Posts by peacefulpete

163

Moral absolutes

by Aztec in

i keep saying i am going to start a thread on this topic so here goes.... what, if anything, is always morally wrong?

murder, rape, incest?

how much do you think your belief, or lack thereof, in a higher power influences your opinion?.

It is unwise to try to use the Bible as the measure of what are absolute wrongs. The very commandment to not "kill" is a perfect example. The word there used is "retsakh" and it means roughly to kill a fellow tribesman without the consent of the tribe. Never was a prohibition against the killing of gentiles for their land,goods,girls, etc expressed or implied. Even the Talmud compiled years later still did not confuse the two. It says "One who intending to kill a gentile, kills an Israelite, is to be deemed guiltless."

The taboo about sex with minors is also a cultural construct. In Greece and Rome for example the practice was normal and without apparent harm to the child. It was deemed recreation for both parties and an honor to the boy. It is apparently only when this practice runs counter to the cultural norms that the child perceives itself as different,unclean, a victim and abused. This then is the source of the emotional damage. A present day tribe in S. America engages in sexual activity until puberty, it is then that the tribe feels a taboo is in order.

It is untrue that without absolutes society would decay into anarchy. Social convention is shaped by local needs and traditions. These are real and effective methods of constraining group behavior. It is only when a clash of cultures occurs that one people accuse the other of immorality.

3

The Incredible Hulk

by peacefulpete in

whose imagination is not stirred by the idea of having superhuman strength?

stories like the hulk delighted me as a boy and still excite me today.

(cheesy computer animation aside) .

peacefulpete

Whose imagination is not stirred by the idea of having superhuman strength? Stories like the Hulk delighted me as a boy and still excite me today. (cheesy computer animation aside)

My comic books (Hulk, Spiderman and Thing, the rest were too scary)were full of tales of heros that right wrongs using muscle and brute force, the only language bad guys understood.

In the bible I found the same bigger than life superheros beating impossible odds. Judges 3:31 boasts of a man named Shamgar, a good name for a superhero,who single handedly stops an army of philistines and kills 600 of them with a pointed stick. Lets not forget David the warrior king who was said to have singlehandedly killed a bear a lion an 11 ft tall giant and tens of thousands of regular sized men.. The best of course wass my hero Samson. He kills lions of course but aso tears up and carries away stone city gates weighing tons. He also kills bad guys. 1000 of them met their demise when he wacked them with a jawbone of an ass. Earlier he killed so many he piled them up, legs and thighs. He lives in a cleft in the rocks he drinks from water magically produced from the ass jawbone(see footnotes NWT). Now here is a man's man. I remember the stories about him told me as a boy as I pushed out my chest and flexed my muscles I wanted to slay lions and Philistines too!
Then I learned about Hercules in school. I had found another hero with super human strength. He too killed a lion. He too killed thousands with a crude weapon. He also had long hair. I was confused. Did Jehovah give Hercules his muscles too? No he was not a real person I was told. He was mythology.

My favorite was still the Hulk ( Lou Ferrigno not the computer one). He had everything the others guys had but he never got messed up with girls.

2

methodologies

by peacefulpete in

anyone who enters the fray of bibical scholarship finds a world of empassioned arguments drawing diametrically oposing conclusions.

both/all sides of a debate claim relevant archaeologically and paleographically established facts to support their position.

i propose to describe the methodologies of the 3 foremost camps of thought on this subject.. the 3 camps are in my estimation, 1..the conservative historical critical method (hcm)supporters, 2...the so called "minimalists", and the 3...bible inerranists.. to roughly approximate the priciples and approaches of these 3 groups i have supposed a hypothetical bible text that has 3 elements open to historical review and proof/disproof, i will call them a,b,c.

peacefulpete

Sorry for the typos I still can not edit from home and can only post from here every once in a while.????

2

methodologies

by peacefulpete in

anyone who enters the fray of bibical scholarship finds a world of empassioned arguments drawing diametrically oposing conclusions.

both/all sides of a debate claim relevant archaeologically and paleographically established facts to support their position.

i propose to describe the methodologies of the 3 foremost camps of thought on this subject.. the 3 camps are in my estimation, 1..the conservative historical critical method (hcm)supporters, 2...the so called "minimalists", and the 3...bible inerranists.. to roughly approximate the priciples and approaches of these 3 groups i have supposed a hypothetical bible text that has 3 elements open to historical review and proof/disproof, i will call them a,b,c.

peacefulpete

Anyone who enters the fray of Bibical scholarship finds a world of empassioned arguments drawing diametrically oposing conclusions. Both/all sides of a debate claim relevant archaeologically and paleographically established facts to support their position. What is going on?........

I propose to describe the methodologies of the 3 foremost camps of thought on this subject.

The 3 camps are in my estimation, 1..the conservative historical critical method (hcm)supporters, 2...the so called "minimalists", and the 3...Bible inerranists.

