great detail on these matters, matters you're ignorant of, yet you want me to take you seriously. No way Stev

Also, when you insult the allegorical method and parade the h-g method, you are AGAIN taking it for granted that the h-g method is correct, when in fact Jesus, the Apostles, and the early church didn't use that method. THEY DIDNT INTERPRET THE BIBLE THAT WAY STEV. Stev, I cant educate you. You have to do that yourself, okay?

You are ASSUMING the bible is actual history, rather than Myths! You are ASSUMING that ancient people wrote with modern day notions of history and science. If you had a wider knowledge of ancient literature you would understand the ancients had different priorities and different assumptions and a different worldview. Yet fundies in their ignorance read their own unquestioned modern day assumptions into documents thousands of years old!

What arrogance fundies have! Fundamentalists are monumentally ignorant, so ignorant they don't even have a notion of their own ignorance. They take as givens the very assumptions by which they operate. They never question even their basic assumptions. Fundie "learning" about the Bible all takes place within the franmework of your UNQUESTIONED ASSUMPTIONS! In other words, IN THE FRAMEWORK OF IGNORANCE!

"It is apparent that people on this list have different views on religion and the Bible, and therefore it is not likely that there will be agreement on how to interpret the Bible. "

No kidding Stev. Some of us have spent many years and a lot of effort to get past where you're at. We've questioned our own assumptions and studied what the assumptions and worldview of ancient Semitic peoples were. We have studied their literature, and understand its genre' and it's motivation and intended purpose. You have not, do not, andnever will do this. No amount of bible memorization is going to help you emerge from ignorance. You have to somehow wake up and understand you are a modern man and the bible is not only a product of foreign cultures in foreign languages but from A WORLD LONG DEAD that operated under completely different assumptions and worldview.

"But I think the historical-grammatical method is a good place to start for anyone in interpreting the Bible. "

You do huh? Whys that Steve? Because Jesus used it? Because the apostles used it? Because the early church used it? Got news for ya Stev, you're wrong on all counts, and as much as you would like to shuffle reality aside and not deal with it, you just bit a tiger on the ass pal. I'm going to shove reality into your face till you go away, kill youself, or change.

"What did the author intend to mean"

LOL no shit sherlock. And of course the literary concerns of the ancient Semites were just like modern humans! Again, you simply ass-ume so much.

"and what would the original audience have understood? "

Exactly pal. Perhaps your brain will start to click into gear and you'll begin to wonder why Jesus, the apostles, and the entire early church IGNORED your historical-grammatical method! The OT was never INTENDED to be taken as you take it, to be interpreted as you interpret it, and a tiny CLUE is that Jesus, the apostles and the early church DIDNT USE THIS METHOD! DUH!

"I think those are good questions to ask no matter what book is being read."

Me too Stev, me too. That's why I spent years and thousands of hours actually STUDYING the cultures that produced the bible. Their language, the sources from which the languages sprang, their modes of thinking, their assumptions/presuppositions about life, the world, and God. Their priorities and purpose when it came to writing spiritual material. "There are dangers to the allegorical method, and it is best to use with caution."

Gosh, thanks for the heads up Stev. The fact is,I have never read of ANYONE who interpreted the Bible allegorically (As Jesus, the apostles, and the early church did) who BURNED WITCHES or KILLED PEOPLE FOR THEIR SINS or FORCED PEOPLE TO CONVERT TO CHRIST OR DIE or who FORCED THEIR RELIGION ON ANYONE AT ALL! These activities are engaged in by LITERLISTS! KABOOM! Read not only some church history Stev my man but even your newpaper for christs sake! KABOOM! You can bet those muslim nutballs dont interpet the Quaran allegorically! Your violent murderous Christian forefathers (and their violent murderous descendents) were literalists.

If their are any 'dangers' to the allegorical method they pale in comparison to the h-g. Do you think assholes like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell interpet the Bible allegorically? Do you think the violent, arrogant, warlike Religious Right interprets the Bible allegorically? You bet your mothers bottom they dont. And you just want to shove the example of Jesus, the apostles, and the early church aside in understanding how to interpret the bible...

Pal, get an education then bother me again, okay? Stop ignoring the way the Bible interprets the Bibke, okay? Stop ignoring the example of Jesus, the apostles, and the early church, okay? Stop ignoring the world and cultures that produced the Bible, okay? Stop ignoring their assumptions and presuppositions, okay? Stop ignoring your own assumptions and presuppositions, okay? Okay.

"Otherwise it can lead to excess. It can lead to flights of fancy and speculation, idiosyncratic notions, where there is no limit or control on what the interpreter can see in the Bible."

Heavens to Mergatroid! You mean like perhaps KABOOM KAPOW KABLAM? No? M'k. Well, Stev, I can only tell you again to stop assuming the very thing that is to be proved, to wit: that the h-g method is the proper method. You simply ignore all evidence to the contrary, then 'let fly.' It's is YOUR h-g method that is the 'FLIGHT OF FANCY' becaue IT FLIES IN THE FACE OF ALL THE EVIDENCE! IT DOESN'T EXIST IN THE BIBLE IT ONLY EXISTS IN THE MINDS AND WRITINGS OF FUNDIOTS! The way the Bible writers use the Bible means nothing to you and your kind, you just ignore it then plow right on with your drabble and babble and try to force you bullshit down our throats by political means. I hate fundamentalism pal because its the product of IGNORANCE. Do yuo know what that is? It's IGNORE-ANCE. Fundies ignore facts, they ignore reality, even the reality of how the Bible writers use the Bible, let alone ignoring the ancient cultures that produced these books.

