I have now met a real life creationist.

[Cheerful Charlie]

In the Bible, the New Testament, Jesus repeatedly tells us to sell all we have and give to the poor. Do you really follow the commands of Jesus? Does the Bible really mean anything to you?
Luke 14:33
In the same way, those of you who do not give up everything you have cannot be my disciples.

I wonder what it means to you. Things are not always what they seem.
Look at the context.
Jesus is talking about counting the cost before beginning any project; i.e. the cost of building a tower, and/or, engaging an enemy with far superior numbers than you have.
He was emphasizing the responsibilities of discipleship; the willingness to part with all of our material goods for his sake.

This is silly. Jesus repeatedly told his followers to sell all they had and give to the poor. Why?

The gospels represent Jesus as believing the world as his followers knew it would end, soon, soon, soon, and owning much property would be an impediment to earning salvation. You cannot serve God and Mammon et al. when you go through all the comments made by Jesus, it is obvious the gospels represent him as believing the second coming and the kingdom of God would reward those who gave up all their property one hundred fold.

Context? There's your context! Sermon on the mount. Don't worry about what you will eat, drink or wear. Just worry about being mistaken for a wealthy person when Jesus returns with his angels and clouds of heaven to gather his saints and judge the world.

Matthew 24
³⁰ “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth^[c] will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.^{[d] 31} And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

Matthew 26
⁶⁴ “You have said so,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”^[e]

So the context was, since the world is ending soon and the rich will suffer for having wealth, abandon all wealth, while you can. This is the main message of the gospels. And that did not happen as promised.

Well the high priest didn't see that and so the context, why his followers were to sell all they had and give to the poor was based on a grave error of reasoning. The many prophecies of the gospels from Jesus that the end would happen in that day and age were so much nonsense, nothing more. and no, he's not coming back, now or in the future.

If people think so, then the reason to sell all you have and give to the poor still holds. Again, the context why he told his followers to do that are quite clear.

Matthew 6
¹⁹ “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. ²⁰ But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. ²¹ For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
²² “The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are healthy,^[c] your whole body will be full of light. ²³ But if your eyes are unhealthy,^[d] your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!
²⁴ “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money

 

[DrZoidberg]

Is there something in their literature that says so? Please point me to it.

"Studies in the Scriptures" I've actually read it.

With no proof for this allegation forthcoming, this charge is sufficiently debunked.

So you deny that JW use Studies in the Scriptures as a companion piece to it?

Nothing to deny. JWs do not use "Studies in the Scriptures" at all!
You alleged:

They've accepted that the Bible is out of date, and they've created a companion piece to it. An update.

That is simply not true. There is no need for any updates:
“. . .“I am bearing witness to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone makes an addition to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this scroll; 19 and if anyone takes anything away from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God will take his portion away from the trees of life and out of the holy city, things that are written about in this scroll.” (Revelation 22:18, 19)

““Now look! I am about to die, and you well know with all your heart and with all your soul that not one word out of all the good promises that Jehovah your God has spoken to you has failed. They have all come true for you. Not one word of them has failed.” (Joshua 23:14)
“By myself I have sworn; The word has gone out of my mouth in righteousness, And it will not return: To me every knee will bend, Every tongue will swear loyalty” (Isaiah 45:23)
“. . .So my word that goes out of my mouth will be. It will not return to me without results, But it will certainly accomplish whatever is my delight, And it will have sure success in what I send it to do.” (Isaiah 55:11)

I asked you to show me something in our literature that says we made an update to the bible. You failed to provide that information, so your claim is debunked!

ha ha. I know all this. JW says they aren't changing the message of the Bible and then change it. It was a while ago I studied it, so I don't have it fresh. But just ask any ex-JW. Once the brainwashing stops, and they get a little distance to it they always see the ridiculousness of Russel's claims.

The reasons for shunning, of course isn't to limit association with wrongdoers. It's to keep critical voices about their creative Biblical interpretation at a distance. Any idiot understands that a movement that doesn't encourage internal critique and debate is unhealthy and dysfunctional. The fact that they shun people tells you everything you need to know about JW.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Context? There's your context!

Oh, you missed it.
'Context' doesn't mean what you think it means.
In apologetics, 'context' means the mental gyrations necessary in order to make what the bible actually says come out with the meaning that the speaker approves of. Or that his authorities TELL him he approves of.

