It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Question: If Jesus was the son of God, why did he wait to do his miracles?

page: 8
4
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by freespirit1
 






Akushla




posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


With the inductive categories you use as a substitute for logic, I must also be a (somewhat) JW.....

Quote: ["Again sir, we were talking about the Trinity/deity of Christ. In regards to what we were discussing, you share the same beliefs as the JWs:

1. Jesus is not God.
2. Trinity doctrine is false."]

..as I share these 'beliefs'. This is ofcourse a bit troublesome, as I'm not a theist. Apparently your 'logic' needs re-adjustment.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


Do you argue your 'shared beliefs' from your own translation of scripture made from men who didn't even go to college? If so, I suppose it's also addressed to you.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by bogomil
 

Do you argue your 'shared beliefs' from your own translation of scripture made from men who didn't even go to college? If so, I suppose it's also addressed to you.
Everybody does, or just about because the Greek text used to make the JW Bible is the same one used by practically all the Bibles made after the JW Bible, so picking them out for using that version is rather disingenuous.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by bogomil
 

Do you argue your 'shared beliefs' from your own translation of scripture made from men who didn't even go to college? If so, I suppose it's also addressed to you.
Everybody does, or just about because the Greek text used to make the JW Bible is the same one used by practically all the Bibles made after the JW Bible, so picking them out for using that version is rather disingenuous.


That's fine, the issue is the NWT translators never went to college, well, one did for 1 semester then dropped out in 1916 because their 2nd leader after CTR told them Christ was returning in 1917.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 


Again sir, we were talking about the Trinity/deity of Christ. In regards to what we were discussing, you share the same beliefs as the JWs:

1. Jesus is not God.
2. Trinity doctrine is false.

That's it.

I was comparing your position to theirs in regards to these two points. And ONLY these two points.

Clear now finally??

It's been some time now, can I actually get you to watch the videos then comment back on them? Is this too much to ask?


I really don't see the point of me watching those videos honestly. And i really am not interested in why JW's beliefs are false according to your religion. I know why i don't believe either of those points. The fact is Christianity is the only religion that certian sects believe Jesus is God. So why did you happen to chose JW's for that comparison? Could you have not just asked why i don't believe what you believe instead of comparing me to a cult?

Perhaps in some small way you were trying to politely insult me?

regardless, if these videos share the same view on these topics as you do, i won't agree with them either... so is there really a point of me watching them?




posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


No, I made sure to qualify my statement that I know you're certainly not a JW, but that you share the same views they do on the deity of Christ and the Trinity. Fine, you don't care to watch the videos, what's new around these parts with regards to linking reference material?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 


No, I made sure to qualify my statement that I know you're certainly not a JW, but that you share the same views they do on the deity of Christ and the Trinity. Fine, you don't care to watch the videos, what's new around these parts with regards to linking reference material?


And again, i tell you that many many other religions also share the belief that Jesus was not God, and the trinity is false... that list includes athiests.....so again i'll have to ask you, WHY did you pick JW's out of the thousands of other religions you could have chosen?

Was it meant as a polite insult?

Also i don't mind reference materiall, videos i do mind because i don't want to waste my time listening to someone preach his religon... Give me something to read, i would probably take a look.... Post a video it gets ignored.




posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 05:29 AM
link   
This is as good an opportunity as any to clarify a few points, which regularly pops up. And with a lenient use of OP, I believe it's thread relevant.

1/ Facts and faith.

a/ Daily-use version (including science/logic):

The standard definition of facts is self-defined and follow some basic rules. This does not give it any ultimate truth value, but is a consensus mankind increasingly uses. Under certain conditions this is also 'objectivity'.

Faith is opinions based on personal choice, preferences etc., not supported by facts. Faith is a legitimate position for any individual or group, but must both academically and socially accept egalitarian principles BOTH ways to benefit from e.g. free speech. No faith has any privileges compared to other faiths/ideologies (such privileges is fascism). Usually this is 'subjectivity'.

b/ The complex philosophical version:

Which goes via epistemology ('how do we know, what we know' and how valid is it'), and as it is practically never used on this forum except occasionaly for debate-tactics, I'll leave it at that.


