Paradise on Earth

[onewithhim]

When I learned that the Bible speaks of a restored Garden of Eden and the restoration of mankind to the perfection and endless life that Adam forfeited, I was thrilled. Who doesn't want to keep living on this beautiful earth, with our loved ones, and being able to do all the things we love to do---endlessly?

If God said to you today, "When do you want to die?" would you say "now!!"? I don't think very many people would say that.

We CAN live forever here on Earth. The Bible tells us that we can.

Matthew 5:5
Psalm 37:9-11,29

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 320 by onewithhim]



[center]The Bible is true because the Bible says so.
Part two: an apology[/center]

Two different people, both with beliefs. In the light of the fact that you are not here to trash any beliefs and neither am I, and since this sub-forum the bible is authorative, and since if you ask for proof from one of Jehovah’s Witnesses they will invariably refer to scripture, did you have a further comment?

I do.

Basing a belief in what the BIBLE has to say by using the BIBLE as evidence, is as useless as it is wrong headed.

Not when the Bible is considered authoritative by this forum.

I stand corrected.
I was out of line.

It's difficult for as an outsider to NOT think about the elephant in the room.
My approach to any theological discussion is "Is any of this TRUE?"

My bad for asking that.
In here, we are supposed to ASSUME that it's all true.

In here everything and anything that is in the Bible is authoritative. It should be a "safe zone" for believers.

We have to take it all as "true".

So, if two passages don't seem to agree.. what we have is an authoritative disagreement. If the Bible disagrees with modern science, modern science is wrong, and so on. The Bible is all "true", for the purposes of these theological debates.

I keep forgetting that.. but you see, from my atheist point of view.. these stories are taken AS IF they are true. Nobody should question that the Bible is written AS IF it were all true.

I think that most good fictions are written that way.
When we read say, Harry Potter, we should suspend our SKEPTICISM and pretend along that what is being portrayed is true. Otherwise, we just can't enjoy the book at all.

What I am witnessing in this subforum ( and I'm so sorry for always forgetting that the Bible is authoritative in here ) are the constant disagreements as to what it all MEANS.

Both sides are quite happily providing passages to support their opinions. What I actually see happening in here is that people are asking to be the authority on what the AUTHORITY means.. if you see what I'm getting at.

I'm an outsider to your faith. So I don't pretend to have an opinion on who might or might not have the "correct" interpretation. I don't think there is any correct interpretation. As long as they make some kind of sense, they are all correct to me.

I think what I am witnessing in here is a debate ( not just yours, but in all of these theological debates ) is the same kind of thing that people do when they look at art. People have different interpretations ... The "truth" in art, if you will. Of course, this is personal, subjective truth, NOT objective truth.

I keep forgetting that in here.. we are supposed to be discussing subjective truths.

I guess I got carried away interjecting my subjective reaction to the subjective reactions to the Bible you guys were talking about.

It gets complicated, doesn't it?
Sorry, anyway.

Sometimes a cat gets carried away.

[JehovahsWitness]

My bad for asking that. In here, we are supposed to ASSUME that it's all true.

No you can assume or believe as you like, nobody can govern a thought. Moderators can however govern what is posted.

Responses to topics with "but first you have to prove that the Bible is true" is not allowed here.

JW

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 322 by JehovahsWitness]



[center]
The Bible is true because the Bible says so.
Part Three: I didn't mean to ask anyone to prove anything at all[/center]

My bad for asking that. In here, we are supposed to ASSUME that it's all true.

No you can assume or believe as you like, nobody can govern a thought. Moderators can however govern what is posted.

For sure.
In here, we are SUPPOSED to assume that it's all true.

Responses to topics with "but first you have to prove that the Bible is true" is not allowed here.

I didn't ask that.
What I did was to offer my outsider's perspective.

I see theologians debating about what the Bible means, and then, telling me later that everyone agrees on what it means.

Is Harry Potter a magician, or a wizard, does he do more bad than good?
Does Harry Potter get his magic from God or from the Devil?

We can debate.

I can quote to you certain passages that demonstrate one side, and you might find some that contradicts it.

The TRUTH of the stories are what I call the "elephant in the room" to all theological debates. In Christian theological debates, it is to be ASSUMED that the Bible is authoritative.

What we have before us here and in every theological debate is the FACT that many theologians don't AGREE on what the Bible is authoritative ABOUT.

Everyone seems to disagree on just what the truth IS, you see. I just hope that you agree.

Now, I'll leave you two to it...
Sorry for the derailment.

It was quite unintentional.

Ooops I did it again.

[onewithhim]

I thought this Thought for the Day was very encouraging, so I quote it here:


Thursday, February 16.....God is love---I John 4:8.