So when the Bible says something that's heretical to the apologist, quoting the bible is 'taking it out of context' until an apology can be found or jimmied up.

 

[DrZoidberg]

The Bible assumes a hell of a lot as obvious to the reader, just because it was obvious to iron age citizens of the Roman empire. Everything from science, to philosophy to cultural practices. Everything in the Bible either is written in contrast to a pagan practice, or it is written to affirm a pagan practice or it's entered to settle a specific political score within the early Christian community. And that world was quite different from our own. Without significant education about the iron age pagan world you will most likely be wrong about your interpretation. It's not easy. Especially that last one is impossible to figure out from superficial reading. It requires loads of study of both the ancient Mediterranean world, as well as Roman internal politics as well as early Christian politics.

An example of what I mean. 200 - 550 AD the Roman world were overrun by, so called "parabalani". Often young Christian men who had renounced all worldly possesions, left their farms to join Christian mobs fighting for Christian values. But always fanatic. The cynic might say that these were poor and destitute and had nothing to lose anyway. But I digress. The problem was that these had official sanction and with some flimsy justification could beat up whatever non-Christian they fancied. Savvy nobles converted to Christianity and used the parabalani as hired thugs to terrorise non-Christians and enrich themselves. They kept "stables" of them. Clothed and fed them.

The parabalani couldn't be criticized outright. Because they were Christian. But the specific teachings of priests who encouraged the parabalani could be argued against. Even though the parabalani helped make Christianity the dominant faith in the Mediterranean world, they soon overstayed their welcome. Those in power realized how they were a destructive force for society as a whole. So smart priests, who wanted to be politically influential, said what those in power wanted to hear. This affected which phrases were inserted into the Bible. Just from the text itself it would be impossible to know this. You need to know the specific details of that political conflict.

The parabalani were eventually suppressed. By 550 there's no more mention of them. But at no point where they ever denounced outright. The power of the parabalani was only subtly outmaneuvered from the top.

There's many more like this. Another good one is Galen's scientific theory of gender. Unless you know this the rules regarding what men and women should do become nothing but decrees without rational justification. The text assume you know and agree with Galen. But almost nobody have even heard of Galen today, let alone his theories.

 

[wilson]

If you are not a friend, a family member, or a representative of an organisation I currently do business with (with a good reason to call, and preferably with an appointment), then don't knock on my door.

I don't care how important it is to you to tell me about a wonderful opportunity to buy something, donate to something, worship something, or vote for someone - in the unlikely event that I want to do any of these things, then rest assured, I will come to you.

Unsolicited door-knocking is rude and frankly immoral behaviour; and you have no right to be upset when I am not polite and cheery in my response to your interruption of my life, no matter how cheerfully you greet me.

It's not your place to use up my irreplaceable time with things that you have decided I should care about. If you wouldn't take my money without my permission, then neither should you take my time. And if you do take either from me, don't expect me to be gentle with you in my response.

Your outrage on this issue is inappropriate. Unsolicited door-knocking is legal in most countries. To decline is the right of the householder, which saves his precious time; but the right to knock cannot be rightly abrogated.
"Wherever anyone does not receive you or listen to your words, on going out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet.” (Matthew 10:14)
That is the law!
http://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-01/59-door-to-door-solicitation.html

So - you seize an opportunity to vent.
But..........
How does this prove that most first-century Christians were slaves?
That was the point - wasn't it?

 

[wilson]

"Studies in the Scriptures" I've actually read it.

With no proof for this allegation forthcoming, this charge is sufficiently debunked.

So you deny that JW use Studies in the Scriptures as a companion piece to it?

Nothing to deny. JWs do not use "Studies in the Scriptures" at all!
You alleged:

They've accepted that the Bible is out of date, and they've created a companion piece to it. An update.

