Total Posts:80|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why does the bible include the Old Testament?

Daedal
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.
dee-em
Posts: 6,495
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 12:42:47 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

The early Christians were in a bind. Many (most) were diaspora Jews banished from their homeland in Jerusalem, so Christianity was a sect (multiple sects in fact) of Judaism at first. It had to have appeal to the gentiles these Jews found themselves living amongst (hence the departure from Jewish rites like circumcision and dietary laws) but it also had to have an air of the authority from the parent religion. The gospels and epistles were largely reworkings of the Jewish Bible with Jesus written to fulfill the "prophecies" of a Jewish messiah. You couldn't then have the gospels referring to Jewish Bible scripture and then discard the referenced scripture. That was the conundrum.

Yes, the OT is well past its use-by-date. The Christians are stuck with it though because the NT would make no sense without it.
Daedal
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 9:44:36 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 12:42:47 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

The early Christians were in a bind. Many (most) were diaspora Jews banished from their homeland in Jerusalem, so Christianity was a sect (multiple sects in fact) of Judaism at first. It had to have appeal to the gentiles these Jews found themselves living amongst (hence the departure from Jewish rites like circumcision and dietary laws) but it also had to have an air of the authority from the parent religion. The gospels and epistles were largely reworkings of the Jewish Bible with Jesus written to fulfill the "prophecies" of a Jewish messiah. You couldn't then have the gospels referring to Jewish Bible scripture and then discard the referenced scripture. That was the conundrum.

Yes, the OT is well past its use-by-date. The Christians are stuck with it though because the NT would make no sense without it.

Thanks for the info.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 10:16:26 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
I'd go along with dm. As a historical footnote, the idea of excising the OT / Judaic elements from Christianity is not new. It goes back at least as far as Marcion of Sinope (1st centure AD). The Marcionist form of Christianity included only NT testament books as its scripture on the basis that the Christian god and the Jewish god are not the same.

https://en.wikipedia.org...
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

After all, when Paul wrote 2 Timothy 3:16-17 he could only have been talking about the Hebrew Scriptures once there was little else to use.

2 Timothy 3:16, 17
16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Besides which, the "God of the Hebrew Scriptures", Jehovah, is the same God that Christ and the Apostles worship.

John 20:17; 1 Peter 1:3; Ephesians.

If you ignore the Hebrew Scriptures you will never even get close to understanding the Christian Greek Scriptures. Simple as.
annanicole
Posts: 19,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 4:10:48 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

1. There is nothing at all wrong with calling it the "New Testament" or "New Covenant".

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

No, it isn't. Why in the world would anyone "expand" on OT prophesies that were fulfilled long before Revelation was ever penned?

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

The general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 4:36:39 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 4:10:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

1. There is nothing at all wrong with calling it the "New Testament" or "New Covenant".

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

No, it isn't. Why in the world would anyone "expand" on OT prophesies that were fulfilled long before Revelation was ever penned?

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

The general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

As always your lack of understanding of scripture, especially of the over themes, lets you down fatally.

Of course it is, because it shows how everything will end up, especially the last three chapters.

The fact that it was written in advance and will happen exactly as foretold just makes it all the more powerful in terms of evidence.

Basically the whole of the Bible is saying "This is why Satan is wrong, I can counter everything he does even with 7,000 years of free rein".
Harikrish
Posts: 11,014
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 4:54:13 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 4:36:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:10:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

1. There is nothing at all wrong with calling it the "New Testament" or "New Covenant".

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

No, it isn't. Why in the world would anyone "expand" on OT prophesies that were fulfilled long before Revelation was ever penned?

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

The general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

As always your lack of understanding of scripture, especially of the over themes, lets you down fatally.

Of course it is, because it shows how everything will end up, especially the last three chapters.

It shows how everything will end up. So it isn't just about evidence against Satan. It's about believers and those who accept Jesus and the new order to come.

The fact that it was written in advance and will happen exactly as foretold just makes it all the more powerful in terms of evidence.

When asked Jesus could not tell when it would happen. How does it help telling things in advance when no one knows when these predictions will happen? The Jehovah's Witnesses have been making prediction blunders for over a 100 years. Maybe they weren't prophesies after all, just stories taken out of context.

Basically the whole of the Bible is saying "This is why Satan is wrong, I can counter everything he does even with 7,000 years of free rein".

