Posts by EverAStudent

77

How do you know the Bible is from God?

by cognac in

jw
friends

i really want to believe it, but, sometimes it is very difficult to figure out how it can be from god.

i mean, in the old testament, he seems horrible in some instances.

the adam and eve thing doesn't make to much sense to me.

EverAStudent

A straight up problem for all parties is the precise timing of the flood. The 4000-years-ago tradition for many creationists is grounded in the tracing of the recorded lineages. However, it is not possible to determine if there are families or generations not recorded in the biblical record. The ones that are there are recorded because of their importance to the story of humanity.

That said, it would seem unlikely that "millions" of years of history are unaccounted for, and I am not even trying to imply such a thing. Was the flood 4000 years ago, 5000, 9000, more?--I do not know. Was there a flood at all? I sincerely believe there was.

Someone asked above, "EAS, what would it take to disprove the ark to you?" What have you got?

IF someday it is genuinely discovered that Adam and Eve never existed and that evolution is the mechanism God used to create the planet over billions of years, then we would be forced to conclude that the creation account was intended as a parable instead of as history. How would that impact my faith? At one time, it would have been devastating. Today, I would shake my head at my lack of understanding as to how to read the first book of the Bible and the book of Romans and then continue in my faith that Jesus is the Creator, ruler, inheritor, and king of this universe. Jesus is the Christ, the Holy One, the Alpha and Omega. Without faith in Him, there is no salvation and no Christian faith at all. Saving faith is in Christ, not in creationism.

77

How do you know the Bible is from God?

by cognac in

jw
friends

i really want to believe it, but, sometimes it is very difficult to figure out how it can be from god.

i mean, in the old testament, he seems horrible in some instances.

the adam and eve thing doesn't make to much sense to me.

EverAStudent

All good questions.

Remember that God knew that we humans would sin before He created the world and He even planned on a means by which to save us from sin before He created the world (Ephesians 1:4, 2:10). Therefore, He obviously never intended THIS earth to be an everlasting paradise.

Romans 5:12 tells us that death first came into the world when Adam and Eve sinned. This is why "creationists" like myself believe that the evidences used by evolutionists to theorize an evolutionary advance of life is wrongly interpreted. If evolution were the way that life came into the world then the garden would have been planted on a billions-of-years-old graveyard that also contained the parents of Adam and Eve. Death would already have been present, so what kind of a hollow warning would it have been for God to tell Adam and Eve, "don't sin or you will die"? Did they not expect to die anyway? So much for paradise.

I know that you have come to believe that the evolutionary scientists have "proven" that life came about naturally over billions of years. In so much as they have convinced you, they have "proven" their case. They have not convinced me, so I continue to consider the evidence of the biblical creation account to be persuasive. It is a matter of faith. Just as the literalness of the flood is a matter of faith.

77

How do you know the Bible is from God?

by cognac in

jw
friends

i really want to believe it, but, sometimes it is very difficult to figure out how it can be from god.

i mean, in the old testament, he seems horrible in some instances.

the adam and eve thing doesn't make to much sense to me.

EverAStudent

A better translation of that verse into modern English is:

But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; (1 Thessalonians 5:21 NASB)

77

How do you know the Bible is from God?

by cognac in

jw
friends

i really want to believe it, but, sometimes it is very difficult to figure out how it can be from god.

i mean, in the old testament, he seems horrible in some instances.

the adam and eve thing doesn't make to much sense to me.

EverAStudent

The word "proven" and "disproven" have been thrown around alot. When it comes to literary interpretation (and that includes interpreting the Bible) very little can be proven or disproven, just studied, analyzed, assumed, alleged, believed, and disbelieved.

The goal of interpretation is to find out what the original author probably meant. This requires study and the search for evidences. Evidences is the name of the game, not proving.

Virtually nothing has been proven erroneous about the Bible, though much has been alleged. Many of the historical references in the Bible have been demonstrated to be valid even though once they were alleged to be false (e.g. the existence of the HIttites, the T-shape of the cross, etc.).

Evidence is rarely the same as proof, and allegations are of no value at all.

In my studies, I have found the Bible to be a book of high credibility as supported by the evidence.

77

How do you know the Bible is from God?

by cognac in

jw
friends

i really want to believe it, but, sometimes it is very difficult to figure out how it can be from god.

i mean, in the old testament, he seems horrible in some instances.

the adam and eve thing doesn't make to much sense to me.

EverAStudent

Someone wrote, "Hmmm...Re the statement about Babylon being rebuilt - do you believe that because you have been TOLD that? OR because you've actually seen it and been there? Because that kind of thing used to be big for me too - however, if you google it, you will find that is not the case. Saddam Hussein actually preserved part of it, re-built part of it and there is a huge international effort going on right now to restore it. People DO still live in Babylon."

The Bible does not prophesy that Babylon will never be rebuilt or inhabited in our history. In fact, it states that Babylon the Great is preserved in some fashion until the end of the Great Tribulation where it is finally destroyed (Revelation 18:21).

77

How do you know the Bible is from God?

by cognac in

jw
friends

i really want to believe it, but, sometimes it is very difficult to figure out how it can be from god.

i mean, in the old testament, he seems horrible in some instances.

the adam and eve thing doesn't make to much sense to me.