That is simply not true. There is no need for any updates:
“. . .“I am bearing witness to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If anyone makes an addition to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this scroll; 19 and if anyone takes anything away from the words of the scroll of this prophecy, God will take his portion away from the trees of life and out of the holy city, things that are written about in this scroll.” (Revelation 22:18, 19)

““Now look! I am about to die, and you well know with all your heart and with all your soul that not one word out of all the good promises that Jehovah your God has spoken to you has failed. They have all come true for you. Not one word of them has failed.” (Joshua 23:14)
“By myself I have sworn; The word has gone out of my mouth in righteousness, And it will not return: To me every knee will bend, Every tongue will swear loyalty” (Isaiah 45:23)
“. . .So my word that goes out of my mouth will be. It will not return to me without results, But it will certainly accomplish whatever is my delight, And it will have sure success in what I send it to do.” (Isaiah 55:11)

I asked you to show me something in our literature that says we made an update to the bible. You failed to provide that information, so your claim is debunked!

ha ha. I know all this.

Do you? They why make the false statement that JWs have updated the bible?
Charge is debunked!

JW says they aren't changing the message of the Bible and then change it.

Give us an example.

It was a while ago I studied it, so I don't have it fresh. But just ask any ex-JW. Once the brainwashing stops, and they get a little distance to it they always see the ridiculousness of Russel's claims.

The claim of updating the bible was never made by JWs, so this is irrelevant.

The reasons for shunning, of course isn't to limit association with wrongdoers. It's to keep critical voices about their creative Biblical interpretation at a distance. Any idiot understands that a movement that doesn't encourage internal critique and debate is unhealthy and dysfunctional. The fact that they shun people tells you everything you need to know about JW.

This is also irrelevant.
You still have not proved your point.

 

[wilson]

I wonder what it means to you. Things are not always what they seem.
Look at the context.
Jesus is talking about counting the cost before beginning any project; i.e. the cost of building a tower, and/or, engaging an enemy with far superior numbers than you have.
He was emphasizing the responsibilities of discipleship; the willingness to part with all of our material goods for his sake.

This is silly. Jesus repeatedly told his followers to sell all they had and give to the poor. Why?

The gospels represent Jesus as believing the world as his followers knew it would end, soon, soon, soon, and owning much property would be an impediment to earning salvation. You cannot serve God and Mammon et al. when you go through all the comments made by Jesus, it is obvious the gospels represent him as believing the second coming and the kingdom of God would reward those who gave up all their property one hundred fold.

Context? There's your context! Sermon on the mount. Don't worry about what you will eat, drink or wear. Just worry about being mistaken for a wealthy person when Jesus returns with his angels and clouds of heaven to gather his saints and judge the world.

Matthew 24
³⁰ “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth^[c] will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.^{[d] 31} And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

Matthew 26
⁶⁴ “You have said so,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”^[e]

So the context was, since the world is ending soon and the rich will suffer for having wealth, abandon all wealth, while you can. This is the main message of the gospels. And that did not happen as promised.

Well the high priest didn't see that and so the context, why his followers were to sell all they had and give to the poor was based on a grave error of reasoning. The many prophecies of the gospels from Jesus that the end would happen in that day and age were so much nonsense, nothing more. and no, he's not coming back, now or in the future.

If people think so, then the reason to sell all you have and give to the poor still holds. Again, the context why he told his followers to do that are quite clear.

Matthew 6
¹⁹ “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. ²⁰ But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. ²¹ For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
²² “The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are healthy,^[c] your whole body will be full of light. ²³ But if your eyes are unhealthy,^[d] your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!
²⁴ “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money

I told you - you're not listening!
Jesus told his followers when the end would come:
"And this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.” (Matthew 24:13, 14)

The preaching of the Gospel is to be spread throughout the entire earth BEFORE the end comes.

Has it reached saturation point yet?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

So, if we help stop the spread of Christianity, it will prevent God from kicking off the apocalypse and all the related plagues and wars and death and stuff?

Thanks for the heads up. We'll continue getting on with that.

 

[atrib]

I think God likes one-on-one relationships.

And yet it cannot be bothered to show up in person and tell us that. We are supposed to believe in it based simply on faith and pray to it. Doesn't sound like a healthy relationship to me.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

This is silly. Jesus repeatedly told his followers to sell all they had and give to the poor. Why?

The gospels represent Jesus as believing the world as his followers knew it would end, soon, soon, soon, and owning much property would be an impediment to earning salvation. You cannot serve God and Mammon et al. when you go through all the comments made by Jesus, it is obvious the gospels represent him as believing the second coming and the kingdom of God would reward those who gave up all their property one hundred fold.