You retard. The bible is more about telling the Jews they were wrong and to repent and return to God or suffer the abomination of destruction. That is the common theme throughout the bible and in all the prophesies of the prophets.

You are not mentally competent to interpret scriptures.

Here is what yiu wrote about your mental competency:

You wrote:"I'll never be cured. It is not that kind of problem. It is caused by problems at, and immediately after birth which prevented my brains from developing in certain ways, and therefore have caused permanent brain "damage". Unfortunately, since my Mental Health issues are actually physical problems with a brain that never had the chance to develop properly."

You write:"I have, as I have mentioned before, certain Mental Health issues, which have, as it turns out, been lifelong and undiagnosed despite a visit to a Psychiatrist, at my adoptive Father's behest, when I was 15. It was almost a further 35 years before it was finally discovered that I had been working under this problem for all my life."
annanicole
Posts: 19,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 4:59:24 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 4:36:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:10:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

1. There is nothing at all wrong with calling it the "New Testament" or "New Covenant".

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

No, it isn't. Why in the world would anyone "expand" on OT prophesies that were fulfilled long before Revelation was ever penned?

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

The general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

As always your lack of understanding of scripture, especially of the over themes, lets you down fatally.

Then I suppose you will find a passage that states such a thing. After all, we'd hate for a Jehovah's Witnesses to read such a voluminous work as the Bible and come up with an assertion all on his own. Generally, that hasn't worked out very well.

However, if you can provide a passage which states such a thing, then I'd be glad to see it. I hope you do better on this than you did with your 1925 passage.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Daedal
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 6:03:41 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

After all, when Paul wrote 2 Timothy 3:16-17 he could only have been talking about the Hebrew Scriptures once there was little else to use.

2 Timothy 3:16, 17
16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Besides which, the "God of the Hebrew Scriptures", Jehovah, is the same God that Christ and the Apostles worship.

John 20:17; 1 Peter 1:3; Ephesians.

If you ignore the Hebrew Scriptures you will never even get close to understanding the Christian Greek Scriptures. Simple as.

Quoting scriptures really doesn't work for me at all, so best forget it.

I think the christian message was different from what had gone before, hence the OP.
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 6:39:00 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.


Such as, "Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves."

The immorality of the OT is undeniable. It will be the first pillar to cause the eventual collapse of Christianity.
SNP1
Posts: 2,407
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 6:43:35 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

The first Christian Canon ever published was by Marcion, who believed that Jesus was not there to fulfill the Jewish prophecies but was a separate god. He also believed that the OT god was an evil god.

Many proto-orthodoxy Christians believed that Jesus WAS there to fulfill OT prophecies, and so it became important to them.

The proto-Orthodoxy eventually won out, and so due to the historical importance of the OT to their version of Christianity, the OT would seem obvious to include.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
Daedal
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 7:03:11 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 6:43:35 PM, SNP1 wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

The first Christian Canon ever published was by Marcion, who believed that Jesus was not there to fulfill the Jewish prophecies but was a separate god. He also believed that the OT god was an evil god.

Many proto-orthodoxy Christians believed that Jesus WAS there to fulfill OT prophecies, and so it became important to them.

The proto-Orthodoxy eventually won out, and so due to the historical importance of the OT to their version of Christianity, the OT would seem obvious to include.

Thanks for the info.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 7:27:53 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 4:59:24 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:36:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:10:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

1. There is nothing at all wrong with calling it the "New Testament" or "New Covenant".

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

No, it isn't. Why in the world would anyone "expand" on OT prophesies that were fulfilled long before Revelation was ever penned?

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

The general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

As always your lack of understanding of scripture, especially of the over themes, lets you down fatally.

Then I suppose you will find a passage that states such a thing. After all, we'd hate for a Jehovah's Witnesses to read such a voluminous work as the Bible and come up with an assertion all on his own. Generally, that hasn't worked out very well.

However, if you can provide a passage which states such a thing, then I'd be glad to see it. I hope you do better on this than you did with your 1925 passage.

Well since I didn't even try with the 1925 passage it is hardly surprising I didn't find one.

However it should be obvious to anyone who actually knows what the Bible teaches from Genesis to Revelation that it is the perfect evidence against Satan's false charge, especially since that is the whole reason we are having to undergo this Satanically inspired world.

