Posts by Bart Belteshassur

2596

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

by cofty in

yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.

we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.

they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.

Bart Belteshassur

Cofty- The problem then as defined is that if God is Perfect Love and if he comits an action which is the opposite of Perfect Love, the christain theology is flawed because he can not be defined as Perfect Love as this is an absolute.

However does his non action in a given situation constitute the opposite of Perfect Love, and I would argue it does not.

If the Perfect love is absolute, then two actions of it will not be double Perfect, it will and can only remain perfect.

It also is true that an action of perfection can only be nullified by the opposite action, and therefore a non action which by definition is nothing can not have any effect on the perfect action.

Therefore we can describe these actions as mathmatical functions:

Perfect Love = 1

Non action = 0

Opposite PL = -1

As shown 1+1 = 1 then addition is not a funtion that can be used to combine the effects of two actions of perfect love. The function which controls perfect love action can only be 1x1=1.

So this proves that the funtion in this problem is the product of the two actions.

Therefore: 1x1=1, 0x0=0, and -1x-1=1

So logic and reason prove that two opposite actions of perfect love equal perfect love.

I will admit that in the singular event this is not the case, but we are looking at actions in the real world and as the Japanese tsunami is a second event then the above proof holds true. To disprove this it needs to be shown that the total number of natural disaster event are always an odd number.

Please pick out the flaws in this as I can not see them at present although I don't except it can this simple.

BB

2596

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

by cofty in

yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.

we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.

they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.

Bart Belteshassur

jgnat - I do not recall reading your post in relation to your view, can you direct me to it?

Thanks

BB

2596

The Pastor of my Old Church Tried to Re-Convert Me Yesterday

by cofty in

yesterday evening my wife and i were invited to friends house for new year's eve.

we met them when i was a christian and we have kept in touch.

they had a few other friends there as well, including the new church pastor and his wife.

Bart Belteshassur

Cofty - Do the original preconditions still apply or have we gone beyond that now? As I understood that the question is:

Accepting that God exists (nothing esle defined) and that he is Omnipotent why did he either produce the tsunami directly or fail to prevent it, and is therefore responsible for the consiquences etc.

Is this the correct question?

BB

16

Why does the WT insist that the first five books of the bible were written by Moses?

by marmot in

any biblical scholar worth his salt will tell you otherwise, and it's not as if this is a new concept.

as early as the 1700s people were noticing that the first books of the bible had numerous authors.

tell that to an elder, though, and you'll be booted for apostasy faster than you can say spanish inquisition.

Bart Belteshassur

Marmot- Have you read the Friedman book "The Hidden Book in The Bible"?

34

Revelation written to the 1st century churches

by maccauk11 in

im suggesting revelation was not for us today but to the seven churches in minor asia.

they 1st centruy faithful ones were waiting for the promised return of messiah, like he promised them.

he did in fact return on the lcouds to take them to heaven.

Bart Belteshassur

maccauk11 - John Marco Allegro knows all about the use of magic mushrooms by the early christain church, in his books "The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross" 1970 and "The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Christain Myth" 1979.

BB

11

The WHore of Babylon Was 1st Cnetury Jerusalem

by maccauk11 in

called sodom and egypt.

located where messiah was crucified.

becomes a river of blood (70ad).

Bart Belteshassur

maccauk11 - Could you please list the chapters and verses, where these disciptions of the Whore are stated, as different translations use different descriptions?

You do appear to have confused the Whore of Babylon with Babylon the Great, the Great City, Babylon the strong city, the Beast, and Babylon the Great City, all of which are different people and places.

Thanks BB

224

Another problem for JW apologists

by Jeffro in

the 2013 edition of the new world translation renders 2 kings 17:1 as:.

in the 12th year of king ahaz of judah, hoshea the son of elah became king over israel in samaria; he ruled for nine years.. this is in fact a better rendering than the previous nwt, which stated:.

in the twelfth year of ahaz the king of judah, hoshea the son of elah became king in samaria over israel for nine years.. despite their improved rendering, the watch tower society still claims that hoshea's reign 'really' began in 758 bce, but that it was 'established' in the 12th year of ahaz.

Bart Belteshassur

Rev John Aquila Brown - 1823?

27

Yet another problem for Watch Tower Society apologists

by Jeffro in

amos 1:1 is set during the reigns of both uzziah and jeroboam (ii), "two years before the earthquake".. geologists* have dated this earthquake to around 760bce, with an error margin of plus or minus 25 years.. *steven a. austin, gordon w. franz, and eric g. frost, "amos's earthquake: an extraordinary middle east seismic event of 750 b.c.

" international geology review 42 (2000) 657-671. y. yadin, hazor, the rediscovery of a great citadel of the bible (new york: random house, 1975).

i. finkelstein, "hazor and the north in the iron age: a low chronology perspective," bulletin of the american schools of oriental research 314 (1999) 55-70. d. ussishkin, "lachish" in e. stern, ed., the new encyclopedia of archaeological excavations in the holy land (new york: simon & schuster, 1993) vol.

Bart Belteshassur

I found this artical "The Sheshonq I campaign and the 8th cenury BCE eathquake" Fantalkin and Finklestein 2006. More to do with the date of Ironage IIa and IIb than the earthquake but makes interesting reference to strata layers at different dig sites across palstine and how they evidently link them. Also this comment re the date of the earthquake "anytime between 780and 740 BCE" Herzog and Singer-Avitz 2004:230. Haven't managed to track the article down yet but will keep trying.

BB

4

Yes, it's... ANOTHER problem with JW chronology...

by Jeffro in

according to the watch tower society, ahaziah (of judah) reigned for a single year, in 906bce.

the watch tower society also claims that judah and israel both used nisan-based dating for the start of reigns.. according to 2 kings 9:29, ahaziah's reign began in the 11th year of jehoram (of israel).

of course, if judah and israel were both using nisan-based dating, ahaziah's single year of reign couldn't have started in both years.

Bart Belteshassur

Jeffro- I was just looking at this period earlier this morning and you have already answered the question I had re your chart, with the answer I had assumed. I agree with your reasoning and will give the matter a good going over after lunch (late). Enjoy your day.

BB

93

Rolf Furuli's accusation about VAT 4956 being tampered with?

by possiblepineapple in

i'm sorry but can someone here explain what this is about.

i saw someone on here called scholar on here saying that it somehow destroyed both coj and hermann hunger but how?

how does rolf furuli know that it was tampered with?

Bart Belteshassur

ANN- So even I am having trouble with RF's actual posotion regarding the tablet as he appears to argue three seperate cases:

1. The year sign should be "57" but has been tampered with in 1906 to read "37" when 1914-607 was not an issue of any importance to Russel.

2. It is a complete forgery and therefore should be ignored.

3. That it is completely genuine but relates to 587bce where the data has a better fit and not 567bce.

In the third edition will he or does he make a decision on which corner of his triangle he wishes to support????

BB