Context? There's your context! Sermon on the mount. Don't worry about what you will eat, drink or wear. Just worry about being mistaken for a wealthy person when Jesus returns with his angels and clouds of heaven to gather his saints and judge the world.

Matthew 24
³⁰ “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth^[c] will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory.^{[d] 31} And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

Matthew 26
⁶⁴ “You have said so,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: From now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.”^[e]

So the context was, since the world is ending soon and the rich will suffer for having wealth, abandon all wealth, while you can. This is the main message of the gospels. And that did not happen as promised.

Well the high priest didn't see that and so the context, why his followers were to sell all they had and give to the poor was based on a grave error of reasoning. The many prophecies of the gospels from Jesus that the end would happen in that day and age were so much nonsense, nothing more. and no, he's not coming back, now or in the future.

If people think so, then the reason to sell all you have and give to the poor still holds. Again, the context why he told his followers to do that are quite clear.

Matthew 6
¹⁹ “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. ²⁰ But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. ²¹ For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
²² “The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are healthy,^[c] your whole body will be full of light. ²³ But if your eyes are unhealthy,^[d] your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!
²⁴ “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money

I told you - you're not listening!
Jesus told his followers when the end would come:
"And this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.” (Matthew 24:13, 14)

The preaching of the Gospel is to be spread throughout the entire earth BEFORE the end comes.

Has it reached saturation point yet?

Oh dear, dear, dear. Context again.

Matthew 16:28
Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.

Plus other verses. No, it is obvious when you look at ALL the relevant verses, Jesus is represented as telling us all of this was to have happened soon, not 1900 + years later.

Matthew 10:23King James Version (KJV)

²³ But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

The problem is, you have to cherry pick one foolish verse to ignore the context of numerous other very clear verses that say something you wish to ignore. Sorry, nobody here will buy that. The gospels are so very clear about what Jesus said about all of this that torturing one poor little verse like you do is ludicrous.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think God likes one-on-one relationships.

I've several times challenged God to appear before me and let himself be known. If God exists it's pretty clear he wants me to be an atheist. Who am I to defy God?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I think God likes one-on-one relationships.

I've several times challenged God to appear before me and let himself be known. If God exists it's pretty clear he wants me to be an atheist. Who am I to defy God?

Luke 4:12 - Thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the test.

You were just doing it wrong by directly challenging him. If you want him to appear before you, try being more passive aggressive about it.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I've several times challenged God to appear before me and let himself be known. If God exists it's pretty clear he wants me to be an atheist. Who am I to defy God?

Luke 4:12 - Thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the test.

You were just doing it wrong by directly challenging him. If you want him to appear before you, try being more passive aggressive about it.

I could set out on a mission to burn down all the churches I can find. Unless God appears before me to stop me in person, I'll take that as a sign he wants me to keep going. Clever!

 

[funinspace]

I've several times challenged God to appear before me and let himself be known. If God exists it's pretty clear he wants me to be an atheist. Who am I to defy God?

Luke 4:12 - Thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the test.

You were just doing it wrong by directly challenging him. If you want him to appear before you, try being more passive aggressive about it.

No, no, no...you have this all wrong. You can't look directly at it/him/her....its much like a SEP.

"An SEP," he said, "is something that we can't see, or don't see, or our brain doesn't let us see, because we think that it's somebody else's problem. That's what SEP means. Somebody Else's Problem. The brain just edits it out, it's like a blind spot. If you look at it directly you won't see it unless you know precisely what it is. Your only hope is to catch it by surprise out of the corner of your eye." -- Douglas Adams; Life, the Universe, and Everything

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Luke 4:12 - Thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the test.

You were just doing it wrong by directly challenging him. If you want him to appear before you, try being more passive aggressive about it.

I could set out on a mission to burn down all the churches I can find. Unless God appears before me to stop me in person, I'll take that as a sign he wants me to keep going. Clever!

Reminds me of a Simpson's quote:

Marge: Homey, I...

Homer: Can't talk, praying. Dear Lord, the gods have been good to me and I am thankful. For the first time in my life, everything is absolutely perfect just the way it is.

Marge: Mmm.