The simple fact is that the whole of the Bible is about:

Where we come from.
Why we are here.
What Jehovah's plan is.
What derailed it temporarily.
What Jehovah is doing about it, through his son.
How that plan is working out, right down to today and beyond.
How that plan will eventually, and inevitably succeed.
The Joy that the eventual and inevitable success of that plan brings both in heaven and on earth.

But of course you don't know enough of scripture to see that overall pattern.

Jehovah announces his plan in the most basic terms to Satan in the Garden of Eden.

From then on the Hebrew Scripture charts the development of the line leading to the Messiah, as well as prophetically explaining some of the advantages the Messiah will eventually bring and how. Those latter ones are the ones expanded on in Revelation.

The Christian Greek scriptures describe the fulfilment of the relevant prophecies, up to that point, tell of the growth of the "New Nation", and tell of it's "death" when the last of the Apostles has died, and then points ahead to the eventual fulfilment of all the unfulfilled prophecies, including those fulfilled in recent times and being fulfilled even now, as well as those yet to be fulfilled.

After the final test, should anyone else, Angel or human Jehovah will simply be able to point to the evidence gathered up to that point and summarily execute the unfaithful one, because the issue raised by Satan had been dealt with and the precedent finally set.

But of course you have failed to learn that because you have not read scripture to sufficient depth nor have you asked Jehovah for his wisdom to help you do so (James 1:5-8) which he supplies the only way he can, through his son and holy spirit.

Why?

because as yet you have not recognised that you need that wisdom, nor do you recognise that Jehovah actually does keep his promises, even now.
annanicole
Posts: 19,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 7:45:45 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 7:27:53 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:59:24 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:36:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:10:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

1. There is nothing at all wrong with calling it the "New Testament" or "New Covenant".

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

No, it isn't. Why in the world would anyone "expand" on OT prophesies that were fulfilled long before Revelation was ever penned?

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

The general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

As always your lack of understanding of scripture, especially of the over themes, lets you down fatally.

Then I suppose you will find a passage that states such a thing. After all, we'd hate for a Jehovah's Witnesses to read such a voluminous work as the Bible and come up with an assertion all on his own. Generally, that hasn't worked out very well.

However, if you can provide a passage which states such a thing, then I'd be glad to see it. I hope you do better on this than you did with your 1925 passage.

Well since I didn't even try with the 1925 passage it is hardly surprising I didn't find one.

Yep, you had the same results you would have had if you DID try.

However it should be obvious ...

Oh, I've seen the word "obvious" from the WatchTower folks before, along with "indisputable" ... "clearly" ... and the like. With them, such words are usually followed by a load of BS.

I cut off the rest of the rambling since I didn't see a single passage given that even purports to imply that the "general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

Thus it remains simply your little assertion - and should be treated as such.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 8:10:58 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 7:45:45 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 7:27:53 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:59:24 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:36:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:10:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

1. There is nothing at all wrong with calling it the "New Testament" or "New Covenant".

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

No, it isn't. Why in the world would anyone "expand" on OT prophesies that were fulfilled long before Revelation was ever penned?

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

The general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

As always your lack of understanding of scripture, especially of the over themes, lets you down fatally.

Then I suppose you will find a passage that states such a thing. After all, we'd hate for a Jehovah's Witnesses to read such a voluminous work as the Bible and come up with an assertion all on his own. Generally, that hasn't worked out very well.

However, if you can provide a passage which states such a thing, then I'd be glad to see it. I hope you do better on this than you did with your 1925 passage.

Well since I didn't even try with the 1925 passage it is hardly surprising I didn't find one.

Yep, you had the same results you would have had if you DID try.

No.


However it should be obvious ...

Oh, I've seen the word "obvious" from the WatchTower folks before, along with "indisputable" ... "clearly" ... and the like. With them, such words are usually followed by a load of BS.

Nope, they leave that to such as you.


I cut off the rest of the rambling since I didn't see a single passage given that even purports to imply that the "general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

Thus it remains simply your little assertion - and should be treated as such.

That is not my Assertion. my assertion is that the whole of Scripture, including Revelation is precisely for that purpose, and of course you had t cut out what I wrote because t shows you how and why you are so wrong in denying that is a basic purpose of the Bible,

That is your usual trick to hide what has exposed your ignorance, but it's a dumb trick because people only have to scroll back up to see it, if they haven't already.

