Arguing With Jehovah Witnesses
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-07-2014, 08:35 AM
RE: Arguing With Jehovah Witnesses
(06-03-2013 06:06 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  
(06-03-2013 03:56 PM)Vosur Wrote:  My mother told them not to bother us again 'bout eight years ago. Haven't seen them since.

You do realize this now means you are on their "List"?

What list? Sounds terrifying...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-07-2014, 09:23 PM
RE: Arguing With Jehovah Witnesses
CAN you argue with them? Haha, perhaps ending the conversations with them will give them reason to not come back anymore, even though they're pleasant as you've said. You may only be encouraging them.

"Did IQs just drop sharply while I was away?" --Ellen Ripley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2014, 02:22 PM
Arguing With Jehovah Witnesses
Considering some of the crazier solutions to JW encounters we've discussed here, what must it be like to be a JW and see people go out of their way to either annoy you or avoid you I wonder?

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2014, 03:33 PM
RE: Arguing With Jehovah Witnesses
Some versions of the bible say "circle"... Rather than ball or sphere.

There are also passages related to ideas of a solid firmament.

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2014, 03:41 PM
RE: Arguing With Jehovah Witnesses
(28-07-2014 02:22 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  Considering some of the crazier solutions to JW encounters we've discussed here, what must it be like to be a JW and see people go out of their way to either annoy you or avoid you I wonder?

Some of them probably get off on it (martyr complex). I also know people who just like to argue. They would get bored if everyone agreed with them. Maybe some of the JWs are like that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2014, 03:58 PM
Arguing With Jehovah Witnesses
(28-07-2014 03:41 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(28-07-2014 02:22 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  Considering some of the crazier solutions to JW encounters we've discussed here, what must it be like to be a JW and see people go out of their way to either annoy you or avoid you I wonder?

Some of them probably get off on it (martyr complex). I also know people who just like to argue. They would get bored if everyone agreed with them. Maybe some of the JWs are like that.

Perhaps you misunderstand. I'm trying to visualize what t might be like to go door to door and be met by more naked people than the typical salesperson might. I don't have any solid data. Just speculating. No, I'm not considering becoming a JW, not even for science.

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2014, 05:18 PM
RE: Arguing With Jehovah Witnesses
(03-05-2013 06:31 AM)CompletelySolo Wrote:  You never know when something you might say to a religious person will click with them later and all of a sudden pull a pillar out of their worldview. If they are the slightest bit logically inclined, their entire belief structure will come tumbling down.
That's what happened to me when I was 12 years old.Shocking

Sapere aude
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2014, 05:40 PM
RE: Arguing With Jehovah Witnesses
(06-03-2013 02:12 AM)riseinside Wrote:  Today they brought up a verse that talks about the earth being spherical and hinting at being suspended in space. They say that the only way to know this was from the creator as nobody had discovered this fact at that time. How do I argue against this? Obviously I know that the writer of the books of the bible did not have insight from the creation of the universe. I know this. But how do you argue this with a Jehovah Witness?
I think it's probably this verse.

Job 26:7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

The Book of Job is a Mesopotamian story that has been dated to about 1500 B.C.E. It was included in the Hebrew canon by Jewish priests during the Babylonian captivity around 500 B.C.E. or later. The entire canon was heavily edited as it was being compiled. The Babylonians were aware of the Earth being spherical and this "fact" was probably edited into the story during the compilation.

Having written that I can't provide any source for it. I'm confident it's accurate but I don't have the time to look up sources. If they challenge you on that you're on your own. Sorry.

Sapere aude
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2014, 06:26 PM
RE: Arguing With Jehovah Witnesses
(06-03-2013 08:28 PM)riseinside Wrote:  Very interesting. That is a reference I can use. I appreciate all the information so far. Is there anyplace the that shows the days that each book of the Bible was written? That would be a great start as well.

I would tell them to go away but so far they have been pleasant and very interesting to talk to. They have been respectful even when I said they're was no chance of changing my opinion. I'm an sure there is a chance that could change very quickly but until then it's a good learning experience. However, they have refused to take any literature I have offered lol.

short answer, google is your friend, type in authorship of _________ and enter whatever book, look at the wiki page (hear me out, I know everyone hates wiki) read through it, then scroll down to the bottom, and start clicking the references for validation. Here is a small compilation of mine:

The epistles were written after the mythical jesus's death;

1) paul - written about 60 C.E., of the 13, he actually wrote 8. Not a single instance in any of Paul's writings claims that he ever meets or sees an earthly Jesus, nor does Paul give any reference to Jesus' life on earth (except for a few well known interpolations). Therefore, all accounts about a Jesus could only have come from other believers or his imagination. Hearsay.

