Proof the Judeo-Christian Bible Inspired of God

ALTER2EGO -to- CORWIN:
A word to the wise: Self-righteousness can be a stumbling block.

If I have you pegged right, it won't be long before you condemn me to the Roman Catholic's version of Dante's fictional hell. My crime? I started up a thread in which I am presenting evidence that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. I started up another thread in which I expose macroevolution as nothing more than myth. And I started up a third thread in which I call into question the false hellfire and Trinity teachings, while directing attention to what the Bible has to say on the matter.

 

What a pity for you that your 'evidence' can't be verified.

 

You are mistaken. Your BIGGEST crime is to be a MORON. Does this prove that your God didn´t like you and therefore deprived you of the brain?

 

Much better to fight the ignorance displayed by A2E....frustrating though it is!

 

When we look for justification for doing so there are a number of reasons with most of them pointing to social responsibility. From my perspective I would hope that people would bombard any of my children with rational arguments if they were taken in the same way by a cult.

GOMEZA -to- ALTER2EGO

Do you really think that it is possible that a group of American bible students uncovered the true meanings of what is written in the bible nearly 1900 (circa 1870) years after the death of Christ and that no other group has?

When were you going to tell the people you are having dialog in this thread that you are reading from the "New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures" and not from any of the more widely used versions of the bible that they are reading from?

And finally: when were you going to honestly reveal the motivations behind all of the similar threads you have started on multiple forums? From what we can tell it seems you are intent on telling anyone who will listen that they have it wrong and your little group has it right.

 

ALTER2EGO -to- CORWIN:
I rest my case. You're condemning me for rejecting a 3-prong god that the Roman Catholics dreamed up, for rejecting literal eternal hellfire that is nowhere to be found in the Judeo-Christian Bible, and for rejecting evolution theory that was dreamed up by Charles Darwin and other Englishmen a few centuries ago. Meanwhile, you propose that the Genesis account of creation was not literal! But according to you, my lack of "formal education on the history of Christianity" makes me out to be--get this--"sinful and unforgiving - very un-Christian."

Ubelievable! You've sure got it twisted.

 

Quite! Ignoring people like A2E is the same as giving them a platform to spread their beliefs without hindrance. There is no possibility of changing the beliefs of A2E but there are many thousands of people reading these threads that never post. With reasoned and logical arguments against people like A2E, we can hope to convince some of them that belief in ancient mythology has no place in the 21st century. We must not give up. As Mencken said:

"The way to deal with superstition is not to be polite to it, but to tackle it with all arms, and so rout it, cripple it, and make it forever infamous and ridiculous. Is it, perchance, cherished by persons who should know better? Then their folly should be brought out into the light of day, and exhibited there in all its hideousness until they flee from it, hiding their heads in shame. True enough, even a superstitious man has certain inalienable rights. He has a right to harbor and indulge his imbecilities as long as he pleases, provided only he does not try to inflict them upon other men by force. He has a right to argue for them as eloquently as he can, in season and out of season. He has a right to teach them to his children. But certainly he has no right to be protected against the free criticism of those who do not hold them. He has no right to demand that they be treated as sacred. He has no right to preach them without challenge. ....... "

 

Right on . . . I think I'm on the official ignore list, which is fine, it is time to leave this thread anyways.

 

ALTER2EGO -to- CORWIN:
What's that got to do with anything? I didn't say the Catholics copied it from Dante. I said they copied the idea of hellfire from cultures that never worshipped the God of the Judeo-Christian Bible. Look at the words that are bolded in my quotation posted above. To confirm that I quoted myself correctly in this post, take a look at the original at Post 38, Paragraph 2.

I used the expression "Dante's Hell" because Dante's description of hell perfectly depicts the mythical hell that is found in pagan cultures--which the Roman Catholic Church has been teaching people for centuries.

 

Pot. Kettle. Black.

I've seen, and been subjected to, bigotry in my life. You stink of it,

Who was it that said "you can't win an argument with an ignorant man"?

I can remember who wrote "Don't cast your pearls before swine"

Look, A2E has made it plain that he is a bigot. He has a seething and unreasonable hatred for, among other peoples, Roman Catholics. How do we combat such disturbing ignorance? Is he demonstrating anything that can be reported to the Mods?