You aren't as smart as you like to think, but even so you are too smart for your own good.

That' why Jehovah doesn't bother with you, and therefore nor does his son.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 8:13:26 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 6:39:00 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.


Such as, "Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves."

The immorality of the OT is undeniable. It will be the first pillar to cause the eventual collapse of Christianity.

It is absolutely deniable and provably so, as you would know if you bothered to learn the truth of what is behind things that on the surface seem to be as you describe them.

The fact that you cannot be bothered to dig deep enough to find out what is truly happening just shows that you are too judgemental, and not sufficiently concerned about truth.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 8:26:23 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 6:03:41 PM, Daedal wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

After all, when Paul wrote 2 Timothy 3:16-17 he could only have been talking about the Hebrew Scriptures once there was little else to use.

2 Timothy 3:16, 17
16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Besides which, the "God of the Hebrew Scriptures", Jehovah, is the same God that Christ and the Apostles worship.

John 20:17; 1 Peter 1:3; Ephesians.

If you ignore the Hebrew Scriptures you will never even get close to understanding the Christian Greek Scriptures. Simple as.

Quoting scriptures really doesn't work for me at all, so best forget it.

Well, if you are happy to leave half the evidence out of the equation, that is your fault, and your problem. You'll never get the truth without taking all aspects into account.

The trouble is that you cannot begin to understand Christian teaching unless you do take note of the very scriptures that Christ and the Apostles taught from.

I think the christian message was different from what had gone before, hence the OP.

The basic message was exactly the same though there were certain differences in the way it was being taught, in fulfilment of Jeremiah 31:33, where Jehovah says that his law will be put into peoples hearts not in a law code.

That is the only real change that Christ introduced, though it has to be said that it did take the same major prohibitions further by, for instance teaching that not only was adultery wrong but so was even thinking about committing it, as Christ explained in his sermon on the mount in fulfilment of Jeremiah 31:33.

No, the Christian message is the same, as Christ showed when he quoted from Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:19 when asked what the most important command in the law is:

Matthew 22:36-40
36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37 He said to him: ""You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind." 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this: "You must love your neighbor as yourself." 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets."

Deuteronomy 6:5
5 You must love Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your strength.

Leviticus 19:18
18 ""You must not take vengeance nor hold a grudge against the sons of your people, and you must love your fellow man as yourself. I am Jehovah.

Why did he quote two laws when asked for only one?

Because you cannot truly fulfil either one without fulfilling the other also.
Daedal
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 8:30:46 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 8:26:23 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:03:41 PM, Daedal wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

After all, when Paul wrote 2 Timothy 3:16-17 he could only have been talking about the Hebrew Scriptures once there was little else to use.

2 Timothy 3:16, 17
16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Besides which, the "God of the Hebrew Scriptures", Jehovah, is the same God that Christ and the Apostles worship.

John 20:17; 1 Peter 1:3; Ephesians.

If you ignore the Hebrew Scriptures you will never even get close to understanding the Christian Greek Scriptures. Simple as.

Quoting scriptures really doesn't work for me at all, so best forget it.

Well, if you are happy to leave half the evidence out of the equation, that is your fault, and your problem. You'll never get the truth without taking all aspects into account.

The trouble is that you cannot begin to understand Christian teaching unless you do take note of the very scriptures that Christ and the Apostles taught from.

I think the christian message was different from what had gone before, hence the OP.

The basic message was exactly the same though there were certain differences in the way it was being taught, in fulfilment of Jeremiah 31:33, where Jehovah says that his law will be put into peoples hearts not in a law code.

That is the only real change that Christ introduced, though it has to be said that it did take the same major prohibitions further by, for instance teaching that not only was adultery wrong but so was even thinking about committing it, as Christ explained in his sermon on the mount in fulfilment of Jeremiah 31:33.

No, the Christian message is the same, as Christ showed when he quoted from Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:19 when asked what the most important command in the law is:

Matthew 22:36-40
36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37 He said to him: ""You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind." 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this: "You must love your neighbor as yourself." 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets."

Deuteronomy 6:5
5 You must love Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your strength.

Leviticus 19:18
18 ""You must not take vengeance nor hold a grudge against the sons of your people, and you must love your fellow man as yourself. I am Jehovah.

Why did he quote two laws when asked for only one?

Because you cannot truly fulfil either one without fulfilling the other also.