Do axe-heads float in tyour world Stev? Do they? No? Do people walk out of tombs and fly away in your world Stev? No they dont. You live in the same world I do Stev, and NONE of that EVER happens EVER. Thats reality. If God is pesonal and performs miracles,. show me a modern documented miracle. Dont start blathering about some kid whose uncles cousins best friends neighbor knew a guy in Bumfart Egypt who heard of a guy who knew somebodys grandfather who was raised from the dead. I want firsthand documented evidence pal. The Bble, in Malachi says "I am the Lord, I change NOT." Jesus Christ is "the same yesterday, today and forever." Where are the literal miracles Steve? Hmm? There aren't any. The only REAL miracle is the reality BEHIND the allegory of "miracles." The miracle of a transformed mind and life.

"The BIble can become silly puddy in the hands of an allegorist. The Bible can be made to say what ever the interpreter wants it to say."

Not only CAN the Bible become a horrible weapon of torture and murder if taken literally, it HAS become just such a weapon MILLIONS of times in the hands of LITERLISTS! So kindly stop blathering about the dangers of allegory to me Stev, m'k? Plus, the fact there are over 30,000 Christian sects registered with the IRS, all of them disagreeing in doctrine, is proof aplenty that the h-g method also allows its users to make the bible say whatever they want. If you broadened your knowledge beyond your own denomination you might come to know that.

Perhaps if you studied your own 'holy book' and became familiar with the way the bible writers use the bible you will snap out of it. I doubt it. Most fundies are too deeply hypnotized by literalism. You live in a fantasy world where magic happens. (Not really, you actually live in the REAL world, the ADULT world, the same as the rest of us, you simply are DELUSIONAL and therefore are beyond reasoning with. Hell, how can I reason with someone who insists on ignoring how the writers of his own holy book themselves interpreted their own book?)

As for silly 'putty', I would say thats a damn good analogy for the fundy mind. You live in a silly world that takes an impression of the real world and stetches it into silliness. A world of make believe and magic. A world that can be stetched and played with all day long. Grow up, get real, build a bridge and get over it. M'k?

As for your insulting of the allegorical method I take my stand with Jesus, the apostles, and the early church. Unlike YOU I interpet the bible BIBLICALLY! I do indeed pay very close attention to how Jesus, the apostles, and the early church interpret the bible.

Thats enough. Dont bother me anymore with this childish nonsense until you've done your homework. You and all the other fundiots here. Click on my my profile and then click on my post topics. That will enable you to find my other posts on this subject. Good day to you. edited title ~ Scully

73

Are Most Folks Here Agnostics and Atheists?

by Nate Merit in

jw
friends

that's the overall impression i get from reading the posts.

i'm very new here, so i could be mistaken.

if i am, my apologies.

Nate Merit

Hi Jaffacake

Please call me Nate. It's informal and I like it informality.

For myself, I returned to the Christian Mythos purely from cultural motivation. I'm an American of European descent, and Christianity is the background of our spirituality. I got tired of playing oriental. I'm not an oriental, and I enjoy my own culture very much. Far more so than I did when I was young and enamored of anything foreign just because it was different. I would rather be part of the leaven that changes Christianity from within than simply junk it.

I'm pleased to read that you take an intelligent approach to the Bible. I don't have a problem with any religion, except in its fundamentalist form. I dislike fundamentalist Buddhism (Theravada/Hinayana) as much as I dislike Fundamentalist Islam, Christianity, or Judaism. Your own approach to the Bible and Christianity sounds promising. I hop whatever condition you and I share that causes us to reject fundamentalism catches on.

I wrote Jehovah Unmasked as my personal slap in the face to fundamentalism. http://www.lulu.com/content/167431
To force them to see just how subhuman their god is, as well as to force them to see the glaring contradictions between the several gods presented to us in the Bible (if interpreted literally). Also, as an attempt to free people from the deep-seated guilt they imbibed from youth by having the Eden allegory pounded deep into their psyche. I was raised by atheists, so was spared that.

Jehovah Unmasked presents an alternative interpretation of the Eden Myth, one that makes more sense with the text as it reads, and also takes the onus of guilt for the condition of the Cosmos off of our narrow shoulders and places it directly where it belongs: on the shoulders of the "God" who made this universe.

Of course, I don't literally believe in any such god or in creation, but hopefully I'll manage to make some people question their literal Bible and they'll seek a nonliteral understanding of the Bible.

As far as the weaknesses of science, I don't think science itself has any weaknesses except that it cannot tell us if there is any point or purpose to life, or whether there is a a Final Reality or an afterlife. I'm of the opinion such questions will remain forever outside the realm of science.

