Posts by Anti-Christ

9

Why does it bother me so much?

by Anti-Christ in

jw
friends

most things that people believe that are out there and don't have much evidence to support their believe, like the reptilian conspiracy, does not bother me has much as people believing that the bible is literal word of god.

i can understand that someone would believe it because of the lack of knowledge like me before, once i learned more about out it i realized that it was not the word of god, i was duped.

if someone after learning all this information and still believes it's the literal word of god it drives me nuts, i just don't know why it bothers me so much.

Anti-Christ

It could be coz that belief has such an impact on their lives and thus the lives of those around them. It can turn the most naturally tolerant and laid back of people into hypersensitive judgemental Nazis! Certainly true in my case but I'm almost cured!

Possible, I think that's a good explanation.

You have transfered your hatred of the WT, to a hatred of God and the bible.

That's a good one, first, how can someone hate something he does not believe in? And second it's not hatred towards the bible but towards mind controlling religions and people that purpusfully keep information from others to get what they want from them.

9

Why does it bother me so much?

by Anti-Christ in

jw
friends

most things that people believe that are out there and don't have much evidence to support their believe, like the reptilian conspiracy, does not bother me has much as people believing that the bible is literal word of god.

i can understand that someone would believe it because of the lack of knowledge like me before, once i learned more about out it i realized that it was not the word of god, i was duped.

if someone after learning all this information and still believes it's the literal word of god it drives me nuts, i just don't know why it bothers me so much.

Anti-Christ

Most things that people believe that are out there and don't have much evidence to support their believe, like the reptilian conspiracy, does not bother me has much as people believing that the bible is literal word of god. I can understand that someone would believe it because of the lack of knowledge like me before, once I learned more about out it I realized that it was not the word of god, I was duped. If someone after learning all this information and still believes it's the literal word of god it drives me nuts, I just don't know why it bothers me so much. Any thoughts?

23

Discussion about the bible.

by Anti-Christ in

okay it's has been a while since i started a good old discussion about the bible.

i will discuss a few facts about it that a lot of religions (including the wtbts) don't like talking about.

first the formation of the ot.

Anti-Christ

Okay here is more information about the bible. I,m not going to mention all the contradictions, absurdities and just crazy verses in the OT but I am going to continue with the NT.

For more details this is a good start

The Formation of the New Testament Canon (2000)

I will cut and past some general information. ( yes I know I'm lazy)

Contrary to common belief, there was never a one-time, truly universal decision as to which books should be included in the Bible. It took over a century of the proliferation of numerous writings before anyone even bothered to start picking and choosing, and then it was largely a cumulative, individual and happenstance event, guided by chance and prejudice more than objective and scholarly research, until priests and academics began pronouncing what was authoritative and holy, and even they were not unanimous. Every church had its favored books, and since there was nothing like a clearly-defined orthodoxy until the 4th century, there were in fact many simultaneous literary traditions. The illusion that it was otherwise is created by the fact that the church that came out on top simply preserved texts in its favor and destroyed or let vanish opposing documents. Hence what we call "orthodoxy" is simply "the church that won."

The Gospels cannot really be dated, nor are the real authors known. Their names were assigned early, but not early enough for us to be confident they were accurately known. It is based on speculation that Mark was the first, written between 60 and 70 A.D., Matthew second, between 70 and 80 A.D., Luke (and Acts) third, between 80 and 90 A.D., and John last, between 90 and 100 A.D. Scholars advance various other dates for each work, and the total range of possible dates runs from the 50's to the early 100's, but all dates are conjectural. It is supposed that the Gospels did not exist before 58 simply because neither Paul nor any other epistle writer mentions or quotes them, and this is a reasonable argument as far as things go. On the other hand, Mark is presumed earlier, and the others later, because Mark is simpler, and at least Matthew and Luke appear to borrow material from him (material that is likely his own invention, cf. my review of The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark).

After learning all this in formation I find it hard to expect someone to believe 100% that the bible is 100% reliable.

23

Discussion about the bible.

by Anti-Christ in

okay it's has been a while since i started a good old discussion about the bible.

i will discuss a few facts about it that a lot of religions (including the wtbts) don't like talking about.

first the formation of the ot.