"Love is God's dominant quality, his most important one. Jehovah does not just possess love---he is the personification of it. How wonderful it is to know that the Creator of the universe and of all living things is a God of love! Everything he does is guided by that quality. The warm, benevolent affection that God has for his creatures assures us that all his purposes for the human family will be fulfilled in the best possible way and will result in the greatest benefit to all who come under his rulership.

"For example, out of love Jehovah 'has set a day on which he purposes to judge the inhabited earth in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed,' Jesus Christ. (Acts 17:31) We can be confident that this will come to pass. For rightly disposed and obedient humans, favorable judgment will result in a truly blessed future that will go on and on throughout all eternity." (Examining the Scriptures Daily, WT Bible and Tract Society)


All God's purposes for humans will be fulfilled! His very first purpose was that the human family take care of the planet and all the animals, and fill the earth with people that want to be His friends. That is still assuredly to be brought about. (Genesis 1:28; 2:15)


.

[otseng]

[Replying to post 324 by onewithhim]

Moderator Comment

This post would be considered to not comply with the guidelines on preaching. Please read through the guidelines and abide by them.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[onewithhim]

OK. I didn't realize that. Thank you.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 322 by JehovahsWitness]



[center]
The Bible is true because the Bible says so.
Part Three: I didn't mean to ask anyone to prove anything at all[/center]

My bad for asking that. In here, we are supposed to ASSUME that it's all true.

No you can assume or believe as you like, nobody can govern a thought. Moderators can however govern what is posted.

For sure.
In here, we are SUPPOSED to assume that it's all true.

Responses to topics with "but first you have to prove that the Bible is true" is not allowed here.

I didn't ask that.
What I did was to offer my outsider's perspective.

I see theologians debating about what the Bible means, and then, telling me later that everyone agrees on what it means.

Is Harry Potter a magician, or a wizard, does he do more bad than good?
Does Harry Potter get his magic from God or from the Devil?

We can debate.

I can quote to you certain passages that demonstrate one side, and you might find some that contradicts it.

The TRUTH of the stories are what I call the "elephant in the room" to all theological debates. In Christian theological debates, it is to be ASSUMED that the Bible is authoritative.

What we have before us here and in every theological debate is the FACT that many theologians don't AGREE on what the Bible is authoritative ABOUT.

Everyone seems to disagree on just what the truth IS, you see. I just hope that you agree.

Now, I'll leave you two to it...
Sorry for the derailment.

It was quite unintentional.

Ooops I did it again.

That was one of your most pleasant posts. It is true....everyone disagrees on what the truth is. I would think that that is why Jesus said, "Ask and it will be given you; seek and you will find; knock and it will be opened to you." (Matt.7:7, NASB) We must really search for the truth, and not take anybody's word for it.

[Blastcat]

[Replying to post 327 by onewithhim]


[center]
Philosophical pleasantries[/center]

That was one of your most pleasant posts.

Thank you so much, onewithhim, that means a lot, you know.

I think that all too many Christians get offended by the way I write. If we can get at the point of being able to have nothing BUT pleasant conversations with each other.. this world of ours would be way more pleasant than it already is. I think that one way to be pleasant to one another is by way of AGREEMENTS.

I'm consistently being ignored in here.. for example, because people disagree with me so much.

I've even get consistently warned for being rude by our mods, even when I protest that it was never my intention. I get it though. People don't find me always so pleasant. I blast a lot.

Here's a bit of a defense:


1. People don't always understand what I mean. But I can always explain.
2. I do make mistakes. If someone points one out.. I immediately apologize and correct. Then I try to remember to thank the individual. I sometimes DO learn by my mistakes. And I want to learn.
3. I never intend to INSULT anyone.. I think that's a waste of time.
4. I am not so KIND to their words and ideas, though. I blast those if I find them offensive or wrong. Again, out of RESPECT to people. I don't WANT them to be wrong, I want to HELP.
5. I do think of myself as a poet ( or artist in general ) first in here.. TRYING to learn logic and philosophy in general. I use language very fluidly. And I do type very fast. Sometimes, I am not as clear as I intend. A little poetry slips in... and IRONY... woo. People don't always appreciate irony.
6. One of the things that I think is crucial is to engage in pleasant conversations.. but by that I mean PRODUCTIVE ones.. I want to GET somewhere.. and I get frustrated sometimes when I don't. Too often discussions with Christians go round and round.. I don't think that's always so necessary. I think we get come to MANY agreements. I think that agreements ARE very pleasant, indeed.

There is such a thing as the philosophy of religion.

In philosophy, the sloppy use of key terms is discouraged. When discussing ideas about truth, facts, belief, knowledge, and so on, it becomes crucial to AGREE on the meanings. Philosophical discussions aren't the same as kitchen table discussions.
They might not be so pleasant... but they should be way more PRECISE.

