Posts by Farkel

103

The "Tree" of WHAT?

by Farkel in

jw
friends

the account of adam and eve as a literal event is so full of logical contradictions that it is mind-boggling.

it only takes a minimum of scrutiny to discover that fact, too.. there is something god did not want adam and eve to know.

he didnt want them to know the difference between good and evil.

Farkel

Shelby,

I stated:

There is something God did not want Adam and Eve to know.

You replied with:

: Well, actually, it wasn't that He didn't want to know ABOUT something; He didn't want to them to KNOW it, as in experience it. You can understand that, yes? I mean, I want my kids to know ABOUT crack, but I don't necessarily want them to experience it. I want them to know ABOUT teenage pregnancy and HIV... but I don't necessarily want them to experience. I want, then, for them know only good... and not bad.

You've already dug yourself a big hole, my dear. In fact it's so big that IF your "explantion" is true, you've defeated your whole argument and made mine, and IF your "explanation" is false, you have no argument. THAT is a hard thing to do!

In a moment, I'll show you why. But first, my stuff is directed almost entirely towards JWs, and only peripherally to other Christians who believe some of the same stuff that JWs believe. As Moxy has pointed out, many people (include many Christians) believe the Eden story is allegory and/or about the loss of innocence. Fine and dandy, but those beliefs mean nothing to JWs.

Your argument in a nutshell is that the Bible was talking about experiencing good and evil rather than just knowing about them as an un-experienced concept, yes?

If this argument is true then when God says that the pair has now become one of US with the knowledge of good and evil, then God is stating that not only all of his heavenly creation had personal experience of good and evil, but that God himself had personal experience of good an evil at the time he issued his command to the first pair! Yet, he stated those words before any rebellion by Satan or anyone else, according to the Bible itself. There is no mention in the Bible of any evil existing at the time of the creation of man. So your theory contradicts the Bible. Now, if those little voices you hear say otherwise, fine and dandy, because we are only using the Bible as our reference and most of us don't get ad hoc answers on-the-fly from talking voices. Are you going to concede that for your argument to be true, God and all his angels (or whoever he was talking to at the time of his statement) MUST have already and personally experienced evil themselves? If so, how so, and why so? Particularly, why would God let that happen to them and to himself?
If not, you'd better be prepared to prove yourself using the Bible.

Let's look at the other possibility, that is to say: if "knowing" really does mean "experiencing?" First, you have ignored what was really said in the Bible (knowledge) and discussing "knowing," or "to know" even using John 17:3 to make your point. "To know" or "knowing" can mean both understanding conceptually and having a personal experience of a concept. "Knowledge" is most commonly used to mean having an understanding. Knowledge is mental. Look it up in the dictionary. Neither of my dictionaries even hint that "knowledge" means or implies personal experience. It COULD mean personal experience, but that is not how it is most-often used. If God wanted all of humanity to clearly understand what it was he didn't want Adam and Eve to know/experience, then why would he use a word that was at least ambiguous or at most totally misleading? He could have said the "tree of the experience of Good and Evil," but he didn't say that. YOU said that.

:...Your 'argument' falls apart here because of your assumption of what is meant by the word 'know'. And really, that takes care of the entire REST of your argument, and you know it, but I will continue... for the SAKE of argument

No it doesn't. Yours does.

Farkel

59

Blood, The Watchtower and Deceit

by Maximus in

jw
friends

while much attention is given to doctrine in sites such as this, very little is noted about the watchtower societys intellectual dishonesty in its publications, especially when it comes to quotations.. oftentimes the societys writers will cite a scholar or author of some repute: "professor blank observes that blah, blah, blah.

" the reader assumes from the quotation that professor blank is in agreement with the organizations position, of course, and that the quotation chosen accurately depicts the authors thoughts.. heres the catch: the words between the quotation marks may be accurate, but the snippet may not at all faithfully represent someones actual thesis or position.

much like a newspaper ad for a movie that quotes a reviewer as saying "monumental!

Farkel

Maximus,

: Veritas Vos Liberabit"

Truth and liberty?

Truth through liberty?

Truth through root-canals?

Truth or consequences?

Verdad: perhaps that means not truth or "true", but something else.

You simply must speak in a language that we schmucks understand, Maximus. I have a hard enough time trying to communicate in a live language, let alone a dead one.

Farkel, the big dummy

17

WTBS Made a Huge Mistake!

by patio34 in

jw
friends

i was tempted to write the wtbs today.

i'm reading a loaned copy (from my younger sister, 'waiting') of ray franz's "in search of christian freedom.

" it is a masterful point-by-point refutation of the wts doctrine.

Farkel

Dedalus,

It's nice to have you with us, again. :)

: "Well, we don't have the whole story," he said.

Translation: "Until we get the WATCHTOWER spin on the matter, we won't know how they want us to think."

(Think about what I just said above. Think about that seriously.)

Farkel

103

The "Tree" of WHAT?

by Farkel in

jw
friends

the account of adam and eve as a literal event is so full of logical contradictions that it is mind-boggling.

it only takes a minimum of scrutiny to discover that fact, too.. there is something god did not want adam and eve to know.

he didnt want them to know the difference between good and evil.

Farkel

: Then, I've 'lost', Farkely, 'cause I've been given nothing else to give you.

Consider the source, Shelby. Consider the source. Maybe your "source" is not as great as you think it is.

I'm gonna handle your other arguments tomorrow. That will not require a lot of my time.

Farkel

13

Crossroads, Farkel, et al. re Tree of Knowing Bad.

by AGuest in

jw
friends

may you all have peace!.

dear crossroads, may i ask how is that we can conclude that the tree of knowledge was not to be used... or even never to be?

indeed, adam and eve were told not to eat of it, but what makes you think all beings were?

Farkel

kes,

: did you NOT read that spirits DO eat?

Do spirits have stomachs, then? Do they pass waste? If so, how do they do that?

Do they have "spiritual dumps," or what? I'n curious about this.

Farkel

13

Crossroads, Farkel, et al. re Tree of Knowing Bad.

by AGuest in

jw
friends

may you all have peace!.

dear crossroads, may i ask how is that we can conclude that the tree of knowledge was not to be used... or even never to be?

indeed, adam and eve were told not to eat of it, but what makes you think all beings were?

Farkel

You are lost, my dear bunny.

: Dear Crossroads, may I ask how is that we can conclude that the Tree of Knowledge was not to be used... or even never to be?

If it wasn't to be used, then why did God insist that it not be used? He would have never done that if it were not to be used. He did that because he thought it might be used. Furthermore, he put the damn thing in the garden to begin with and he made that proclamation that it shouldn't be "used." Why would he do that if it was not significant in the lives of Adam, Eve an all of our destinies? (You never ask simple questions like this.)

:Indeed, Adam and Eve were told not to eat of it, but what makes you think ALL beings were?

What makes you think that all beings outside of Adam and Eve WERE or WOULD BE given the possibility to eat of it? Anything scriptural will do. Just anything. Once again Shelby, you like so many xtian apologists are just making up stuff to try to explain goofy stuff that shouldn't have to be explained. Why would God give us all this goofy stuff and expect the average non-superhuman-psychic to understand it? It's sad, really.

: Seems pretty logical to ME that Satan had already eaten of it.

Huh? Satan was an angel, remember? Angels are spirits, remember? They don't exist in the physical (three dimensional world), remember? Eating a piece of fruit off a tree IS three-dimensional, remember? So given that, when and how did Satan eat from that tree? Did he trans-morgrify himself into a three-dimensional being and eat of it, or what?

Your stuff gets more goofy as it goes, Shelby.

: Maybe a few other spirit beings did, too.

Well, YOU'RE the seer, not me! Ask your source! Then there will be no "maybes" about it! Ask him how they had to trans-morgrify themselves to do it, though. I'm most curious about that part.

: And how do we know that the 'command' to Adam and Eve not to eat would have stood to time indefinite?

Did God set a time limit on it? When God gives a law, does he say "this is good for 5 years and 3 months and 10 days?" If God doesn't set a time limit on one of his laws, are you are me or anyone else arrogant enough to tell the rest of the world when that law "expires?" I'm not. Are you? Are you going to question the time limits on God's laws when he set none?

Farkel
"Shakin' the bush, Boss. Shakin' the bush."

19

Resurrection... to what TYPE of body?

by AGuest in

jw
friends

may you all have peace!.

there is a bit of a debate about the resurrection, and to what type of body people will be resurrected to.

it is quite simple, and encompasses two resurrections: the 'first' resurrection... and the general resurrection.. 1. the 'first' resurrection -.

Farkel

Uh, Shelby,

I noticed that your whole thread was nothing more than your opinion. You produced not one whit of evidence whatsover.

Thank you for sharing, though.

You won't like my rebuttal to your comments on the "Good/Evil," thread either, btw. How do I know that? I make sense, that's why.

Get a better voice in your ear, Shelby. The one you've got is not the least bit logical or even sensible. If we can get past all this religious crap, perhaps we can get around to just being friends again.

Sorry about Aaron's headache. Please give him my best wishes, anyway. Facts tend to do that with crusaders who think they know everything, but when it boils down to the issues, they are totally clueless.

Farkel

10