Oh dear. I already told you that quoting scripture doesn't work. The other contributors have give some pertinient information, maybe you could try to?
annanicole
Posts: 19,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/27/2016 8:40:20 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 8:10:58 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 7:45:45 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 7:27:53 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:59:24 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:36:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:10:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

1. There is nothing at all wrong with calling it the "New Testament" or "New Covenant".

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

No, it isn't. Why in the world would anyone "expand" on OT prophesies that were fulfilled long before Revelation was ever penned?

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

The general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

As always your lack of understanding of scripture, especially of the over themes, lets you down fatally.

Then I suppose you will find a passage that states such a thing. After all, we'd hate for a Jehovah's Witnesses to read such a voluminous work as the Bible and come up with an assertion all on his own. Generally, that hasn't worked out very well.

However, if you can provide a passage which states such a thing, then I'd be glad to see it. I hope you do better on this than you did with your 1925 passage.

Well since I didn't even try with the 1925 passage it is hardly surprising I didn't find one.

Yep, you had the same results you would have had if you DID try.

No.


However it should be obvious ...

Oh, I've seen the word "obvious" from the WatchTower folks before, along with "indisputable" ... "clearly" ... and the like. With them, such words are usually followed by a load of BS.

Nope, they leave that to such as you.


I cut off the rest of the rambling since I didn't see a single passage given that even purports to imply that the "general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

Thus it remains simply your little assertion - and should be treated as such.

That is not my Assertion. my assertion is that the whole of Scripture, including Revelation is precisely for that purpose,

So you can't give a passage - or a few passages - so you just assure us that (i. e., assert) that you're right and base your claim on your idea of what the "whole of scripture" implies. Well, that doesn't cut it.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
matt8800
Posts: 2,077
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 12:28:05 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 8:13:26 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:39:00 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.


Such as, "Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves."

The immorality of the OT is undeniable. It will be the first pillar to cause the eventual collapse of Christianity.

It is absolutely deniable and provably so, as you would know if you bothered to learn the truth of what is behind things that on the surface seem to be as you describe them.

The fact that you cannot be bothered to dig deep enough to find out what is truly happening just shows that you are too judgemental, and not sufficiently concerned about truth.

Then I suppose what is considered moral is debatable, hence subjective morality.

You think it is OK to tell a man to stab and burn his sons body as a human sacrifice and I think that is wrong. People that follow through with that today get arrested and thrown in a mental institution.

If your heros were alive today, they would be committed to mental institutions. You are a perfect candidate for a weird modern day cult.....uh...oh, wait...
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 8:32:01 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 12:28:05 AM, matt8800 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 8:13:26 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:39:00 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.


Such as, "Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves."

The immorality of the OT is undeniable. It will be the first pillar to cause the eventual collapse of Christianity.

It is absolutely deniable and provably so, as you would know if you bothered to learn the truth of what is behind things that on the surface seem to be as you describe them.

The fact that you cannot be bothered to dig deep enough to find out what is truly happening just shows that you are too judgemental, and not sufficiently concerned about truth.

Then I suppose what is considered moral is debatable, hence subjective morality.

You think it is OK to tell a man to stab and burn his sons body as a human sacrifice and I think that is wrong. People that follow through with that today get arrested and thrown in a mental institution.

If your heros were alive today, they would be committed to mental institutions. You are a perfect candidate for a weird modern day cult.....uh...oh, wait...

Morality is absolute and is set by the only one with the right and ability to judge, the creator of the universe.

The fact that most people teat it as subjective does not mean it is.

True morality is a perfect balance of Love, Wisdom, Justice and Mercy, Jehovah's 4 controlling qualities, which are always applied in everything Jehovah does.

If he does it, or authorises it, it can only be for the long term benefit of his creation, all of it, not just the human part.

After all, the only thing we can give Jehovah is peace of mind. Everything else is either what he gives us, or what he allows us to have.

He owns everything by right of creation, and will destroy those parts of it which don;t fit into his overall plan for the good of his creation, when the time is right.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 8:35:27 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/27/2016 8:40:20 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 8:10:58 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 7:45:45 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 7:27:53 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:59:24 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:36:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:10:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

1. There is nothing at all wrong with calling it the "New Testament" or "New Covenant".

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

No, it isn't. Why in the world would anyone "expand" on OT prophesies that were fulfilled long before Revelation was ever penned?

