The "knowing good and bad like one of us" phrase always disturbed me as well. The WT answer was that God was speaking to Jesus. The term "knowing good and bad" was defined as "determining for one self right and wrong" We have a problem then. This suggests that Jesus was independently determining good and bad, and this before "being tested in all respects". The WT solution was to say that Jesus aquired this ability thro years of association with God. This implies that the sin of Adam and Eve was only one of timing. This suggests that those who live in this paradise to come will one day quite appropritely be said to not need God. This was contrary to "god being all this to everybody" at the end of the 1000 years. Problems on top of problems....Until I found that the earliest Jewish theology included polytheism. And that the conversation in this passage was likely between El, the god of the Ugarits who was commandeered by the desert folks who became Israelites, and the pantheon of gods that assembled above the dome of the earth.
peacefulpete
JoinedPosts by peacefulpete
-
24
Satan Had it easy! Does the bible make sense?
by Mecurious? inmy response to the thread above on do you still believe got me to thinking.
satan had it easy.
in genesis he was allowed to corrupt adam and eve and bring death to the whole human family.
-
-
-
28
Causing divisions is doing God's will!
by rebel ini was speaking to hubby tonight.
i was explaining why i can't and won't go back to the kh.
i tried to explain my feelings as best i could without annoying him or making him feel upset.
-
-
peacefulpete
A really that eludes many is that Christianity from it's inception was a cult. But like many cults it evolved into a more benign religion as the numbers grew to big to manage with cult control techniques. The effforts to restore "true Christianity of the first century" have revived antisocial doctrine and intellectually and emotionally stiffling pressures that were better left in a less enlightened time.
-
32
Babylon the Great is NOT false religion.
by proplog2 inthis is the short argument against the watchtower interpretation of babylon the great.
(btg) .
) the watchtower claims that babylon the great is the world empire of false religion (wefr).
-
-
peacefulpete
Greven...It is a testimony to the power of cult thinking, long after the particulars of any one cults interpretation had faded the need to uncover "secret truths" lingers. The final result is sometimes worse due to the addition of isolation and added frustration of seeking a teacher who can answer all. The obvious reality that noone can fortell the future seems distasteful and depressing to someone escaping a cult that insisted it had this power or power to uniquely interpret the cryptic passages of the Bible. Yes the context itself makes clear that Babylon refers to Roman power. The setting upon seven hills or mounds is a dead give away. (Rome was called the city on seven hills) Anyone who wishes can research this easily with word searches on the web. The imagery of the book is blatent plagerism of pagan mystery cult material. I have discussed this before in more detail but felt it was unappreciated. I'm sure others have done the same.
-
46
Did I turn my back on Jehovah's True Organization?
by sandy ini was wondering as i have been lately; did i turn my back on god and am i wrong for turning my back on the organization?.
are there any of you out there that feel like you have a real personal relationship with god with or without religion in your life?
do you still call god jehovah?
-
-
peacefulpete
Sandy...please get a copy of Steve Hassan's book, Releasing the Bonds. It is very insightful about the psychology of leaving a high control organization and offers help for reaching those yet in these groups. Much of the book deals specifically with the JWs. I feel that after understanding why we have the feelings we do after leaving this organization and that this is a normal process, we are then better equipped to pursue the questions of "god or no god". Please get the book it is the single best book on the topic and is used by cult recovery councelors.
-
108
Why is the Bible wrong?
by StinkyPantz inthis primarily goes out to other agnostics and athiests.
this week i got into two interesting conversations that i will admit that i was ill prepared for.
one was with a jw friend of mine who wanted to know why i thought jw's were wrong.
-
-
peacefulpete
A whole lot of man power and use of ramps sand and time went into the Pyramids. Recent discoveries of a well established workers community next to the Pyramids has unraveled much of the mystery. It can now be stated that the work was viewed as an honored national project using largely volunteer labor not slaves from all over Egypt. It was a lot like the Patterson building projects. Volunteers motivated by religious zeal lived and died cxreating this monument to their gods and leaders. The setting of the large vaulted stones was accomplished by ingenius use of sand to slowly lower pieces in place. As the sand poured out through holes in the chamber floors the massive stones were carefully eased into place. The outside blocks were moved with nothing more miraculous than rollers, water and ropes up a winding inclined ramp encircling the structure. No tractor beams required.
-
108
Why is the Bible wrong?
by StinkyPantz inthis primarily goes out to other agnostics and athiests.
this week i got into two interesting conversations that i will admit that i was ill prepared for.
one was with a jw friend of mine who wanted to know why i thought jw's were wrong.
-
-
peacefulpete
hooberus.......I was just thinking about Gal 1 when Paul boasts that he did not receive his gospel from any man but only by revelation, that he preached "his" gospel for 3 years before even making an attempt to contact the Christian Apostles in Jerusalem. Even in the washed version of this encounter between these 2 sects of Christianity in Acts we see serious doctrinal difference and hostility. The story suggests Paul's convincing the old fashioned Apostles and older men in Jerusalem minds after consulting the scriptures and hearing testimonials. Howevr the final resolution was that Paul preach to uncircumsized and they will preach to the circumsized! The final result was that neither changed their position. In fact, sometime later Paul says he chastized Peter for not abandoning the Mosaic Law. These passages reveal the true origin of Christianity as we now understand it. After 70 when the Jerusalem sect was dissolved Pauline Christianity took off unfettered by historical constaints. By the way the passage you site in 1 Cor 15:3-11 appears to contradict this statement in Gal 1 when he says he did receive this gospel through human assistance. It also is considered by some scholars as a later addition to the Pauline text. 1 Cor is regarded by textural scholars as a pieced together collection of writings attributed to Paul and addressed to Corinth for cataloging convenience. I can no longer respond to this site daily. My webtv does not work with the new program and can only access it at the library once in a while.
