You might have a point if the Gospels were not complementary. Each writer has a target audience and theme in mind. Eyewitnesses do not always describe the trunk, ear, leg, etc. of elephant, but a mosaic is formed.
Mark 16? The most important event in the gospel is that Jesus rose from the dead as promised! This is before your 'lost' section. Don't quit your day job. You are a lousy theologian.
The Greek MSS variations are 99% in agreement. Any disagreement affects no significant doctrine or practice. No other work of antiquity that you accept as accurate has a fraction of this evidence so close to the original writings. Your ignorance of textual criticism is noted. If the conclusion to Mark was lost, why do we have it (there is more than one MSS family)? We know the Johannine Comma is an interpolation, so if it is not in the best and oldest MSS, we reject it. I believe Mark 16 has merit, so we note the issue and make an informed decision (that does not affect anything since the principles are reiterated elsewhere).
Hundreds of millions have come running to God after reading the Bible. A few atheists have used it as an excuse to reject God because of their ignorance and agenda (the most prominent atheist, Anthony Flew, became a theist before death, but not a Christian. C.S. Lewis was not an idiot, but an expert on myth. He knew Scripture was divine historical narrative, not myth, and did become a Christian).
Asimov now knows that he was wrong (and so does Sagan). It is a stupid statement out of ignorance and arrogance.
Isi: apparently Catholics had something to do with canonicity (odd that it is not a problem for JWs who use it except Apocrypha cf. Protestants).
The Holy Spirit inspired Scripture, the original autographs. The wealth of manuscript evidence supports the accurate transmission of it. The same Spirit that inspired it worked providentially to ensure that the canon was complete, closed, accurate. There is a divine and human factor. The order of Scripture has varied from Jews to Christians, etc. I am reading a chronological Bible right now. There were no chapters and verses. These were added by men and are not inspired. The Pauline letters are generally from largest to smallest, not chronological.
If you are serious, sincere, do your homework with a resource like this:
Bible If you are an insincere skeptic who prefers ignorance, don't waste our time.
The Bible is the objective standard of truth, but it must be translated and interpreted properly (leaves WT out).
theology is the study of religion and religions are human systems of spirituality.
it could then be said that theology is the study of the applications of human spirituality.
human spirituality is a chosen way of life.
I have full freedom to watch the video, but it sounds like nothing new. I am not afraid to agree or disagree with the content based on merit vs source. Since there is no end to posts and info, I am selective in what I waste my time on. Since you don't care about my opinion, I will be selective.
in light of all the recent trinity threads, how many times do you think christ was begotten?.
Yes.
in light of all the recent trinity threads, how many times do you think christ was begotten?.
Maybe.
No.
When a JW offers a Bible study, they pull a bait and switch and it ends up being a WT book study primarily. Why can't they see this problem? There is nothing wrong with using a tool like a commentary, but only if it is biblical, not cultic.
They also said that laying aside WT lit will cause one to revert back to the ideas in commentaries of Christendom. So, read the Bible and become a Christian. Read the Bible through the eyes of WT and become an unbiblical JW.
Catholics elevate tradition/popery on par with Scripture. JWs elevate the popery of the GB and WT traditions (as fickle as they are) on par with Scripture. The most odious thing is that a JW must believe a false teaching at risk of DF until WT catches up. A true Christian rejects false teaching and embraces sound doctrine regardless of what a man or church or organization says. It is not an excuse to let a cult think for you.
i would like to hear people's opinions on intolerant religious groups?
who wins?.
somehow, i have this notion that pentecostals would win 1st place, followed by baptists, followed by jw's.
It is not just groups with a variance among members, but the issue may be more individualistic. Cults foster the group mentality and intolerance, but biblical Christianity does not (so negative intolerance would be a rogue individual, not something promoted by the church/religion). Again, disagreeing on whether Jesus is the exclusive way to God or not is not intolerance, just difference of opinion (if true that there is one way to God vs many contradictory ways).
JWs are absolutely guilty of reading the Bible through the eyes of the WT and not vice versa. They are without excuse for trusting the musings of men over the illumination of the Holy Spirit (whom they reject). They are not trained to be exegetes with hermeneutical principles, just receptacles for WT indoctrination through literature study. This is why they have uniformity like McDonald's, not biblical unity and doctrinal disputes like we see in the early church. Uniformity comes at the expense of freedom and being able to correct error. The whole group ends up in error, whereas a local church emphasis with godly leaders/teachers will keep it from going viral (at the expense of every Christian on the planet being clones). An authoritarian organization that is fallible is cultic and not the way to go (despite their boasting of superiority). It also does not help that they have a terrible sectarian version (NWT) instead of an accurate translation. The odds are stacked against JWs from knowing the truth that sets free (yet they are without excuse for allowing NY to be a mediator instead of Vatican (same thing) or Jesus/right answer).