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

The general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

As always your lack of understanding of scripture, especially of the over themes, lets you down fatally.

Then I suppose you will find a passage that states such a thing. After all, we'd hate for a Jehovah's Witnesses to read such a voluminous work as the Bible and come up with an assertion all on his own. Generally, that hasn't worked out very well.

However, if you can provide a passage which states such a thing, then I'd be glad to see it. I hope you do better on this than you did with your 1925 passage.

Well since I didn't even try with the 1925 passage it is hardly surprising I didn't find one.

Yep, you had the same results you would have had if you DID try.

No.


However it should be obvious ...

Oh, I've seen the word "obvious" from the WatchTower folks before, along with "indisputable" ... "clearly" ... and the like. With them, such words are usually followed by a load of BS.

Nope, they leave that to such as you.


I cut off the rest of the rambling since I didn't see a single passage given that even purports to imply that the "general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

Thus it remains simply your little assertion - and should be treated as such.

That is not my Assertion. my assertion is that the whole of Scripture, including Revelation is precisely for that purpose,

So you can't give a passage - or a few passages - so you just assure us that (i. e., assert) that you're right and base your claim on your idea of what the "whole of scripture" implies. Well, that doesn't cut it.

It's not supposed to "cut it" it is an invitation for you to test it out for yourself, which you can only do by a detailed study of the whole of the Bible, and with Jehovah's help.

Are you prepared to ask for that help? James 1:5-8.

Hardly since you don't even believe he keeps his promises, even today, and always will.

In fact in the light of that lack of faith do you think you will even get his help.

James 1:5-8, also answers that with a resounding negative.

I trust Jehovah implicitly so I get his help, simple as.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 8:41:24 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 12:28:05 AM, matt8800 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 8:13:26 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:39:00 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.


Such as, "Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves."

The immorality of the OT is undeniable. It will be the first pillar to cause the eventual collapse of Christianity.

It is absolutely deniable and provably so, as you would know if you bothered to learn the truth of what is behind things that on the surface seem to be as you describe them.

The fact that you cannot be bothered to dig deep enough to find out what is truly happening just shows that you are too judgemental, and not sufficiently concerned about truth.

Then I suppose what is considered moral is debatable, hence subjective morality.

You think it is OK to tell a man to stab and burn his sons body as a human sacrifice and I think that is wrong. People that follow through with that today get arrested and thrown in a mental institution.

If your heros were alive today, they would be committed to mental institutions. You are a perfect candidate for a weird modern day cult.....uh...oh, wait...

I do not need to think anything.

Because of the fact that I have taken the trouble to study his word in depth from Genesis to Revelation, and ask for as well as rely on his help to do so (James 1:5-8; 3 Timothy 3:16), I know that anything and everything Jehovah has ever done has been for the overall, long term benefit of his creation, all of it not just the human part.

I also know, for the same reason that Jehovah no longer authorises such things as there is no longer any requirement to do so to ensure the success of his plan to get his creation back on course.

All of that comes because I am not prepared to judge without as much knowledge as is available, unlike you who is judging in at least partial, and major, ignorance.

You should do the same. No-one else can do it for you, and as long as you are prepared to judge on only partial knowledge you will be judged the same way.

Is that what you want?
bulproof
Posts: 25,308
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 10:52:55 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 8:41:24 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/28/2016 12:28:05 AM, matt8800 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 8:13:26 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 6:39:00 PM, matt8800 wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.


Such as, "Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves."

The immorality of the OT is undeniable. It will be the first pillar to cause the eventual collapse of Christianity.

It is absolutely deniable and provably so, as you would know if you bothered to learn the truth of what is behind things that on the surface seem to be as you describe them.

The fact that you cannot be bothered to dig deep enough to find out what is truly happening just shows that you are too judgemental, and not sufficiently concerned about truth.

Then I suppose what is considered moral is debatable, hence subjective morality.

You think it is OK to tell a man to stab and burn his sons body as a human sacrifice and I think that is wrong. People that follow through with that today get arrested and thrown in a mental institution.

If your heros were alive today, they would be committed to mental institutions. You are a perfect candidate for a weird modern day cult.....uh...oh, wait...

I do not need to think anything.

Because of the fact that I have taken the trouble to study his word in depth from Genesis to Revelation, and ask for as well as rely on his help to do so (James 1:5-8; 3 Timothy 3:16), I know that anything and everything Jehovah has ever done has been for the overall, long term benefit of his creation, all of it not just the human part.