Theology is an attempt to use philosophical ideas to support a particular religion.

One the HUGE honking problems in the forum is that people want to discuss philosophically, while almost totally disregarding the hard won philosophy that has come before us.

It's ok to be ignorant. We are all BORN ignorant.

I have just started to learn about philosophy... there is a WHOLE lot to learn.
I do it one step at a time.

But be should be aware that these debates ARE philosophical in nature... each and every ONE of them are. Sloppy language will not result in precise ideas... ever.
That's why one of the groups I belong in here is called "Define your terms".

I don't claim to be the best philosopher.. I'm really just learning.
One small blasty step at a time.

It is true....everyone disagrees on what the truth is.

Just to be clear, of course, many Christians will agree with each other UP TO A POINT.. but if you dig deep enough, I think that nobody agrees completely with one another what this ultimate religious "truth" is.

When Christians insist to me that they know what this "Truth" with a capital T is... I just think they are very wrong. I don't think that they actually KNOW anything at all. I make a distinction between the word "knowledge" and the word "belief". I can agree that Christians BELIEVE ... but I can't agree that they KNOW...

I would think that that is why Jesus said, "Ask and it will be given you; seek and you will find; knock and it will be opened to you." (Matt.7:7, NASB)

If Jesus is speaking about some kind of spiritual KNOWLEDGE ... then that method obviously doesn't work. If he is speaking about some kind of spiritual BELIEF, then I have to agree. If you seek to believe.. just keep at it.

We must really search for the truth, and not take anybody's word for it.

I'd like to know what kind of "truth" you are look for, exactly.

I would imagine that it's the spiritual kind ( beliefs ) ... and not the "mundane" kind ( facts )

If I want to know what I believe, it's very obvious that I cannot ask anyone else. I have to ask myself. Only I really know what I believe.

But FACTS are different.
Many people know more facts than I do. I just don't think that religion IS about "facts", but about "beliefs" instead. To me, that's a huge honking difference, right there.

One of the biggest philosophical problems with that is .. people use such sloppy language that the difference between facts and beliefs gets horribly confused.

And that's where I come in blastin' away.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 327 by onewithhim]


[center]
Philosophical pleasantries[/center]

That was one of your most pleasant posts.

Thank you so much, onewithhim, that means a lot, you know.

I think that all too many Christians get offended by the way I write. If we can get at the point of being able to have nothing BUT pleasant conversations with each other.. this world of ours would be way more pleasant than it already is. I think that one way to be pleasant to one another is by way of AGREEMENTS.

I'm consistently being ignored in here.. for example, because people disagree with me so much.

I've even get consistently warned for being rude by our mods, even when I protest that it was never my intention. I get it though. People don't find me always so pleasant. I blast a lot.

Here's a bit of a defense:


1. People don't always understand what I mean. But I can always explain.
2. I do make mistakes. If someone points one out.. I immediately apologize and correct. Then I try to remember to thank the individual. I sometimes DO learn by my mistakes. And I want to learn.
3. I never intend to INSULT anyone.. I think that's a waste of time.
4. I am not so KIND to their words and ideas, though. I blast those if I find them offensive or wrong. Again, out of RESPECT to people. I don't WANT them to be wrong, I want to HELP.
5. I do think of myself as a poet ( or artist in general ) first in here.. TRYING to learn logic and philosophy in general. I use language very fluidly. And I do type very fast. Sometimes, I am not as clear as I intend. A little poetry slips in... and IRONY... woo. People don't always appreciate irony.
6. One of the things that I think is crucial is to engage in pleasant conversations.. but by that I mean PRODUCTIVE ones.. I want to GET somewhere.. and I get frustrated sometimes when I don't. Too often discussions with Christians go round and round.. I don't think that's always so necessary. I think we get come to MANY agreements. I think that agreements ARE very pleasant, indeed.

There is such a thing as the philosophy of religion.

In philosophy, the sloppy use of key terms is discouraged. When discussing ideas about truth, facts, belief, knowledge, and so on, it becomes crucial to AGREE on the meanings. Philosophical discussions aren't the same as kitchen table discussions.
They might not be so pleasant... but they should be way more PRECISE.

Theology is an attempt to use philosophical ideas to support a particular religion.

One the HUGE honking problems in the forum is that people want to discuss philosophically, while almost totally disregarding the hard won philosophy that has come before us.

It's ok to be ignorant. We are all BORN ignorant.

I have just started to learn about philosophy... there is a WHOLE lot to learn.
I do it one step at a time.

But be should be aware that these debates ARE philosophical in nature... each and every ONE of them are. Sloppy language will not result in precise ideas... ever.
That's why one of the groups I belong in here is called "Define your terms".