2) Galatians - complete third hand heresay.

3) James - Epistle of James mentions Jesus only once as an introduction to his belief. Nowhere does the epistle reference a historical Jesus and this alone eliminates it from an historical account.

4) Peter - Many scholars question the authorship of Peter of the epistles. Even within the first epistle, it says in 5:12 that Silvanus wrote it. Most scholars consider the second epistle as unreliable or an outright forgery. The unknown authors of the epistles of Peter wrote long after the life of the traditional Peter. Moreover, Peter lived (if he ever lived at all) as an ignorant and illiterate peasant (even Acts 4:13 attests to this). In short, no one has any way of determining whether the epistles of Peter come from fraud, an author claiming himself to know what Peter said (hearsay), or from someone trying to further the aims of the Church. Encyclopedias usually describe a tradition that Saint Peter wrote them. However, whenever you see the word "tradition" it refers to a belief passed down within a society. In other words: hearsay. This the definition of Pseudepigrapha; a book written in a biblical style and ascribed to an author who did not write it...otherwise known as a FORGERY.

5) Jude - Even early Christians argued about its authenticity. It quotes an apocryphal book called Enoch as if it represented authorized Scripture. Biblical scholars do not think it possible for the alleged disciple Jude to have written it because whoever wrote it had to have written it during a period when the churches had long existed. Like the other alleged disciples, Jude would have lived as an illiterate peasant and unable to write (much less in Greek) but the author of Jude wrote in fluent high quality Greek..more forgery.


Then there are the non-christian sources as follows;

1) Josephus Flavius, the Jewish historian, lived as the earliest non-Christian who mentions a Jesus. Although many scholars think that Josephus' short accounts of Jesus (in Antiquities) came from interpolations perpetrated by a later Church father (most likely, Eusebius), Josephus' birth in 37 C.E. (well after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus), puts him out of range of an eyewitness account. Moreover, he wrote Antiquities in 93 C.E., after the first gospels got written. Therefore, even if his accounts about Jesus came from his hand, his information could only serve as hearsay.
- Flavius Josephus, (37–100 CE) (http://www.josephus.org) a prolific and comprehensive Jewish historian, who would frequently write a few pages on the execution of common Jewish thieves, has not one authentic line that mentions Yeshua. “He” does mention “Christ” on two occasions, yet both have been convincingly exposed as interpolations, (http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html)

2) Pliny the Younger (born: 62 C.E.) His letter about the Christians only shows that he got his information from Christian believers themselves. Regardless, his birth date puts him out of range as an eyewitness account.

3) Tacitus, the Roman historian's birth year at 64 C.E., puts him well after the alleged life of Jesus. He gives a brief mention of a "Christus" in his Annals (Book XV, Sec. 44), which he wrote around 109 C.E. He gives no source for his material. Although many have disputed the authenticity of Tacitus' mention of Jesus, the very fact that his birth happened after the alleged Jesus and wrote the Annals during the formation of Christianity, shows that his writing can only provide us with hearsay accounts.

4) Suetonius, a Roman historian, born in 69 C.E., mentions a "Chrestus," a common name. Apologists assume that "Chrestus" means "Christ" (a disputable claim). But even if Seutonius had meant "Christ," it still says nothing about an earthly Jesus. Just like all the others, Suetonius' birth occurred well after the purported Jesus. Again, only hearsay.

5) Talmud: Amazingly some Christians use brief portions of the Talmud, (a collection of Jewish civil a religious law, including commentaries on the Torah), as evidence for Jesus. They claim that Yeshu in the Talmud refers to Jesus. However, this Yeshu, according to scholars depicts a disciple of Jehoshua Ben-Perachia at least a century before the alleged Christian Jesus or it may refer to Yeshu ben Pandera, a teacher of the 2nd centuy CE. Regardless of how one interprets this, the Palestinian Talmud didn't come into existence until the 3rd and 5th century C.E., and the Babylonian Talmud between the 3rd and 6th century C.E., at least two centuries after the alleged crucifixion. At best it can only serve as a controversial Christian or Jewish legend; it cannot possibly serve as evidence for a historical Jesus.