EverAStudent

Cognac, one of the previous posters did you a great service, they told you that the Bible is most understandable when you know the hisorical roots of its writing. Think about how the fact that many people of the Muslim faith do not understand the freedoms of democracy (and even hate it) because they were raised to believe in a strict theocracy--for them the US constitution is almost giberish--they need to understand our historical setting first before they understand our writings.

A good and cheap way to begin is to obtain Eerdmans' Handbook to the Bible. Begin with page one and just read. It is really cheap when bought used online.

The Bible was written by genuine prophets. Every original word was true and accurate--the very meaning of "inspired." The Jews believed this, Jesus believed this, the apostles believed this.

After you have read Eerdmans, another really good text to read is Henry Virkler's "Hermeneutics." It is a short tutorial that steps you through the process of reading and understanding the Bible (Old and New Testaments).

Blessings.

17

I don't really wish to "Attack" Religion - but this is hard to ignore!

by AK - Jeff in

not my words.

not my total sentiments.

but it made me think, and that is the only reason i posted it.

EverAStudent

My preference is generally to read this forum (it is often relevant to talking with some active JW's whom I often meet with) but not comment much. Yet...

Certainly everyone in rich America could be more generous. However, even if all the "religious" people in America gave up all they had, the poor would be with us still. The fact is that America is the most altruistic nation on the planet, giving more in overseas food, clothing, and charity than any other country. "Religion" is the key determing factor (according to NBC News) in identifying the largest cumulative donor groups to charity. Up until recent years, almost all hospitals were relgion-founded (e.g. Saint Lukes, Saint Vincents, Methodist Hospital, etc.). I am not so down on "religious" types helping others. I wonder why non-religious types are given a free pass?

17

One easy question to stump a JW

by drew sagan in

for quite some time i have been tossing around the idea that there has to be a question out there, a question that can cut straight to the heart of what it means to question the watchtower.

last night while doing some mindless tasks i think that question may have come to me.

the question is: .

EverAStudent

Good comment on the Revelation study quote. A question that I have found to make Witnesses think (not a magic bullet question) is: How many firstborn sons does Jehovah have? They seem surprised to find that He has so many...

7

"secondary worship", obeisance, Jesus

by NanaR in

friends:.

i have a question for the researchers here.

i tried to do a search, but the word "worship" brings up way too many posts to filter through.. i remember as a young jw being told that jws render "secondary worship" to jesus christ.

EverAStudent

"You shall have no other gods before Me…You shall not give obeisance to them" (Exodus 20:3-5, excerpts) Normally we say, "You shall not worship them," however, the Hebrew word is "shachah" which means both worship and obeisance. So, it really does not matter whether you want to give Jesus obeisance or worship because God requires that no other "god" be given either obeisance or worship. Of course, since I believe that Jesus, like the Father, is Jehovah, it is reasonable and right for me to give Him both worship and obeisance.

A Student

25

Mat 27.52 bodies of holy ones.Sorry,bro.Franz but YOU'RE RIDICULING US

by aligot ripounsous in

after jesus' death, mat.

27 : 52-53 reads : and the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons, coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.

let me first give cognac the credit for having raised this topic lately (i don't know what was written on jwd in the past on this subject).

EverAStudent

Joseph wrote: "We are not talking about the same earthquake. What you are describing [from Matthew 28:2] was an aftershock quite common during severe earthquakes. Then again not all hills were downhill of the wall. The Mount of Olives for example was higher and they could look down on the temple from there. The walls had entrance ways in them so bodies could get in. But this is not the point here. The point being made is that after being released from the tombs, the bodies had to be prepared for reburial by someone and touching them any earlier would make them unclean for this high Passover taking place. The Law was very clear on this and we should stay with what we know. This is really how they got into the city so people could see them. And the three day delay involved proved that a high Sabbath was taking place at the time. I learned this over 30 years ago just by following the events in real time. Making up things like throwing bodies 20 feet and more should never be done unless you have proof. Do you? Another thing that we should not do is question Paul's work in the faith as if we are smarter than him. Questioning Paul is like questioning the decision Jesus made when appointing him as His apostle. Was that a mistake made by Jesus? I notice this done a lot when their errors are exposed. The mistake here is with the false doctrine being spread around over the years and believed by many organized religions. When exposed then the text and the people involved in writing it like Paul must be criticised to save face. The teachers that continue to make this mistake and follow such scholars are the ones that deserve the criticism not the texts."

Joseph, your comments are interesting, but inconsistent, both with what I wrote and with regard to Scripture. When the tombstone is rolled away from Jesus' tomb in Matthew 28:2, it does not describe it as "an aftershock" as you characterized it, but as a "severe earthquake." Where in the text did you deduce the theory that this was an aftershock?

I further believe that you have addressed the wrong individual, as I did not invent the "tossed bodies" theory. That rather improbable theory comes directly from the Watchtower's Insight on the Scriptures, pages 368-369. The Watchtower indicates that the bodies were literally "thrown" into the city by the violence of the earthquake. I quite agree with you that such individuals ought to not make up such things without proof, and I further agree with you that "such scholars are the ones that deserve the criticism."

Though I hold to the text of Scripture just as it is written, I appreciated the opportunity to interact with you on the subject.

A Student