I don't claim to be the best philosopher.. I'm really just learning.
One small blasty step at a time.

It is true....everyone disagrees on what the truth is.

Just to be clear, of course, many Christians will agree with each other UP TO A POINT.. but if you dig deep enough, I think that nobody agrees completely with one another what this ultimate religious "truth" is.

When Christians insist to me that they know what this "Truth" with a capital T is... I just think they are very wrong. I don't think that they actually KNOW anything at all. I make a distinction between the word "knowledge" and the word "belief". I can agree that Christians BELIEVE ... but I can't agree that they KNOW...

I would think that that is why Jesus said, "Ask and it will be given you; seek and you will find; knock and it will be opened to you." (Matt.7:7, NASB)

If Jesus is speaking about some kind of spiritual KNOWLEDGE ... then that method obviously doesn't work. If he is speaking about some kind of spiritual BELIEF, then I have to agree. If you seek to believe.. just keep at it.

We must really search for the truth, and not take anybody's word for it.

I'd like to know what kind of "truth" you are look for, exactly.

I would imagine that it's the spiritual kind ( beliefs ) ... and not the "mundane" kind ( facts )

If I want to know what I believe, it's very obvious that I cannot ask anyone else. I have to ask myself. Only I really know what I believe.

But FACTS are different.
Many people know more facts than I do. I just don't think that religion IS about "facts", but about "beliefs" instead. To me, that's a huge honking difference, right there.

One of the biggest philosophical problems with that is .. people use such sloppy language that the difference between facts and beliefs gets horribly confused.

And that's where I come in blastin' away.

Well, I appreciate your post here. I know you and I have been around and around without getting anywhere, but perhaps it was I who didn't have patience enough.

I also think that to search for agreements is a good thing. I tend to want to blast certain people, but I'm learning to cool it. To agree on the meanings of terms is necessary, and I don't know how that will prove to be possible! Achhhh! "Soul" is always a term that people can't come to an agreement about, no matter what someone says.

A thought I have on people not totally agreeing on what Truth is, even in the same religion.....I think JWs agree on the basic doctrines, else they wouldn't be JWs. No hell-fire, no Trinity, Jehovah alone is God, the soul is not immortal, and there is no spirit that consciously lives on when a person dies. That is real, hard truth to each of us, and we think of them as facts. I believe that they ARE facts, according to what the Bible actually says. I believe that anyone would see that if they really checked it all out. I truly do not believe that most of the people in the world really get into it enough to know what the Bible teaches. Again, I feel "facts" are, in relation to the Bible, there to be known. It is a FACT that God is not a Trinity, for example, and that can be discerned by an open mind.

Believe it or not, I had an open mind when I started conversing with a JW. I was going to show them that they were wrong, but shortly I realized that I really didn't know much about the Bible, being a Southern Baptist. I analyzed what I was being told and what the Scriptures were actually saying. I could see clearly what the Bible really says about God, and that many versions are lacking in their honesty.

I do agree that most "religion" is about belief and not facts. I searched for facts concerning what is really being said in the Bible. I find that the majority of people don't want to concern themselves with facts. (The Bible clearly calls animals "souls," but, try as you may, by showing them the FACTS, they still will say that "animals don't have souls." I want to pull my hair out. They don't have souls, they ARE souls, just like humans, but that FACT will not be allowed into their minds.)

Anyway, I probably haven't made any sense, but that's the way I see it.

[Joe1950]

I just joined this forum but let me suggest the following. First, I am an atheist.
I KNOW the Bible is an historical piece of literature written over hundreds of years by various members of a tribe who began as goatherds and later developed into urban dwellers. It is not inspired by a supreme being.
I KNOW this just as certainly as a fundamentalist KNOWS that the Bible is the inspired word of god.
And the liberal Protestant KNOWS that the Bible is inspired by god but not every word is to be taken literally.
And the Roman Catholic KNOWS that the pope is god's representative on earth.
And the Jew knows that the New testament is not part of the Holy Book and not inspired by god.
And the Muslim knows that as an infidel I am condemned to hell. And so forth.

My point is that people who follow religious doctrine are not alike. There are liberal and moderate and conservative and fundamentalist Jews, Christians, Moslems, etc.
This can make debate and discussion very difficult because the very basic nature of the issue is not agreed upon by the different parties.

This should not cut off discussion by any means, but I have difficulty discussing with a fundamentalist. Why? because we BOTH know we are starting from diametrically opposed understanding if the nature of the universe and life. I know there is no god and they know they have a direct line to god.
This does not mean we shouldn't talk, of course. But it is probably frustrating for all of us when we cannot agree on the fundamentals.