 

ALTER2EGO -to- CORWIN:
I'm stating historical facts and you're hollering bigotry—in an obvious attempt at attacking my credibility. Below is a source that confirms what I said regarding the Roman Catholic Church's monopoly of the Bible for centuries and their harsh punishment of those who dared translate it into the common language of the populace. The victim in the first quotation is William Tyndale who was executed by the Roman Catholic Church for translating the Bible to English. I could post more sources, but why bother when it's clear you are a Roman Catholic apologist?

http://jackopines.wordpress.com/201...-william-tyndale-bible-translator-and-martyr/


ALTER2EGO -to- CORWIN:
John Wycliffe was the first person who translated the Bible to English. He managed to escape the murderous Roman Catholic Church in life. But in death he could not escape their vindictiveness. The Catholic Church literally desecrated Wycliffe's grave 43 years after his death. They dug up the man's grave and burned his dead body and then scattered the bones! Those are historical facts and have nothing whatever to do with personal bigotry. That's the religion you are up in here trying to defend. You are doomed to failure on that front because you are attempting to defend the indefensible.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/131christians/moversandshakers/wycliffe.html

 

. William G. McAdoo said...."It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument".

It's from Matthew 7:6.

With logic, reason and common sense. The more he posts, the more he shows the world the ugly side of religion. He does more for atheism than Dawkins, Sam Harris and Richard Carrier could ever do. I urge him to continue.

 

ALTER2EGO -to- CORWIN:
While you're hollering for the moderators to come to your rescue and ban me, notice what you posted to me at Post 58 of this thread. It will be the next to last paragraph within that post. Here is the weblink to the page where you said it. Keep your eyes on the words in bold print within your quotation.
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=2540813&page=3

Next, read what you posted to me at Post 69. Again, it will be the next to last paragraph within the post. Here is the weblink to the page where you said it.
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=2540813&page=4

ALTER2EGO -to- CORWIN:
Those statements above from you to me are considered personal attacks in violation of forum rule #6 for the Politics & Religion forum, which says:

"Personal attacks against people, or sites will not be tolerated. If you have an issue with someone or their site, take it up with them personally."
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/faq.php?faq=rules#faq_posting_guidelines


Mind you, gworld takes the 1st Prize Trophy in terms of posting personal attacks/personal insults to me--which is why he is now permanently on my "Ignore" list. But you're not exactly innocent in that regard either. My point is this: Did you see me hollering for moderator help when you told me that I'm "sinful and unforgiving - very un-Christian" and when you informed me in so many words that you suspect I am mentally challenged?


Now, notice what Gomeza said about the Catholic Church (at Post 36)--in which he relied on historical facts, just as I did when I presented info on the Catholic Church. Again, keep your eyes on the words in bold print within his quotation. I want you to see how differently you responded to him, in comparison to how you responded to me. Here is the weblink to the page where he said it. You will find your response to him on the same page at Post 37.
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=2540813&page=2

ALTER2EGO -to- CORWIN:
Notice above that you didn't start hollering bigotry or begged moderators to get rid of Gomeza. You singled me out because you figure I'm new here and obviously, since all the skeptics that showed up thus far are against me, you figured you could get them to join forces with you and urge the moderators to ban my account. Never mind that I have not once attacked anyone personally. But as you see it, moderators will more likely get rid of "the newcomer."

Interestingly, the skeptics have been running Jehovah's Witnesses to the ground. Do you see anybody hollering bigotry or begging moderators to intervene because of that? The skeptics have also been doing a job on Islam. I haven't seen Mikaël hollering bigotry and begging moderators to intervene. So what makes you think the Roman Catholic Church is special and exempt from criticism--especially when everything I've said about them is historically correct?


As a Christian, part of my religious training is to look at the historical background of Christian doctrines to identify the source of false religious teachings. When doing that, it is virtually impossible to not mention the role of the Catholic Church because it was the Catholic Church that brought those falsehoods into their version of Christianity. When the Protestants broke ranks with the Catholics during the Religious Reformation, they carried many of the false teachings with them. That's why most of Christendom's 33,000 denominations believe in the 3-prong god (Trinity) and eternal hellfire, and a string of other false teachings directly linked to the Roman Catholic Church.