6) Thallus/africanus, In the ninth century a Byzantine writer named George Syncellus quoted a third-century Christian historian named Sextus Julius Africanus, who quoted an unknown writer named Thallus on the darkness at the crucifixion: 'Thallus in the third book of his history calls this darkness an eclipse of the sun, but in my opinion he is wrong.' All of the works of Africanus are lost, so there is no way to confirm the quote or to examine its context. We have no idea who Thallus was, or when he wrote. Third century would have put him being born long after jesus's alleged death, thus hearsay.

7) Phlegon of Tralles was a Greek writer and freedman of the emperor Hadrian, who lived in the 2nd century AD. case closed, more hearsay, born after the alleged jesus's death.


Christian apologists mostly use the above sources for their "evidence" of Jesus because they believe they represent the best outside sources. All other sources (Christian and non-Christian) come from even less reliable sources, some of which include: Mara Bar-Serapion (circa 73 C.E.), Ignatius (50 - 98? C.E.), Polycarp (69 - 155 C.E.), Clement of Rome (? - circa 160 C.E.), Justin Martyr (100 - 165 C.E.), Lucian (circa 125 - 180 C.E.), Tertullian (160 - ? C.E.), Clement of Alexandria (? - 215 C.E.), Origen (185 - 232 C.E.), Hippolytus (? - 236 C.E.), and Cyprian (? - 254 C.E.). As you can see, all these people lived well after the alleged death of Jesus. Not one of them provides an eyewitness account, all of them simply spout hearsay.

As you can see, apologist Christians embarrass themselves when they unwittingly or deceptively violate the rules of historiography by using after-the-event writings as evidence for the event itself. Not one of these writers gives a source or backs up his claims with evidential material about Jesus. It doesn't matter what these people wrote about Jesus, an author who writes after the alleged happening and gives no detectable sources for his material can only give example of hearsay. All of these anachronistic writings about Jesus could easily have come from the beliefs and stories from Christian believers themselves. And as we know from myth, superstition, and faith, beliefs do not require facts or evidence for their propagation and circulation. Thus we have only beliefs about Jesus' existence, and nothing more.

-------------
and
------------
Acts and luke had the same authors. NO, none of the authors of the gospels knew jesus.

Writings of the Gospels: Mark (60 to 75 CE), Matthew (80 to 90 CE), Luke (80 to 90 CE based on the Gospels of Mark), and John (80 to 110 CE) (Albl 283). I have shown before in various venues the issues with the Gospels, the fact that we don’t know who wrote the gospels, the community effort that put them together, and the fact that they don’t agree with one another, all of which make them a suspect source of empirical evidence. When one posits a super natural, extraordinary story, one requires extraordinary evidence....sadly it doesn't exist, except philosophically.

The Gospel of Matthew is generally believed to have been composed between 70 and 110, with most scholars preferring the period 80–90; a pre-70 date remains a minority view, but has been strongly supported. The anonymous author was probably a highly educated Jew, intimately familiar with the technical aspects of Jewish law, and the disciple Matthew was probably honored within his circle. The author drew on three main sources to compose his gospel: the Gospel of Mark; the hypothetical collection of sayings known as the Q source; and material unique to his own community, called "Special Matthew", or the M source. Note the part where I said...disciple matthew honored...and anonymous writer...do some research. Knowledge is power, and quite liberating.

The gospel of Mark; Most modern scholars reject the tradition which ascribes it to Mark the Evangelist, the companion of Peter, and regard it as the work of an unknown author working with various sources including collections of miracle stories, controversy stories, parables, and a passion narrative.

Luke: Tradition holds that the text was written by Luke the companion of Paul (named in Colossians 4:14). Many modern scholars reject this view, although the list of scholars maintaining authorship by Luke the physician is lengthy, and represents scholars from a wide range of theological opinion. According to Raymond E. Brown, opinion concerning Lukan authorship was ‘about evenly divided’ as of 1997.

John: The gospel identifies its author as "the disciple whom Jesus loved." Although the text does not name this disciple, by the beginning of the 2nd century, a tradition had begun to form which identified him with John the Apostle, one of the Twelve (Jesus' innermost circle). Although some notable New Testament scholars affirm traditional Johannine scholarship, the majority do not believe that John or one of the Apostles wrote it, and trace it instead to a "Johannine community" which traced its traditions to John.


Paul also NEVER met jesus. Laughat

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: