Bible question. Where to research?

this was evidence was from the bible. Its been awhile.

Did you notice the cite for my quote?

"From Watchtower, 1979 4/1 p.15, Insight on the News"

Told you so; we get insight! The practical value? For a quarter century that you know of, Jehovah's Witnesses haven't had to waste a single moment on the Shroud. Other groups, filled with scholars the laces of whose Guccis I am not fit to untie, are spending time on it instead of on whatever their bibles say they should be doing. I wonder who- or what mythical person- is happy with that?

But the insight isn't for one-upsmanship, it's part of prophecy. From Dan 12, for example:
??And during that time Mi?cha

Echo, that was noted by an earlier writer, who could afford unlimited free time to study many things. His conclusion was this:
?The words of the wise ones are like oxgoads, and just like nails driven in are those indulging in collections [of sentences]; they have been given from one shepherd. As regards anything besides these, my son, take a warning: To the making of many books there is no end, and much devotion [to them] is wearisome to the flesh. The conclusion of the matter, everything having been heard, is: Fear the [true] God and keep his commandments. For this is the whole [obligation] of man.

I quite agree with Romans 1:20.If your faith is working for you then keep it dr. I would only urge you to do the same research as I and others have done into this and related areas so as to make certain your faith is not just blind but also not misdirected. You are to valuable a resource to knowingly submit to conditioned thought dr.
As I said, Romans is fine.
The problem is the bible is so riddled with inconsistencies and erors and the history of Christianity and its bible is so unclear and at the same time bloody and destructive that I find it hard to look upon it as the only source or means of communion with the Creator. That quote from Romans could also be said of Allah, Vishnu, Brahman, Rama, any pagan or North or South American Indian deity.For that matter you could also bring it in line with (with a little work) most pantheisms. It hardly seems logical to ascribe it only to the Christian God. It is not as if these things are not said and written in other peoples'bibles.

By the way dr. I don't buy the hooker explanation you gave in the Canaanite thread. I have to confess, I could hardly believe my eyes when you mentioned the hooker passage. The thought of a Christian leaning on a hooker to bear witness as to the veracity and justness of an historical Christan question was simply astonishing. I thought we killed hookers in our righteousness dr? By the way, did it ever occur to you that the hooker was trying to save her life and that she was prepared to do or say anything to escape injury? In addition, it hardly seems likely that one hooker would be a reliable spokesperson for a city numbering in the thousands and thousands.There is of course no mention as to why these peoples were being exterminated.
They may have their ear to the ground on some issues but they travel in very tight and isolated circles. I used to have to deal with with hookers on an infrequent basis when I worked in a nightclub here in this city.

Regards,

David

you meant to say, I'm sure.



Dan

However, I do not have to be so tightly policed by you or any other forum member regarding statements I make relating to any group, sect or movement.

Since when have you Dan had a vested interest in upholding the rights and status of Atheists?

Anything wrong with Atheists? Maybe not in an absolute sense. However, I do find them unimaginative, narrow and overly rational thinkers sometimes.They seem to be determined to overthrow every religious Church in the world and erect a Church of Science in its place.Their way of thinking is so close to deconstructionist that it runs the risk of eventually unraveling itself.

Regards,

You should relax, don't take things so seriously that you miss the occasional smiley in a post.

You certainly need to meet a few more atheists. Your description, while certainly not generally applicable to atheists or the followers of any religion, could easily be applied to a small number of atheists as well as a small number of religious types.

Be well.

Dan

I probably do need to meet a few more Atheists.In fact I would like that very much.
I find Atheists are for the most part well informed articulate people.I admire their (stated) personal and community ethic.
I have read many articles and other works by Atheists though Dan. They also appear sometimes on various TV programs. I am familiar with their perspectives and thought processes.That is how I am able to tell you what I think is the downside to their way of thinking.
I think they are hyper-rational sometimes. However, they are at the same time a sharp and necessary antidote to the excesses of religious thought and organization.

you arent an atheist, you also have god to thank for those who are atheists.

position is that 'The fool has said in his heart, there is no God'.

For you to thank god you arent an atheist, there have to be atheists in the world. Anyway, if god is responsible for you being a good god-fearing man, it presumably follows that She is responsible for my not being one.

Isnt that logical?

us as a 'she', so, if you don't believe in 'her', you are correct. It is He that you must be concerned with.

It is quite true, on one level, that He decided you would be an atheist at this point in time. On another level, you are perfectly free to choose to embrace belief in God. If you do not do so, it is because you don't want to. Thus, the responsibility is yours, and you have no one else to blame if it goes wrong. As you can see, God is not a one level player as we are. But then, you wouldn't expect God to play at our level would you?

I don't thank God that I'm not an atheist, and there has never been a reason for me to do so. I do thank God that He has redeemed and forgiven me. Knowing what that means, I wish all people, including you, would find themselves in the same condition. Sadly, that is not the case. There is no reason for being thankful for that.

I dont believe a person chooses to believe one or the other. An atheist, such as myself, simply doesnt believe there is anything to 'embrace'. I would first have to believe there was a god to embrace before deciding to reject or accept him -- but then I wouldnt be an atheist, would I?

clearly evident in the creation. He does say that people can and do deliberately suppress a knowledge of the truth. When you believe there is no God, in spite of the evidence of His existence, you become responsible for that choice. It doesn't really matter whether you think there is a choice or not. God sees reality as it really is, and is not bound by what you think. In fact, you may someday change your mind, so all hope is not lost.

that "He decided you would be an atheist at this point in time" maybe he has decided that some should be atheists their entire lives.

Dan

it's the atheist's choice. The atheist never escapes responsibility for his/her choice.

You just stated that god decided some should be atheists. How do you know he decided at some point that it was now their choice? I follow your first proposition, but not your second.

Dan

multi-level player? We play on one level. It's all we can comprehend. God plays at many levels simultaneously. Trying to reduce Him to our ability leads to anomalies like this one.

What evidence do you have that god decides in the way you have told us he decides?

Dan

in any way. It is ignorance of God that causes Him to be 'reduced' in the eyes of the foolish one. Evidence? God has told us directly how He operates, and He has described this multi-level mode of operation that we do not fully comprehend. Does He use the term 'multi-level'? Possibly. He has said that His ways are not our ways, His thoughts are not our thoughts. He does, however, reduce some of His thoughts to our level so that we can understand what He wants us to understand. He has also described different ways of dealing with us which are in operation simultaneously.

not answering my question.

Dan

satisfaction. I don't think the English language is up to the task.

"You won't be satisfied with any answer so I won't even try."

Good work,

Dan

If you hadn't noticed, the attempt was already made, but no answer is ever good enough for you Dan. That is in spite of the fact that you rarely provide satisfactory answers to any question. Just more one liners.

not to be the case.

Dan

evidence was, proving His existence.