Before you go and comment like a wild bandicoot on my blog about how there is no accuracy within the Bible at all and once again demand proof. how about you
1) Read what is already posted such as: http://www.matchdoctor.com/blog_38041/The_Accuracy_of_the_Bible_per_Archeology_Part_1.html
2) Do some research.
If you are too lazy to do your own research at all, then you can bloody well wait until I am ready, of my own volition, to post what I please on the subject as I please to post it.
I'm not your reference library!
And you figure out for yourself what constitutes proof for you. Then if it turns out, as I suspect it will, that nothing will suit you as you'd just rather not know and couldn't keep an open mind about the research anyway, then don't bother me. It's a big waste of time to discuss such things with people who don't want to discuss.. and it's a big waste of your time to try to argue with me about them as I already know, for an absolute fact, that I am right and you are wrong.
Because of me? No. Because I know there has been a lot of archeological date found, scientific data found, anectdotal evidence, etc. as well as the fact that I just bloody well talked to God and he set me straight on more than one thing .. so I know he exists and the Bible is accurate.
Not because someone forced me to go to church or lured me there with pony rides as a child or because I was kidnapped and indoctrinated by the dreaded Jehovah's Witnesses .. .who, by the way, are one of the absolute hardest religous groups to join and maintain membership in and that is a completely un-cultlike way of living. .. but because I did my own research and didn't take any old passing atheist or priest or rabbi or buddhist monk or hooker or politicians word for it. I correlated information, I considered, I studied, I discussed. .and I learned. I had an open mind.
I still do have an open mind . it's just a better informed one.
And, somewhere in there, I did spend about a week with a real cult. So I know there is a vast difference between Jehovah's Witnesses, who expect you to maintain a certain degree of morality and respect for the law, etc. and people who won't let you sleep for days on end, won't let you eat protein so that they can trick you into believing they have cured you of the woman's curse, and then try to drug you up and who burst in your room at odd hours to massage you and/or yell at you and/or demand you allow them to save your immprtal soul and tell you what they believe. That was a cult .. Jehovah's Witnesses are people who are dedicated to serving Jehovah aka: God
One tell tale sign: the cult had guards at the door with machine guns. You moved, you had to explain why.
Jehovah's Witnesss, you could stand up, hop on one foot right out the door, and go home. They would ask questions, sure .. but they wouldn't shoot you!
Taking Kung Fu or joining a Square Dance Club is more like being part of a cult.
So, anyone who wants to know more about the accuracy of the Bible, I suggest you get to googling and dogpiling and asking Jeeves. Because, yes, it is a subject I enjoy and I have blogged about it, touched on it somewhat in the forums in times past, but I am not going to jump up and do it just because it's either requested or ordered. Slavery is over. Or, has MD become a cult, too?
Copy & paste to friend: (Click inside box; Ctrl + C to copy; Ctrl + V to paste)
|
|
read more blogs!
Blogs by HopelesslyHopeful:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Bible Accuracy and people who like to be rude and lazy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sparechange64
|
Apr 19 @ 10:26PM
|
|
I agree whole - heartedly that the Bible is accurate, without error, as true now as true as everything that happened in history ... we never "grow out" or "modernize" or whatever else you want to call it ... away from the Bible ...
One thing though .... I studied cults for sometime ... as someone very very very close to me was involved .... I think your definition of a cult may be different than mine ... mine includes all thos that do a certain amount of brainwashing tactics that take someone AWAY from the truth .... after all, what is more important - physical or spiritual death? So, I would include jw in this classification ... in fact, their own bible states that there are lower gods ... they could not avoid this whole fiasco - due to John 1:1-14 ... Christians know that Jesus always existed (by this passage) and that it was He Became the Word of God and He Is God (in the trinity sense of course) ... the jw bible states he is "a" god - lower case
keep it up
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
Apr 20 @ 12:52AM
|
|
Well then, to whatever you are, all other religions would be a cult: right?