-
108
Why is the Bible wrong?
by StinkyPantz inthis primarily goes out to other agnostics and athiests.
this week i got into two interesting conversations that i will admit that i was ill prepared for.
one was with a jw friend of mine who wanted to know why i thought jw's were wrong.
-
-
peacefulpete
hooberus...No authority I've seen suggests that the Gospels were written before Paul's letters. The Gospels do evidence a changing theology developing from Jewish to Hellenistic. This is too great a topic for this forum, but your comment seemed to suggest that Paul's writting did not influence the Gospel stories. The evidence I, and most researchers, believe says different. The fact that Paul does not seem at all interested in quoting Gospels for auhority is difficult to dismiss but when reading Paul's letters when see what appears an almost casual indifference to any historical man caled Jesus. His entire theology revolves around mysteries and secrets apparently unknown to the Apostles. How much of Christianity is actually from the Gospels? Arguably very little. Today in fact "Paul only" Churches abound. They contend that only the books of Paul (dismissing Hebrews generally) apply to Gentile Christians. Do their doctrines greatly differ from those of say the Baptists or Methodists? Very little. This is because Paul created Christianity as we know the word today. Christianity does not require the Gospels at all. They were no doubt compiled by early Christians seeking to attatch a "history" to their new cult. They did this by melding something old (pagan savior myth) with something new (First century Jewish Messianism). Read the books suggested you to learn this for yourself. And to become more familiar with the methods of textural analysis employed.
Edited by - peacefulpete on 16 February 2003 1:36:55
-
108
Why is the Bible wrong?
by StinkyPantz inthis primarily goes out to other agnostics and athiests.
this week i got into two interesting conversations that i will admit that i was ill prepared for.
one was with a jw friend of mine who wanted to know why i thought jw's were wrong.
-
-
peacefulpete
hooberus...I'm sorry I spoke from memory as I should know better. The Luke 22:19,20 pericope is not found in the Benzae Codices NOR any old Latin texts from the 2nd to 4th centuries. Additionally the passage uses words and phases found nowhere else in Luke or Acts. It is the only verse in Luke that implies a substitutionary sacrifice for sins. These unique characteristics coupled with early manuscript exclusion are evidence of late insertion. For this reason most recognise it as a likely addition to the text. This is why the Revised Standard traslation for example includes the passage only as a footnote. There is no excuse for my mistake. It does not however change the point that this text is doubtfull original to Luke. Some of my comment was recalling other alterations in the text that occured during the late third and early fourth century that can be identified with certainty yet are not widely known to be alterations by believers. Changes that reflected changing church views on Jesus parentage and ressurection. But this was another topic entirely. Again I apologise for my dating error. Apparently the addition to Luke occurred around 200-225 ce (dating for P75) and then was retained only in certain manuscripts, as it was not recognised by the Benzae or Latin manuscript writers.
Edited by - peacefulpete on 16 February 2003 2:10:55
-
10
Rebuild of Babylon
by pettygrudger ini read this thread: .
http://www.purelanguage.net/forums/showthread.php?s=e15a84ab92fd9b2062576836c09de936&threadid=6965.
and it got me to thinking - & looking - for information on the rebuild of babylon......i can't seem to find any "well" researched or informed documents - have any of you looked into this "prophecy" - and what were your conclusions?
-
-
peacefulpete
Babylon was never dstroyed it was captured a number of times. It was a great and influential city under the Persians the Parthians and the Greeks. Cyrus the Great used the city as one of the administrative Caitals of the empire. In 275 BC the inhabitants were relocated by it's then Greek governors to Leucia for geo/political reasons. The city was not completely abandoned even then. In fact as late as the 2nd century a thriving community existed. Time changes everything,and atrophy of infrastructure and lack of local resources eventually forced the people to abandon her. As happens to nearly all cities. It is only in the furtile mind of Jewish writers that it was destroyed by the Persians and made desolate never to be inhabited. It is only in the equally furtile minds that it will play some role in Bible. Do not believe that if a passage of "prophecy" obviously went unfullfilled it MUST refer to a yet future event. Especially is this illogical when the Bible erroneously insists it was fullfilled, when this has been proven to have been mere exageration for propagandistic purposes.
-
34
Origin of Hydrogen
by Satanus inmost elements on this earth were made inside stars.
stars fuse the lighter elements into heavier ones.
stars, in turn, are born from hydrogen clouds, generally called nebulae.
-
-
peacefulpete
Interesting discussion, I wish I could add to it. On a note about new militery armour , I read in this month's Na. Geographic about a firm that has genetically crossed goats with spiders.(no joke) They produce spider silk protein in their milk. This is extracted and the resulting fiber is many times stroner than steel yet incredibly light and can be woven into fabric. It will likely soon be used for bullet proof clothing. More proof that milk does a body good.