there seems to be an endless number of ways to show the bible is not devinely inspired but all of it seems so complicated.
anyone know any simple arguements for this?
.
IDIOT (noun): A very stupid or foolish person.
Full definition of IDIOT:
1. usually offensive: a person affected with extreme mental retardation.
2. a foolish or stupid person.
Definition taken from Merriam-Webster online dictionary (m-w.com)
DocHouse there is no indication in Merriam-Websters definition of the word IDIOT that a so-called IDIOT is incapable of 'learning very well'. Please provide the source material for your contention about the learning abilities of IDIOTS.
1- pray to god (whomever you may imagine him to be) asking for understanding.
2- study the background about the bible (from non-religious sources) to see where it came from.
3- discard (or at least set aside) chuyrch claims and dogma.. 4- read it, looking up archaeological/historical sources about the places and peoples referred to.
Your premise is ridiculous to the core DocHouse. You proceed to give a formula with a set of guidelines on "How to Avoid the Faithless Spirit of Most Here.." as though you have discovered some way of insulating yourself and others from ideas that conflict with your own. The best and most practical way of 'avoiding peoples' spirit here' is to CLOSE YOUR ACCOUNT AND NO LONGER COME HERE. (By the way, I am not telling you that you have no right to be here. You have as much right as anyone else to post here. I would just like to help you see the obvious solution to your 'problem'.)
wouldn't being "mentally diseased" give you a pass at armageddon?
the wt claims that apostates are "mentally diseased".
most of us are aware of this claim on this forum.
"he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words."- 1 Timothy 6:4 New World Translation 1984 revised
"he is puffed up with pride and does not understand anything. He is obsessed with arguments and debates about words."-1 Timothy 6:4 New World Translation 2013 revised
Sorry! No more free pass at Armageddon for being 'mentally diseased'. With the stroke of a metaphorical pen any who disagree with the teachings of the Watchtower Society will no longer be able to claim a 'medical exemption' when faced with a judgmental execution at Armageddon. Sorry about that folks!
"for you must not prostrate yourself to another god, because jehovah, whose name is jealous, he is a jealous god," exodus 34:14 nwt 1984 edition.
"you must not bow down to another god, for jehovah is known for requiring exclusive devotion.
yes, he is a god who requires exclusive devotion.
No more cheap shots Apognophos! Stick with the facts and the argument at hand. Stop introducing 'red herrings' into the discussion. I have never made ad hominum attacks against you, ever. NOT ONE. Nor am I lecturing anyone but presenting an idea and backing up my ideas with reference material. Never, ever, ever, ever, ever have I presented myself as an EXPERT. Have I given any credentials that might lead you to think that I am an expert? I never made that claim and it is a fiction of your own mind interpreting what I have written as having come from a self professed expert. You my friend are not as intelligent as you may think. That is not an ad hominum attack but my opinion after having read the mindless, hollow, myopic replies to all my posts in regard to this subject. And I too am entitled to my opinion and in this instance I do not need to back up my claims with any outside reference material. Your posts are all the reference material that I need to see that. Reply like a man and stop rubbing my face in the dirt because I don't happen to agree with you.
"for you must not prostrate yourself to another god, because jehovah, whose name is jealous, he is a jealous god," exodus 34:14 nwt 1984 edition.
"you must not bow down to another god, for jehovah is known for requiring exclusive devotion.
yes, he is a god who requires exclusive devotion.
Answer me this Apognophos. The NWT revised 2013 uses the same expression, "requires exclusive devotion" in both EXODUS 34:14 and JOSHUA 24:19; however the Hebrew word used in EXODUS is kan-naw' which is translated simply as jealous by STRONGS EXHAUSTIVE CONCORDANCE and the Hebrew word used in JOSHUA is kan-no' and is translated by STRONGS CONCORDANCE as jealous or angry-jealous. How can two separate words with their own nuanced meaning be given the EXACT SAME interpretation? It is poor scholarship,period. You may swallow the Watchtower societies puffery and self promotion on the NWT 2013 revision but I do not.
First, I have no intention of 'playing the expert' which is again a childish ad hominum attack. I use the dictionary and other reliable, expert sources to make sure that my assertions are correct. I would be a fool and a jackass if I just shot my mouth off without checking some reference material to see if my thoughts have some credence and basis in reality. Interestly enough I saw my spelling mistake and tried to correct it. For some reason the mistake would not correct and I had to live with my error. I hope you can forgive me.