2/ Logic.

Which mainly comes in two forms, of which deductive logic is the preferred one for rational contexts.

a/ Deductive logic rests on common IDENTITY between things, categories, processes or procedures. This is a request in 'hard' science.

b/ Inductive logic rests to a lesser degree on common identity, but relies instead on SIMILARITY. 'Soft' sciences use this, but have strict rules for when similarity looses its value. Beyond a certain point inductive reasoning and inductive categories are not only worthless, but directly falsifying, as e.g. manifested strongly in scholasticism.

3/ Debate-technique and logic.

By their nature these are only somewhat overlapping. The 'symbolism' (i.e. language and mathematical symbols) differs, and such debate points as e.g. a 'strawman argument' wouldn't be of much use or need in science/logic procedure, where other methods are used to settle validity.

Debaters often take a request of logic to be a debate-technique point, and instead of answering logic with logic, they answer with debate-techniques (sometimes to the extent of semanticism or even scholasticism).

4/ Theism and non-theism.

Ofcourse both groups can use a variety of positions and methodologies, but generally theism is faith-based. Many theists have little or no knowledge of rational reasoning, and consequently flit around between the various options of faith, science, logic, deductive logic, inductive logic, objectivity, subjectivity, procedures and sadly enough even imagined ideas of how all this function; with false inductive categories as an all-time favourite.

Now all this sounds very 'learned', stilted and possibly boring, but once having passed the language barrier, it's quite simple and when understood would save everybody a lot of time, energy and potential bad feelings.

I hope this post will be allowed to stay here on its own, being a support for the general discussion.
edit on 9-9-2011 by bogomil because: typo



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 05:50 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Referring to the 'academic' post above (which I hope still is there) some comments on the JW parallel track recently emerging on this thread.

To take a few examples of SIMILARITIES and debate-wise build an inductive category around them.... thusly 'preparing for a case'....... is useless, and no amount of semantic cosmetics can change that.

My recent post (8/9 06.22 PM) addressed to you on this point wasn't a 'faith' or a 'belief' declaration on my part, but directed at your creation of a false inductive category. Such has no purpose here (or anywhere actually) and debate-technique/tactics is of no relevance in this context.


edit on 9-9-2011 by bogomil because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 




I think a lot of the ‘communication failures’ here can be explained as a case of different styles of thinking

Religious types tend to think in a very back/white good/bad and no in-betweens way

Sceptics/atheist and so on, seem to think in the in-betweens the gray areas and have a dislike for simple black/white answers

And its possible that what theists call the growth of atheism is actually just society evolving away from the black/white thought process’s that where so dominant in the past



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by racasan
reply to post by bogomil
 




I think a lot of the ‘communication failures’ here can be explained as a case of different styles of thinking

Religious types tend to think in a very back/white good/bad and no in-betweens way

Sceptics/atheist and so on, seem to think in the in-betweens the gray areas and have a dislike for simple black/white answers

And its possible that what theists call the growth of atheism is actually just society evolving away from the black/white thought process’s that where so dominant in the past


I'm afraid I'll go even further than that, as I sometimes meet 'communication failure' intentionally used as a 'tactical' maneuver.

E.g....Well knowing an opponent's REAL ideological position and methodology, stubbornly (after several corrections) ascribing a more convenient debate-tactical label to him/her again and again.

No hard feelings I hope: But this mini-analysis will take us too far from topic if it developes further, so on my part I stop that direction here.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 


No, I made sure to qualify my statement that I know you're certainly not a JW, but that you share the same views they do on the deity of Christ and the Trinity. Fine, you don't care to watch the videos, what's new around these parts with regards to linking reference material?


And again, i tell you that many many other religions also share the belief that Jesus was not God, and the trinity is false... that list includes athiests.....so again i'll have to ask you, WHY did you pick JW's out of the thousands of other religions you could have chosen?

Was it meant as a polite insult?


How many times do I have to say no?



