In Reply to: Bible Questions posted by FRED on February 16, 2006 at 08:04:33:
Fred:
There is no snap answer for your questions. That is to say, that the nature of both the one questioning and the one being questioned definitely comes into play, and that human nature on both sides is extremely complex.
There are entire “schools of thought” over many centuries on both sides of the questions you are asking, and even thinking of framing an appropriate answer for you is extremely labor-intensive; all by itself!
I can only begin by trying to identify with you, as much as possible from my own limited experience. That, of course, begins with my assumption that you are a TF exer; correct? That puts us more in the same “ballpark”; so-to-speak. We would share in our personal histories the commonality of having been in the cult.
TF was and is a sub-Christian cult; meaning that its approach to the Bible itself is way off base historically.
Berg was an evil person, who basically abused the Bible and Bible believers, so that he might justify and perpetuate his own particular evil lifestyle, which included the entire set-up for himself as THE “Endtime prophet” so he could molest female children, female adults, and even male adults. Literature is available irrefutably proving all these things—he had some childhood homosexual encounters with a cousin, as well as felating one of his own followers named Timothy Concerned. What both the Old and New testament condemned and warned against, he eventually fully embraced; he and his followers also became everything the New Testament condemns and warns against in regards to false prophets, false teachers, false “brethren”; you name it, he eventually got around to it before he died in 1994, the year AFTER he claimed Christ would return.
So, Fred, I must begin by assuming that you had a cult experience similar to mine. I had just come out of rejecting the Gospel at least a dozen times in High School and college, and then getting into what was left; what was culturally and intellectually popular at the time.
I intellectually found WAY too many scientific, logical and philosophical problems with atheism and evolution, and had become, at age 18 or so, a philosophical nihilist.
The “on-demand” experiences I had, and explored very carefully, were in Silva Mind Control, Transcendental Meditation, and the various forms of Yoga available on and around the campus in Denton, Texas, at the time (Hatha, Raja, Siddha, Bhakti, and Kundalini). All these had definite experiences available to enough people I met of various backgrounds for me to continue seeking and having the experiences.
Post-cult, in the early ‘90s, I took an IQ test and a “personality inventory” psych test at the University of Houston, where I was a Human Physiology student. That psych test, and subsequent ones, revealed that I had several psych problems, including severe Attention Deficit Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder/Recurrent/Severe.
Like Watchman, whose psychiatrist asked me to help Watchman when I went to him for therapy, when I was too depressed to help anyone else, I had a form of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, resulting from my much earlier cult experience. Watchman’s damage at the Victor Camps was far more severe, and he suicided.
The Wechsler Scales placed my IQ in the national upper 1%; supposedly—at the time, that really just intensified my sense of failure, and deepened my depression. But I recalled that, as an American “Oil Company Brat” growing up in South America among committed atheists, agnostics and practical atheists (claiming Christianity without living it at all), I had moved a lot, was always the “new kid on the block”, and read at an adult level since about age 8; including my Dad’s Scientific American and American Scholar magazines. I also read lots and lots of sci fi, and every comic book I could get from other expatriates, or order in bulk from the States.
So, I said that to say this: my exposure to the answers to your questions are all from my own personal post-cult study, and were part of my own “regain the brain” journey, in regards to epistemology itself (defined as “the theory of knowledge and its traditional subject matter as defined by the questions about the nature, origin and limits of knowledge”), the nature of honest scientific method and inquiry, and a thorough personal study of philosophy, religion, and belief systems in general, in the 31+ years since my escape from the COG/TF/TFI sub-Christian cult.
Since there is so much between the lines of what you write, including a lot of bitterness, anger and disappointment with God, all of which I have intensely experienced over those 31+ years, and certainly can identify with very closely, I will try to do so as “[some]one car[ing] to take a stab at answering”; taking one subject per post, and recommending some sources for you to study.
By the way, I have already heard all of the arguments you posed, repeatedly, and for a variety of reasons and motives over the years, and not always formed from a position of actual intellectual openness and honesty on the part of the questioner.
At one timeI also occupied those mistaken positions.
I have also heard answers given, even answers I agreed with, in a really nasty and self-righteous manner. Both extreme positions are useless in regards to actually answering you.
If you have made no real previous attempt at honest scholarship regarding your questions, or “points”, as you called them, and/or if your merely parroting someone else’s questions, out of your understandable post-cult anger and confusion, I am afraid that you will put me in a position, and I do not mean this in a self-righteous manner, of choosing to not waste time with an answer that becomes a “pearls before swine…that which is holy before dogs” type of situation.
At that point I’ll stop responding, in obedience to my own personal faith; which I certainly do not mind sharing.
If you’re just wanting to appear clever, or want to “vent your spleen”, so-to-speak, that would probably be more cathartic/therapeutic for you on GeneXers or MovingOn—I am all for your regaining your self-esteem, self-determination, and so forth, but I won’t be your punching bag, and you’ll find I do not “suffer fools gladly”.
So, here’s hoping for an attempt at discussion which may generate some light on the topics, rather than just polemical heat.
Quoting you, you stated the following:
“The Bible
Translated and interpreted so many times over the centuries. Surely to know the true meaning one must learn the original Greek & Hebrew & form one’s own judgement of the meaning and not someone else’s opinion. Look at all the books in the Christian bookstores, which are commentaries on the Bible, so many will tell you that the meaning of such & such a verse actually means something else if you go back to the original texts. Therefore the Bible as we know it cannot be trusted as ‘God’s guidebook’ since we don’t know how much of the text is true to the original.”
So, your question is regarding the evidence, not just the varying opinions, of the translation, as well as possible interpretations, of extant manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments, compounded with the nature and/or dependability of the Greek and Hebrew Languages in which these still-existing manuscripts were written (actually, there were more languages than that, but those are the main ones), compounded by a large amount of books all variably claiming truth and authenticity while disagreeing with one another at many major points, resulting in a situation where the Bible as it exists today is not trustworthy, mostly BECAUSE “it—[the Bible]-- is not knowable” (or a philosophical equivalent), in your opinion, because of an assumed unsolvable confusion over this stated compound problem.
Shall we begin with that? Please tell me if I understand your position on your first “point”. If so, we’ll try to proceed.
Fair enough?
Sincerely,
OT2 (OldtimerToo)
P.S. Most people don’t need “theology…or [to] dabble in some deep philosophy” as this song states—I did personally—God will “tailor-make” what you need personally if you open your heart again, this time to the real thing without the nasty little false prophet.
This song meant a lot to me when I first heard it, a few years after I escaped TF.
The Best - Words and Music by John Fowler
Album (1979) “First Things First” by Bob Bennett
Lyrics:
I'd like to write the songs of songs
Convince you all that you should come along
But I'll probably never live that long
Still Jesus died for you
I sit around and make up clever lines
And toss them out as they dance through my mind
A sweeter love than His you'll never find
'cause Jesus died for you
The best thing I can tell you is God loves you
I can say that from my heart, I know it's true
The best thing I can tell you is God loves you
And he sent his only son as living proof
Now I can talk all night till I'm blue in the face
Present my argument and state my case
But I'd rather tell you of his wondrous grace
'cause Jesus died for you
The best thing I can tell you is God loves you
I can say that from my heart, I know it's true
The best thing I can tell you is God loves you
And he sent his only son as living proof
Now I can't talk about theology
Or dabble in some deep philosophy
'cause it all comes down to what was done on Calvary
When Jesus died for you
The best thing I can tell you is God loves you
I can say that from my heart, I know it's true
The best thing I can tell you is God loves you
And he sent his only son as living proof