Anti-Christ

When all the evidence is taken together and accorded weight, there really isn't any reason to suppose Mosaic authorship in the first place -- the evidence points decidedly in the opposite direction.
one interesting fact is Jesus did acknowledge moses as the author
This statement is witness to the Jewish tradition about the authorship of the Torah circulating in the first century -- a millennia and a half after the purported time of Moses (whereas the statements in the Talmud date to two millennia after Moses). The author of the gospel of John makes this statement in much the same way that the author of Jude claimed that "Enoch, seventh from Adam" gave the prophecies in 1 Enoch (and it is clear that the author thinking of the whole book than just the portion quoted in Jude 14-15, as the short epistle alludes to many passages throughout 1 Enoch). I don't think many feel obliged to accept this claim at face value as proof that the pseudepigraphal book of 1 Enoch dates to the fourth millennium BC and was written by an antediluvian patriarch; it hardly outweights the overwhelming literary and linguistic evidence that proves that 1 Enoch was written in the postexilic era. It is much the same thing with the Pentateuch. A simple reference to the Torah as written by Moses (as any other rabbi in the first century AD would have done) does not explain in any way the overwhelming evidence that points to a much later date.

Thank you, I could not have said it better myself.

The evidence is overwhelming. The dishonesty of the WT and every other religion who make extraordinary claims when there is absolutely no evidence to support these claims is just mind blowing. Once again I must say "they must find it difficult those who thake authority as the truth instead of the truth as authority".

The examples I gave above in my last post only scratch the surface; the evidence is everywhere. For instance, the book of Numbers relates mainly events occurring in the first month or so of the 40 years of wandering (ch. 1-15) and the final year of the wandering (ch. 18-36); the intervening 39 years are passed over in just a few verses in ch. 16-17 without any acknowledgement of such a gap. A writer living through this lengthy period would doubtless have much more to say about the events of this period. Another example of this phenomenon can be found in Deuteronomy 23:4 which refers to an event at the end of the 40 years (cf. Numbers 22-24 ) as occurring " when you came out of Egypt ". This hardly a natural expression for Moses, who had just lived through 40 years of wandering, to refer to an event that occurred only six months earlier (i.e. after 38 years of wandering). But it is how a person from a later era would write, who viewed the totality of the 40 years as a single point occurring immediately after the exodus.The books of the Pentateuch also embrace at least three different law codes and these are not reconcilable with each other or with other writings that are ignorant of later laws. They are also largely irrelevant to the life of slaves escaping from bondage of several generations and instead presume institutions and social structures that would not arise among the Israelites until after a period of settlement in the land of Israel, and which embrace a lengthy phase of religious and legal development (i.e. from the simple and archaic lex talionis laws from the Book of Covenants of Exodus which presuppose a basic agricultural society, to the ethical and religious reforms of the Deuteronomistic Code which presuppose a monarchical Israel set in its ways, to the mass of sophisticated ritual, fiscal, and ecclesiastical directives in the Priestly Code ).

These are a very good points. I find it sometimes hard to believe I never notice all these details when they were right in front of my eyes. I can't tell you how many times I have seen these verses and never notice this before. Isn't mind control a beautiful thing?

23

Discussion about the bible.

by Anti-Christ in

okay it's has been a while since i started a good old discussion about the bible.

i will discuss a few facts about it that a lot of religions (including the wtbts) don't like talking about.

first the formation of the ot.

Anti-Christ

Thanks again Leolaia, very interesting and helpful.

Could moses have written various bits that a later author put together and a cohesive whole came about?
one interesting fact is Jesus did acknowledge moses as the author

Hi, nice to have you join in. This is the rabbinic traditional belief but there is no evidence to support this claim. It is also believed that the Torah was created before the creation of the world, again there is no proof for this claim either. The problem I have is not that it might be possible that Moses did write the first 5 books of the OT it's that it's accepted as fact in many religions including the JW and that they have no evidence to support this claim just like many other claims they make on the bible.

The other point you made is that In the NT it is mention that Jesus acknowledge that Moses did write these books, I'm sorry to say that this in my opinion is not evidence, it's circular reasoning, first you must prove that the NT is a reliable source before using it as proof, this is for a later discussion. I will later mention some facts about the NT that put serious doubts in the belief that the NT was inspired.