Pentecostles, Baptists, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Buddhists , Sikhs, Moslems, Mormons, Jews For Jesus, any religion you can think of and care to name has tenents of faith that are different than any other religion and therefore all religions except for your own would, by your own definition, be a cult. Yes?
By the way the translation of the Bible, the New World Translation, is accurate per historical records and a minimum of delving into Judaic beliefs and/or the Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, etc. languages.
And I have quoted the King James translation as also mentioning lower gods.
So, which Bible is it that has all the truths and none of the fictions that the New World Translation and the King James Bible are both rife with, from your point of view?
Thank you for your comment, by the way. I don't agree with you, obviously, but I do thank you for your participation and your politeness.
And, *ahem* that is one of the passages : one of many: wherein Jehovah's Witnesses aka: the Christian congregation, also know that Jesus always existed from the beginning of Creation because he was the first creation .
Does any of this have to do with what was blogged on? lol I can't quite remember anymore. Tired. Goodnight.
|
|
sparechange64
|
Apr 20 @ 6:02PM
|
|
Very interesting point you make .... I do understand why you would say that also ... there is truth in it as well ... but only as far as the "teachers" knowingly misleading ... and the "teachers" coud have been someone from long ago ... Timothy warned teachers what they taught and how they would be held accountable
I cannot comment on the historic accuracy of tnwt since I have only read parts of it, but I will say that there is something to be said of grammar and context. Most of what I am stating that people have taken things out of their gramatic context. I will say that my understanding of several versions mentioning "lessor or lower gods" are speaking of either idols or people of powerful positions.
FYI, ct russel had a 6th grade education, and ran a wheat scam among other things and even states in his 5-book-series "studies in the scriptures" that a person would be better off reading his translation than the actual Bible
In conclusion, I actually studied to be a pastor for many years, studied many versions, and own several versions ... had one sister in the jw and another in another. The point is, is that a group of people ... all of the same belief got together to write the tnwt ...
but several versions ... use a group whose members of theologians, historians, liguistics experts, etc... and in fact have only a few clergy
... and according to certain authorities, the NASB is the most grammatically correct.
|
|
HopelesslyHopeful
|
Apr 21 @ 1:39AM
|
|
I'm not sure what some of that meant ... but most of it that I did understand was interesting.
When I was a kid I had a Bible Concordance that came from a Catholic church, I believe. I believe that as I had a Duay (sp?) Bible, a translation of a Pope's journal or diary, and a few other things that were found in the dump and were things that should have been in a library that only the clergy of Catholicism, and only those of certain rank, were allowed access to.
This Bible Concordance was not for Catholics, though. It was a non-denominational breakdown of translations, definitions of words, etc. It covered Mormons, Jews and Moslems where appropriate, Jehovah's Witnesses, Catholics, Baptists, Pentacostles .. anyone who used the Holy Scriptures in part or in full in their doctrine.
This was, I learned from talking to priests and pastors, bishops, and ministers over the years, the premiere concordance .. the one that you would find in all their libraries as it was not written based on the prejudices of any one faith but by a secular historian who had a love of God but no affiliations to any particular faith.
He and his colleagues were prejudiced against Jehovah's Witnesses, however, and he freely admitted that within his footnotes and forewords and such.
Nevertheless, on mostly every page were the words "in this matter, unfortunately, Jehovah's Witnesses have the most accurate definition" or "follow the correct teaching" or "have interpreted the matter correctly" etc.
So, I asked the priest that I loved best, why, if they are so right, as the Concordance claims .. why do people say they are wrong and hate them? And he pointed out yet another place where it said that overall Jehovah's Witnesses are provably the strongest christian-based faith by accuracy and consistency, and he said "Because no one likes to hear that their faith is more wrong than someone elses."
And I said "If you believe it's more wrong, then fix it. And if you don't, then why bother with animosity?"
And he said "If you believe it's wrong fix it? Now you sound like one of those damned Witnesses. You can't just fix what's wrong with the Catholic church. You'd be assasinated."
I have to say he tried. I also have to say I haven't seen him in decades .. so maybe he was right.
|
|
|