I also know, for the same reason that Jehovah no longer authorises such things as there is no longer any requirement to do so to ensure the success of his plan to get his creation back on course.

All of that comes because I am not prepared to judge without as much knowledge as is available, unlike you who is judging in at least partial, and major, ignorance.

You should do the same. No-one else can do it for you, and as long as you are prepared to judge on only partial knowledge you will be judged the same way.

Is that what you want?

The hubris is cosmic in scope.
dsjpk5
Posts: 3,016
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 11:12:56 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

I would say that since Jesus quoted from the Old Testament, not all of it must be irrelevant.
If that was the only issue, then vote moderation could be avoided more often, since a vote in which the voter does explain sufficiently how at least one point a debater made swung their vote, would be considered sufficient. -Airmax
annanicole
Posts: 19,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 11:46:29 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 8:35:27 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 8:40:20 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 8:10:58 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 7:45:45 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 7:27:53 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:59:24 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:36:39 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/27/2016 4:10:48 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 5/27/2016 3:59:46 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

It is more than just the history of the Jews, it is the whole basis for what Christ and the Apostles taught.

There is absolutely nothing in what is wrongly called the New Testament that is not foretold in or taken from the Hebrew Scriptures,.

1. There is nothing at all wrong with calling it the "New Testament" or "New Covenant".

Even Revelation is simply an expansion on many of the earlier prophecies.

No, it isn't. Why in the world would anyone "expand" on OT prophesies that were fulfilled long before Revelation was ever penned?

The simple fact is that at its most basic, the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is simply Jehovah's evidence against Satan, and the story of the outworking of Jehovah's plan to bring humanity back to the holy condition that Adam enjoyed, using his son to guide us.

The general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

As always your lack of understanding of scripture, especially of the over themes, lets you down fatally.

Then I suppose you will find a passage that states such a thing. After all, we'd hate for a Jehovah's Witnesses to read such a voluminous work as the Bible and come up with an assertion all on his own. Generally, that hasn't worked out very well.

However, if you can provide a passage which states such a thing, then I'd be glad to see it. I hope you do better on this than you did with your 1925 passage.

Well since I didn't even try with the 1925 passage it is hardly surprising I didn't find one.

Yep, you had the same results you would have had if you DID try.

No.


However it should be obvious ...

Oh, I've seen the word "obvious" from the WatchTower folks before, along with "indisputable" ... "clearly" ... and the like. With them, such words are usually followed by a load of BS.

Nope, they leave that to such as you.


I cut off the rest of the rambling since I didn't see a single passage given that even purports to imply that the "general purpose of inspired revelation is NOT to "give evidence against Satan."

Thus it remains simply your little assertion - and should be treated as such.

That is not my Assertion. my assertion is that the whole of Scripture, including Revelation is precisely for that purpose,

So you can't give a passage - or a few passages - so you just assure us that (i. e., assert) that you're right and base your claim on your idea of what the "whole of scripture" implies. Well, that doesn't cut it.

It's not supposed to "cut it" it is an invitation for you to test it out for yourself, which you can only do by a detailed study of the whole of the Bible, and with Jehovah's help.

Are you prepared to ask for that help? James 1:5-8.

Thus we see that you cannot give a single passage or passages that confirm your position. That figures. That's what everyone has come to expect. No, the only way to "confirm" your position is to request miraculously-infused "wisdom".
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Daedal
Posts: 157
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 1:37:47 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 11:12:56 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

I would say that since Jesus quoted from the Old Testament, not all of it must be irrelevant.

Good point. I suppose the way to deal with that would be to include any relevant bits as quotations incorporated into the text of the NT. That way you wouldn't have all the old bloody baggage.
bulproof
Posts: 25,308
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2016 2:11:58 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 5/28/2016 11:12:56 AM, dsjpk5 wrote:
At 5/26/2016 8:25:11 PM, Daedal wrote:
Serious question. That's just the history of the Jews, so why not just present the new teachings of Christ? That would be the message, after all. Fresh and new and untainted by the bloody history that the old writings present.

I would say that since Jesus quoted from the Old Testament, not all of it must be irrelevant.

What do you think would be from the creator of your "objective morality"?
Would infanticide be irrelevant?