Homer: So here's the deal: you freeze everything as it is, and I won't ask for anything more. If that is OK, please give me absolutely no sign. [brief pause] OK, deal. In gratitude, I present you this offering of cookies and milk. If you want me to eat them for you, please give me no sign. [brief pause] Thy will be done! [mows down]

 

[Lion IRC]

I think God likes one-on-one relationships.

I've several times challenged God to appear before me and let himself be known....

Yeah, yeah. I get it.
Hey God, first you obey me then I'll decide whether I will obey You

 

[DrZoidberg]

I've several times challenged God to appear before me and let himself be known....

Yeah, yeah. I get it.
Hey God, first you obey me then I'll decide whether I will obey You

Exactly. We're talking about an omnipotent agent. It would be no cost to God to obey me just once to gain me as a convert. My conclusion is the only rational one, that God either doesn't exist or wants me to be an atheist. The result is the same.

 

[bilby]

The Bible assumes a hell of a lot as obvious to the reader, just because it was obvious to iron age citizens of the Roman empire. Everything from science, to philosophy to cultural practices. Everything in the Bible either is written in contrast to a pagan practice, or it is written to affirm a pagan practice or it's entered to settle a specific political score within the early Christian community. And that world was quite different from our own. Without significant education about the iron age pagan world you will most likely be wrong about your interpretation. It's not easy. Especially that last one is impossible to figure out from superficial reading. It requires loads of study of both the ancient Mediterranean world, as well as Roman internal politics as well as early Christian politics.

An example of what I mean. 200 - 550 AD the Roman world were overrun by, so called "parabalani". Often young Christian men who had renounced all worldly possesions, left their farms to join Christian mobs fighting for Christian values. But always fanatic. The cynic might say that these were poor and destitute and had nothing to lose anyway. But I digress. The problem was that these had official sanction and with some flimsy justification could beat up whatever non-Christian they fancied. Savvy nobles converted to Christianity and used the parabalani as hired thugs to terrorise non-Christians and enrich themselves. They kept "stables" of them. Clothed and fed them.

The parabalani couldn't be criticized outright. Because they were Christian. But the specific teachings of priests who encouraged the parabalani could be argued against. Even though the parabalani helped make Christianity the dominant faith in the Mediterranean world, they soon overstayed their welcome. Those in power realized how they were a destructive force for society as a whole. So smart priests, who wanted to be politically influential, said what those in power wanted to hear. This affected which phrases were inserted into the Bible. Just from the text itself it would be impossible to know this. You need to know the specific details of that political conflict.

The parabalani were eventually suppressed. By 550 there's no more mention of them. But at no point where they ever denounced outright. The power of the parabalani was only subtly outmaneuvered from the top.

There's many more like this. Another good one is Galen's scientific theory of gender. Unless you know this the rules regarding what men and women should do become nothing but decrees without rational justification. The text assume you know and agree with Galen. But almost nobody have even heard of Galen today, let alone his theories.

Galen's a wanker.

Every Queenslander knows this.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

[h=2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcellions

The Circumcellions regarded martyrdom as the true Christian virtue (as the early Church Father Tertullian said, "a martyr's death day was actually his birthday"), and thus disagreed with the Episcopal see of Carthage on the primacy of chastity, sobriety, humility, and charity. Instead, they focused on bringing about their own martyrdom.[/h]On occasion, members of this group assaulted Roman legionaries or armed travelers with simple wooden clubs to provoke them into attacking and martyring them. Others interrupted courts of law and verbally provoked the judge so that he would order their immediate execution (a normal punishment at the time for contempt of court).^[6] The sect survived until the fifth century in Africa.

 

[bilby]

[h=2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcellions

The Circumcellions regarded martyrdom as the true Christian virtue (as the early Church Father Tertullian said, "a martyr's death day was actually his birthday"), and thus disagreed with the Episcopal see of Carthage on the primacy of chastity, sobriety, humility, and charity. Instead, they focused on bringing about their own martyrdom.[/h]On occasion, members of this group assaulted Roman legionaries or armed travelers with simple wooden clubs to provoke them into attacking and martyring them. Others interrupted courts of law and verbally provoked the judge so that he would order their immediate execution (a normal punishment at the time for contempt of court).^[6] The sect survived until the fifth century in Africa.

They must have been mightily pissed off about that.