What is problematic is the way certain types of humans apply scientific knowledge by using it to invent destructive technologies. As soon as a scientifc advance is made the military coconuts of the world try turning it into a WMD. I cannot resonate at all with military types. They might as well be plankton.

Most of all I'm glad as hell we're both out of Watchtower religion. Good for us!

Thanks for taking the time to post Jaffacake. Have a great weekend.
Nate

73

Are Most Folks Here Agnostics and Atheists?

by Nate Merit in

jw
friends

that's the overall impression i get from reading the posts.

i'm very new here, so i could be mistaken.

if i am, my apologies.

Nate Merit

Hey Tetrapod Sapian!

Great new icon.

You have just described Zen very well. I'm really pleased you have taken up Zazen. I've been at it fior 32 years, 60-90 minutes a day. More on retreats.

Keep it devoid of doctrines and dogmas and you're all set dude!

Thank you for posting and letting me know.

Nathan

73

Are Most Folks Here Agnostics and Atheists?

by Nate Merit in

jw
friends

that's the overall impression i get from reading the posts.

i'm very new here, so i could be mistaken.

if i am, my apologies.

Nate Merit

Make that 32 years on the meditation. Typo.

Nate

73

Are Most Folks Here Agnostics and Atheists?

by Nate Merit in

jw
friends

that's the overall impression i get from reading the posts.

i'm very new here, so i could be mistaken.

if i am, my apologies.

Nate Merit

Hi Grog

I'm a big fan of Bill Murray! Love your icon.

"Hmm.. I'd have to say that I'm becoming more and more agnostic as I start explore my spirituality more. It just seems to me that its hard to be a part of any "big" religion without being exclusivist to some degree or another. I'd have to say that the spirituality that I am closest with would be the belif that god exists everywhere in all of us.. not sure what you call that though."

I can relate. I've been meditaing 60-90 minutes a day for over 32 years and as my mystical experience strengthens and deepens, the more skeptical I become. Your own viewpoint could be called pantheism.

By all means keep your spirituality personal. Joing groups is a quick way to the nuthouse. Pat Robertson being an excellent example of the megalomania that can result.

Thanks for posting, Grog!
Nate

73

Are Most Folks Here Agnostics and Atheists?

by Nate Merit in

jw
friends

that's the overall impression i get from reading the posts.

i'm very new here, so i could be mistaken.

if i am, my apologies.

Nate Merit

GetBusyLiving. No need to explain. I get it on an intuitive level. What you have is your own koan. I like it.

Thanks for posting.

Nate

73

Are Most Folks Here Agnostics and Atheists?

by Nate Merit in

jw
friends

that's the overall impression i get from reading the posts.

i'm very new here, so i could be mistaken.

if i am, my apologies.

Nate Merit

Hi Nate,

Ever see that poster of the Pleiadian beamship over a tree with the words "I Want To Believe" under it? A small part of me resonates with that sentiment in regards to "God". If it weren't for that, I'd be a full blown atheist. I don't believe there's any evidence for a personal god. Most of our reality (if not all of it), can be explained without the supernatural. Even from a young age, I didn't really find myself moved to believe in anything supernatural [ edit: by that I mean like demons, angels, Big J ]. I guess alot of that has to do with growing up in a religiously divided household. At the same time though, I'm still drawn to the possibility of a god or a "greater reality". Rationally, I acknowledge our own limitations in perceiving material reality, and the degree of subjectivity involved just with that. We simply may not have the tools (and maybe never will) to detect "god" or any non-material aspect of "reality". Its enough of a question, to make me reserve judgment and move over to the edge of agnosticism. Beyond that, I only have this bit of a feeling, a desire. But thats enough to make me want to explore.

Nate here. I agree. There will never be scientific proof of the existence of God. I am convinced there is no God, not in a personal story-book fantasy way that fundamentalists go on about. I agree with your skepticism and your openness. However, I would encourage you to take up the practice of meditation sans any accompanying dogma.

There are CD's available that synchronise with your brain waves using binaural signals. These signals casue your brain to relax into deep meditative states that would take you years to acheive unaided. If you're interested, let me know via PM.

Nate

73

Are Most Folks Here Agnostics and Atheists?

by Nate Merit in

jw
friends

that's the overall impression i get from reading the posts.

i'm very new here, so i could be mistaken.

if i am, my apologies.

Nate Merit

Hi again Brenda

Yes, universes. There may well be others. No way to know yet. Maybe there will never be a way to know scientifically.

Which leaves room for Mystery!

Nate

73

Are Most Folks Here Agnostics and Atheists?

by Nate Merit in

jw
friends

that's the overall impression i get from reading the posts.

i'm very new here, so i could be mistaken.

if i am, my apologies.

Nate Merit

Hi Brenda Cloutier!

Thanks for the welcome!

You wrote:

"I'm an agnostic. I believe there is a top-god-entity, but this god is not worthy of nor desirus of our adulation and worship."

I take it you meant this statement in a Jungian sense of Archetypes. Very cool. People here seem to be very open minded yet skeptical in a healthy way. I like it.

I agree that the Supreme Reality is not a Person.

Thanks for posting!
Nate