Thanks for you input.

23

Discussion about the bible.

by Anti-Christ in

okay it's has been a while since i started a good old discussion about the bible.

i will discuss a few facts about it that a lot of religions (including the wtbts) don't like talking about.

first the formation of the ot.

Anti-Christ

For more information about the OT I will mention a few more things then I will move on with the NT.

The WT and other religions claim that Moses wrought the Pentateuch, there is absolutely no proof for this claim, there is actually a lot of proof against it. First like Leolaia said

Of course Moses did not write the Pentateuch in the sixteenth century BC. If he had, it wouldn't have been written in Hebrew -- it would have been written in an older Canaanite dialect closer to Ugaritic or Amarna Canaanite. The language contains unmistakable signs of a later age. As just one example, the Song of the Sea in Exodus 15 is written in a far more archaic dialect (Early Biblical Hebrew) than the surrounding narrative which was written in Classical Biblical Hebrew. The poem is thought to date to the twelfth century BC, whereas the narrative dates to a time about 500 or 600 years later. That they belong to different eras is plain from the fact that the redactor places the poem on Moses' mouth. He does this because he misinterprets the yiqtol verb tenses as predicting the conquest of Canaan as lying in the future. But the archaic preterite yiqtol verbs in the poem were more like those in Ugaritic and referred to the conquest of Canaan as a past event (in Classical Biblical Hebrew, yiqtol is a jussive/imperfect whereas the preterite forms became prefixed with way-). So Moses did not write the Song of the Sea (which belongs to the period of the judges), and the author who inserted the poem into the text could not have been Moses either.

There is also proof in the verses of the bible itself, for example the books that are claimed to be written by Moses are in the third person when it mention Moses, then there is this verse

Genesis 36:31 (New International Version)

31 These were the kings who reigned in Edom before any Israelite king reigned. and this one

Numbers 12:3 (New International Version)

3 (Now Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth.)

And this one

Deuteronomy 34:5 (New International Version)

5 And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said.

Now these verses were clearly written years after Moses ( if he realy existed ) death.

I await your comments.

27

UFO's are the greatest hoax of all time! They exist only in our mind!

by Witness 007 in

general mccarthur 1955 ; "the next great war will be an inter-planetary war...".

ufo sightings "took off" after world war 2...why?

well what were people watching at the movies?

Anti-Christ

27

UFO's are the greatest hoax of all time! They exist only in our mind!

by Witness 007 in

general mccarthur 1955 ; "the next great war will be an inter-planetary war...".

ufo sightings "took off" after world war 2...why?

well what were people watching at the movies?

Anti-Christ

The object above the Madona is the Holy Spirit or an angel...or the holy grail...really it could be anything religious, Im sure the artist didn't say, "Yeah ill paint Mary and Jesus and a UFO I saw yesterday in the background!"....people are interpreting religious objects thru UFO 2008 eyes.

Yes that is the most plausible explanation. I guess it's like the posters says

24

I think it's time for me to let some of my JW family members go...

by cognac in

jw
friends

i came to this realization last night.

i got into an argument with my mother.

she said that maybe i should be looking at myself as the cause of hubby not becoming an ms. she said that i was not letting my husband make the decisions and not letting my husband be the head of the household.

Anti-Christ

It does suck. I Just had my first child, she is 4 months now. Me and the Mrs wanted our little girl to have a some what "normal" relationship with the JW grandparents, we quickly realised that will not be possible. It's sad but for the sake of our children we must be careful of the influence cult members will have on them. We all know that this religion is not a healthy place for any one.

Good luck with the baby, I can say it's the most amazing and life changing event in a couple's life.

27

UFO's are the greatest hoax of all time! They exist only in our mind!

by Witness 007 in

general mccarthur 1955 ; "the next great war will be an inter-planetary war...".

ufo sightings "took off" after world war 2...why?

well what were people watching at the movies?

Anti-Christ

These pictures could represent "religious protection" from God as the Crusaders believed. Also when they would see Halleys Comet or Meteors no doubt they atributed these as being Chariots or angels or "flaming shields. Also these religious folks would make stuff up.."God helped us."

Yes very possible, like I said there is no hard evidence to prove UFO.