Also i don't mind reference materiall, videos i do mind because i don't want to waste my time listening to someone preach his religon... Give me something to read, i would probably take a look.... Post a video it gets ignored.



Do what you will, I can't make you watch a video. It's just commonplace, people will refuse to acknowledge and address presented materials. But that's fine, the beauty of the internet is that for thousands of people who will click this thread and read, the material is still available.

I presented the video destroying the JW's beliefs Biblically on the deity of Christ and the Trinity because that's what I could find addressing the topic from Dr. Ron Carlson, he's probably the best expert in the word on false doctrine and cults/world religions, that's why I included it. Not to focus on the JWs, but to focus on the notion that the deity of Christ and the Trinity were not Biblical. The JWs were used as an example only.

But whatever, peace man.


edit on 9-9-2011 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Referring to the 'academic' post above (which I hope still is there) some comments on the JW parallel track recently emerging on this thread.

To take a few examples of SIMILARITIES and debate-wise build an inductive category around them.... thusly 'preparing for a case'....... is useless, and no amount of semantic cosmetics can change that.

My recent post (8/9 06.22 PM) addressed to you on this point wasn't a 'faith' or a 'belief' declaration on my part, but directed at your creation of a false inductive category. Such has no purpose here (or anywhere actually) and debate-technique/tactics is of no relevance in this context.



Dear Pete your posts lull me to sleep!! Do you do that on purpose??

*yawn*



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Referring to the 'academic' post above (which I hope still is there) some comments on the JW parallel track recently emerging on this thread.

To take a few examples of SIMILARITIES and debate-wise build an inductive category around them.... thusly 'preparing for a case'....... is useless, and no amount of semantic cosmetics can change that.

My recent post (8/9 06.22 PM) addressed to you on this point wasn't a 'faith' or a 'belief' declaration on my part, but directed at your creation of a false inductive category. Such has no purpose here (or anywhere actually) and debate-technique/tactics is of no relevance in this context.



Dear Pete your posts lull me to sleep!! Do you do that on purpose??

*yawn*


And I haven't even come to the complex parts yet.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by bogomil

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Referring to the 'academic' post above (which I hope still is there) some comments on the JW parallel track recently emerging on this thread.

To take a few examples of SIMILARITIES and debate-wise build an inductive category around them.... thusly 'preparing for a case'....... is useless, and no amount of semantic cosmetics can change that.

My recent post (8/9 06.22 PM) addressed to you on this point wasn't a 'faith' or a 'belief' declaration on my part, but directed at your creation of a false inductive category. Such has no purpose here (or anywhere actually) and debate-technique/tactics is of no relevance in this context.



Dear Pete your posts lull me to sleep!! Do you do that on purpose??

*yawn*


And I haven't even come to the complex parts yet.


It's nothing to do with complexity, but delivery. I get past a line or two then my mind begins to wonder off to desiring to check my emails or play Mafia Wars on Facebook.

I apologize, really, it's me not you.



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:27 AM
link   
The Missing Years Of Jesus!!!!

Any One here please explain mystery behind this 18 Years. Was he hiding? If he was then why? As i know this was also not discussed in Bible
can some1 could shed lights on this


Please see the below Excerpt from Wiki...


The lost years of Jesus concerns the undocumented timespan between Jesus's childhood and the beginning of his ministry as recorded in the New Testament.The gospels have accounts of events surrounding Jesus' birth, and the subsequent flight into Egypt to escape the wrath of Herod (Gospel of Matthew 2:13-23). There is a general reference to the settlement of Joseph and Mary, along with the young Jesus, at Nazareth (Matthew 2:23; Gospel of Luke 2:39-40). There also is that isolated account of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus' visit to the city of Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, when Jesus was twelve years old (Luke 2:41-50).

Following that episode, there is a blank space in the record that covers eighteen years in the life of Christ (from age 12 to 30). Other than the generic allusion that Jesus advanced in wisdom, stature, and in favor with God and man (Luke 2:52), the Bible gives nothing more about Jesus' life during this time span. A common assumption amongst Christians is that Jesus simply lived in Nazareth during that period, but there are various accounts that present other scenarios, including travels to India.