To roughly approximate the priciples and approaches of these 3 groups I have supposed a hypothetical Bible text that has 3 elements open to historical review and proof/disproof, I will call them A,B,C. These may be names of Kings, cities, dates, descriptions of the political and religious environ, stuff like this that archaeology and other historical sciences can offer input.

Lets say that modern study and digging has revealed an inconsistancy with detail A. The hcm group will publish their findings but assume an essentially historical core. The new information will be seen as an embellishment of an otherwise historically valuable text. Group 2 the "minimalists" will see the inconsistancy of detail A and suspect B and C are likewise fictional until B and C can be demonstrated to be historical. Group 3, the Bible inerranists will see point B and C as unDISproven and therefore have faith that detail A is being misinterpreted or worse the information is being distorted by Bible haters.

This gets complicated when more and more evidence comes in as inconsistant with the Bible narratives. Many hcm scholars are left with questions of just what is left to regard as historical. The minimalists are derided for questioning everything, even the traditionally "established" history. The Bible inerranists are cornered and become more certain that conspiracy is everywhere, some resort to out dated reference works to cling to a semblence of rationality.

I welcome serious discussion about the methods only, please no posting of links.

18

Nazareth/Nazarite....answers?

by peacefulpete in

especially gumby may be interested in this bit of speculation i found on the net.

some time ago a thread was started that revealed that nazareth was founded as a village 100-300 years too late to have been the birthplace of jesus, so what is the explanation for the gospel story?

at www.essenes.crosswinds.net/naz01.htm a possible answer in offered.

peacefulpete

What can I say, your logic and objective analysis are mind boggling. Please do not respond to serious posts since you feel that being a Bible Literalist means evidence is irrelevant.

18

Nazareth/Nazarite....answers?

by peacefulpete in

especially gumby may be interested in this bit of speculation i found on the net.

some time ago a thread was started that revealed that nazareth was founded as a village 100-300 years too late to have been the birthplace of jesus, so what is the explanation for the gospel story?

at www.essenes.crosswinds.net/naz01.htm a possible answer in offered.

peacefulpete

This has been discussed at length recently here before, a farm is not a city. Nazareth did not exist during the first century according to the most recent and exhaustive findings. Bible believers have again siezed upon anything to retain their intractable position. This thread was not about the archeaological evidence per se, it was about how the Gospel of Mark and likely Q used the word. It is entirely plausable and consistent with the known facts that the word meant, not a village, but the Essene Nazarite vows. Later authors or redactors simply misunderstood the term and wrongly assumed it to be a reference to a village that by that time did exist.

18

Nazareth/Nazarite....answers?

by peacefulpete in

especially gumby may be interested in this bit of speculation i found on the net.

some time ago a thread was started that revealed that nazareth was founded as a village 100-300 years too late to have been the birthplace of jesus, so what is the explanation for the gospel story?

at www.essenes.crosswinds.net/naz01.htm a possible answer in offered.

peacefulpete

While your hypothesis is amuzing, do you have any examples of the term "branch" having been in use as a metaphor for a suburb or are you simply transferring the 20th century idiom ("branch" office etc.) to make the Bible say something it does not say. When a person is faced with choices of what to believe, evidence should be the determining factor. While you have charactorized the archeaological evidence as "circumstantial" and the lack of documentary evidence as easily explained away by the conjuring up of an unknown town/suburb at an unknown location in the same district as the real Nazareth, you have not offered any evidence to support the scriptures that refer to the village of Nazareth. The hypothesis I posted dovetails well with the facts and may even be tossing believers in an historical Jesus a bone.

Created evidence is not evidence.

38

Questions about Jehovah's Witnesses that I need answers to

by the real truth in

i'm not trying to offend anyone by asking questions, but i really want answers to my questions from jehovah's witnesses.

ok, i've been having a problem with john 1:1. how many gods are there?

the most famous distortion in the nwt is john 1:1. the nwt inserts the word "a" in front of the second god in this verse.

peacefulpete

Awakeand be free....Check the archives ( my history)for a thread I started about Is.9:6,7 and why it does not refer to Jesus.

54

Quesions about Jehovah

by the real truth in

i am not writing these quetions to offend anyone, i am just seeking honest answers.

will you jehovah's witnesses help me in finding answers?

there is only 1 god.

peacefulpete

Awaken...check out the archives for a thread I started and others carried about the Is. 9 passage and why it was not about Jesus at all.

16

JW'S and God's Justice?

by micheal in

apr 10, 2003

especiallly considering all the great people that will never get a chance to recieve "a witness" that will, again according to them, be eternally destroyed at armageddon.

and i refuse to believe that hearing " do you want the latest wt and awake mags?

peacefulpete

I agree Alan as you very capably poited out they do use double speak. But NEVER did they say that non-witnesses will survive Armagedon. They skirt the question by implying as much while actually saying that because some may yet BECOME JWs more than those presently JWs will be saved. The research you have done is much appreciated.