I am simply stating historical facts as part and parcel of my discussion dealing with how false/pagan teachings made their way into Christianity. This has nothing whatever to do with bigotry against the Catholic Church. These are facts, and facts are stubborn things.


SUGGESTION: To avoid reading what I post, put me on your "Ignore" list. Problem solved.

 

You know why everyone is against you? Because you won't listen to reason.

I think the moderators can decide for themselves is a person needs to be banned, no matter how much reports. They still have the last saying.

"But as you see it,"

You are the one that sees it that way

Why should they?

Yeah, because the JW are without any flaw whatsoever

Right, with a version of the bible that only a certain group of people have access to

And somehow, you can magically tell every falsehood... Impressive

So are you.

No, it's way more fun reading your childish defenses.

 

Spoken like a true bigot.

Did you receive any training on comforting the sick and dying, or bringing people together? Have you fed the poor or worked the phones on a suicide hotline as I have done?

What are your intentions? Is your behavior here meant to bring people together, or are you trying to get people to hate you?

Why are you incapable of Christian compassion?

You have no Christian credibility.

O.K., then, prove you are a Christian - what is Christ's Golden Rule and HOW are you demonstrating that here?

 

ALTER2EGO -to- GMF:
Below is a conversation I'm currently having with Bushranger in my thread entitled "Precision in Nature: Evidence of God or Accidents?" Notice the two quotations of the same verse of scripture from the New World Translation (NWT) published by Jehovah's Witnesses and by the King James Version (KJV).

ALTER2EGO -to- GMF:
As you can see, both the New World Translation (NWT) and the King James Version (KJV) are saying the same thing: that God does not have a beginning or an end.

Now, let me point something out to you concerning a fallacy that you--like all Jehovah's Witness haters--repeat at every single online forum where I debate. If you noticed, the NWT is in modern English while the KJV is in 17th century archaic English. The KJV was first published in 1611, whilst the NWT was first published in 1961. The NWT simply presented the same info in modern day English because it's easier to understand due to the fact people today don't speak 17th century English. Presenting the same thing in modern English could never equate to: "a version of the bible that only a certain group of people have access to."

That's why it never ceases to amaze me how Jehovah's Witness haters can get online and invent the popular lie that Jehovah's Witnesses have changed the contents of the scriptures and they have a different Bible from what was written in the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. That is patently false!

The fact that I present quotations and always identify my quotations with the name of the Bible book, chapter, and verse should be a signal to anyone using sound logic that I would not be quoting scriptures that nobody else can find in their own Bible version.


If anything, the New World Translation corrected the dozens of translation errors/blunders found in the KJV and several popular Bible versions that were translated by Trinitarians and hellfire howlers. The KJV contains 40 fabricated verses of scriptures and dozens of translation errors/blunders that INDEPENDENT SOURCES--not affiliated with Jehovah's Witnesses--have identified.


In my thread entitled: "Bible Teachings or Traditions of Men?" found at the following weblink, http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=2532313, I intend to debunk the non-existent Trinity and hellfire dogmas by means of scriptures from the Judeo-Christian Bible. In the opening post of that thread, I asked a total of 8 questions intended to get people thinking. The questions require people to get the answers from their Bible.


QUESTION #1 to GMF: How in the world could I hold a conversation with people and expect to show them that Trinity and hellfire are not Bible teachings if they don't have access to the exact same scriptural contents as I do?


QUESTION #2 to GMF: How could I expect to persuade anyone that Trinity and hellfire are not in the Bible if--as you erroneously claim--the New World Translation has changed the words, or, as you put it, the NWT is: "a version of the bible that only a certain group of people have access to"?


MY ADVICE TO YOU: Get your facts straight. You've got it twisted.

 

...but it is and I and others have shown you the very verses.

 

He has demonstrated repeatedly that he knows very little of the more widely used versions of the bible and general biblical history. As a JW he would be using the "New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures" which is a bible version unique to his cult. It first appeared in the late 1870s and has a number of fundamental differences from other versions . . . . In his cult (if I remember correctly) Jesus is the archangel Michael and anyone reading from a different version of the bible is a member of a "false" religion. . . . none of the passages that have been offered up as rebuttal exist in his version of the bible.

 

It's very convenient when they can rewrite the Bible to fit in with what their cult believes.

 

I'm fairly certain there are no material differences in the JW bible from any other version.