JehovahsWitness wrote:
[
Replying to post 17 by Divine Insight]
JehovahsWitness wrote:
# While the Hebrew word translated as the English "heaven" covers what we call the "sky" ie the atmopher surrounding the earth were birds fly) the same word also, and more frequently refer to the spirit realm. It is arguably this meaning that is exclusively used when speaking of God's literal location.
What exactly do you see as problematic in my explanation?
To begin with this isn't "your" explanation. Clearly this is the explanation that has been given to you by the Jehovah's Witnesses organization.
The reason that their explanation fails is because talking about how Hebrew words might have been translated into English doesn't explain the context of the Biblical texts. The Gospels have the disciples of Jesus watch his physical body ascend up into the clouds. This can hardly be explained away via an argument of semantic abstraction.
So I would ask why you are buying into these excuses being published by JW.org?
They are clearly not valid apologies.
As I also pointed out, they try to make out that Jesus didn't even physically rise from the dead. Instead they try to claim that Jesus "spiritually" rose from the dead. But this ignores the claims of an empty tomb. Why would you need a missing physical body if Jesus only returned as a spirit?
Also, when the doubting Thomas saw Jesus he couldn't believe it was Jesus until he saw Jesus' physical wounds. And the Gospels have Jesus himself instructing Thomas to stick a finger into his wounds himself to verify that it was indeed him, and that he did indeed still have a physical body.
So the idea that Jesus only returned as a spirit is not compatible with the empty grave Gospels, as well as the episode with the doubting Thomas.
I also gave the example of the demons that asked Jesus to cast them into swine. So the apology that "casting demons" out of people is just a metaphor to get them to have a change of heart, change of mind, or change of character simply isn't compatible with these stories.
I'm quite familiar with what JW's are taught to believe. They come to my house quite regularly and I've spoken with them in-depth over the years as well as having read what the JW organization prints in its Watchtower.
Their apologies for this religion simply don't hold water.
The Gospels cannot be made to make sense by proclaiming that they were nothing more than metaphors and any literal interpretations are simply wrong and must be due to people having translated words incorrectly..
That argument simply has no merit. So, to be quite frank about it, I'm surprised that you accept these clearly flawed excuses without questioning them thoroughly.
Finally, let's assume that the JW apologies could hold water. What would that mean? Well, that would mean that God's message has been grossly mistranslated and misunderstood by millions of people and published Bibles.
Even if we were to accept that this was the case, all this would mean is that we cannot trust the written Bible to mean what it says or say what it means.
And if that's true, then my argument that the Bible cannot be true "
as it is written" would then necessarily be an argument that the Jehovah's Witness organization would have no choice but to agree with.
In other words, JW.org would need to agree with me that the Bible indeed cannot be trusted to represent truth "
as it is written".
In fact, isn't that the gist of the argument they have given you to repeat for them?
It's all been mistranslated! English Bibles are indeed false and untrue in what they actually say.
And if that's true, then if there is a God behind this religion that God has no business judging anyone who rejects the Bible as clearly being utter nonsense.
It would ultimately be a God who himself cannot be trusted.
Is that really the kind of apologetics that you want to support? Because that's exactly what you are doing when you support JW.org.
English Bibles have it all wrong! That's the JW apologetic argument!
And Divine Insight has been right all along. English Bibles cannot be true "as they are written".
This has to be the position of the Jehovah's Witnesses organization if they want to maintain that English Bible are not true "as they are written".
Because remember. That is my position.
So "
your apologies" (
or at least the apologies you support) for this religion actually support my position.
So if the JW's are right, then so am I.