Secondly, I don't care if you don't live in a black or white world or whether you are an apologist or not. I never made such claims about you and that viewpoint is a fiction of your own mind. In regards to you considering my reading of your previous posts as 'slightly creepy research' that is hubris of the highest order. Every time you read a passage in the Bible you are researching the words of another person or of God himself to learn their viewpoint on many different matters. Do you consider yourself a 'slightly creepy researcher' when you do this?
Thirdly, my so-called 'dictionary excursion' strengthens my argument rather than weakens it. The only direct synonym for the word jealous according to Merriam-Websters dictionary is possessive. Possessive as a word is a far cry from the phrase "requires exclusive devotion". Again, it seems to me that you are not really reading my posts. The list of words that I quoted are considered RELATED to but not replacements for the word jealous by Merriam-Webster.
Fourthly, my question to you about EXODUS and JOSHUA should help you with your thinking on the NWT 2013 revision. Where you see honing of scripture, I see homogenizing and bastardizing of intent.
I was not at the AGM and so I cannot refute your claim that one of the reasons for the NWT 2013 revision was because 'many changes in wording were prompted by difficulties that translators in foreign fields were having with the old NWT, and this is likely one of those problem areas'. However, I can quote to you from the introduction of the NWT 2013 revision.: "This revised edition has built on the fine foundation laid in previous editions of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, a bible that was first released more than 60 years ago. However, the English language has changed during the past half century. Such change prompted current members of the New World Bible Translation Committee to initiate this comprehensive revision. Our goal has been to produce a translation that is not only faithful to the original texts but also clear and easy to read." No mention of translation difficulties at all, just a concern with the change in the English language. Actually, I am 59 years old and the word jealousy means the same thing today as it did when I was a little boy. So in this one, singular instance your argument about the word jealousy does not hold water because its meaning has not changed over my lifetime.
Good luck in growing in your ability to do Bible research. Did you notice that in refuting me you never appealed to logic or quoted any outside references to prove or support your argument? Remember,an opinion is still just an opinion. You are welcome to your opinion and I respect that. But please don't try to shove your opinion down my throat without any facts to back you up. It's as simple as that.
i'll wager that the number is close to 100 percent.
what number?
the number of jws who have lists--lists of things that make them go hmmm or even wha'???
Stuckinarut2 that is a great observation about Jehovahs United People. I have a Mennonite business associate who is convinced that Mennonites have the TRUTH because they are all "Fitly united in one line of thought'. He is a born in and sometimes I think that I am speaking with a JW when we have conversations. Hmmmmmmmm.................it's deja vu all over again!
even the mennonites won't be left behind in having an out of date and hard to use website!
this announcement was 2 months ago but still is rather interesting.
"we are pleased to announce that a new mennonite church usa website will be launched over the weekend of july 5-6!
Even the Mennonites won't be left behind in having an out of date and hard to use website! This announcement was 2 months ago but still is rather interesting. From mennoniteusa.org:
"We are pleased to announce that a new Mennonite Church USA website will be launched over the weekend of July 5-6! We've designed it in response to feedback from our users (you!), staff and communications consultants."
Can the Mennonite version of Caleb and Sophia be in the works?
this thread was inspired by the poster here with that moniker.
that name, for the first time in my life, caused me to think deeply about the scriptural real meaning of the phrase used in isaiah, often used by biblical defenders to show it's inspiration by god.. i googled the phrase, and among other hits, found this little blogspace with comments that echoed my thought on the matter.. http://www.youngausskeptics.com/2008/12/what-you-really-think-a-sphere-is-a-circle-you-really-think-that/.
found it interesting.. jeff.
Rattigan350, was your post an attempt at humor?
"for you must not prostrate yourself to another god, because jehovah, whose name is jealous, he is a jealous god," exodus 34:14 nwt 1984 edition.
"you must not bow down to another god, for jehovah is known for requiring exclusive devotion.
yes, he is a god who requires exclusive devotion.
Apognophos, please don't demean me personally by calling me "Mr. Expert" or contending that I have poor reading comprehension just because I didn't understand your use of quotation marks in identifying a joke known only to you. Behavior like that is childish at best and rude at its worst. If you can deconstruct any of my contentions with logic or scholarly reference works I welcome the constructive criticism because if I am wrong and admit it I add to my pool of knowledge. Argumentation was originally for the purpose of sharing knowledge and helping both parties come to a correct conclusion. Thanks for your interest in my post, I just wish you had something of substance to add to the discussion.
"for you must not prostrate yourself to another god, because jehovah, whose name is jealous, he is a jealous god," exodus 34:14 nwt 1984 edition.
"you must not bow down to another god, for jehovah is known for requiring exclusive devotion.
yes, he is a god who requires exclusive devotion.
Thanks Band on the Run. At least you 'get it'.