Several authors have claimed to have found proof of the existence of manuscripts in India and Tibet that support the belief that Christ was in India during this time in his life. Others cite legends in a number of places in the region that Jesus passed that way in ancient times.[1] The Jesus in India manuscript was first reported in modern times by Nicolas Notovitch (1894). Subsequently several other authors have written on the subject, including the religious leader Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (founder of Ahmadiyya movement in Islam) (1899), Levi H. Dowling (1908), Swami Abhedananda (1922),[2] Nicholas Roerich (1923–1928),[1] Mathilde Ludendorff (1930), Elizabeth Clare Prophet (founder of Ascended Master Teachings New Age group) (1956)[3] and more recently Holger Kersten[4] in his book Jesus Lived in India (1981).


I have seen some You tube videos that tell like he was studying in the Nalandha Uniiversity In India.His skills were taught by Hindu Saints and Bhuddist Monks.

Now I Need to know whether all the above is TRUE or NOT



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:27 AM
link   
The Missing Years Of Jesus!!!!

Any One here please explain mystery behind this 18 Years. Was he hiding? If he was then why? As i know this was also not discussed in Bible
can some1 could shed lights on this


Please see the below Excerpt from Wiki...


The lost years of Jesus concerns the undocumented timespan between Jesus's childhood and the beginning of his ministry as recorded in the New Testament.The gospels have accounts of events surrounding Jesus' birth, and the subsequent flight into Egypt to escape the wrath of Herod (Gospel of Matthew 2:13-23). There is a general reference to the settlement of Joseph and Mary, along with the young Jesus, at Nazareth (Matthew 2:23; Gospel of Luke 2:39-40). There also is that isolated account of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus' visit to the city of Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, when Jesus was twelve years old (Luke 2:41-50).

Following that episode, there is a blank space in the record that covers eighteen years in the life of Christ (from age 12 to 30). Other than the generic allusion that Jesus advanced in wisdom, stature, and in favor with God and man (Luke 2:52), the Bible gives nothing more about Jesus' life during this time span. A common assumption amongst Christians is that Jesus simply lived in Nazareth during that period, but there are various accounts that present other scenarios, including travels to India.

Several authors have claimed to have found proof of the existence of manuscripts in India and Tibet that support the belief that Christ was in India during this time in his life. Others cite legends in a number of places in the region that Jesus passed that way in ancient times.[1] The Jesus in India manuscript was first reported in modern times by Nicolas Notovitch (1894). Subsequently several other authors have written on the subject, including the religious leader Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (founder of Ahmadiyya movement in Islam) (1899), Levi H. Dowling (1908), Swami Abhedananda (1922),[2] Nicholas Roerich (1923–1928),[1] Mathilde Ludendorff (1930), Elizabeth Clare Prophet (founder of Ascended Master Teachings New Age group) (1956)[3] and more recently Holger Kersten[4] in his book Jesus Lived in India (1981).


I have seen some You tube videos that tell like he was studying in the Nalandha Uniiversity In India.His skills were taught by Hindu Saints and Bhuddist Monks.

Now I Need to know whether all the above is TRUE or NOT



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   
This and a few other things are why I posted the question..... If he was truly the son of God and not just a prophet, even if he had to wait until he was 30 to start preaching because of his religion.... why isn't there more history behind it? Is Jesus a test from God? The first commandment: Thou shalt not have any God before me...... Does that make Christians followers of a "false God"?



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by freespirit1
This and a few other things are why I posted the question..... If he was truly the son of God and not just a prophet, even if he had to wait until he was 30 to start preaching because of his religion.... why isn't there more history behind it? Is Jesus a test from God? The first commandment: Thou shalt not have any God before me...... Does that make Christians followers of a "false God"?



He was the one prophesied to come.

He fulfilled the prophecies that were spoken by the prophets in the Old Testament.

The Hindu's nor the Budhist's prophesied about him.




top topics



 
4
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join