It's been a while :-)

[**bustysinclaire**]

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-no1-2018-jan-feb/bible-guidance-relevant/

A topic that is being offered for discussion this month. Some may find it interesting xxx

[cee-dee]

You've been asked some specific questions (and not just by me) and you've either completely ignored the poster or responded with more JW links/propaganda. Hostile eh? I suppose you'd regard the actions of those that shut the door, tell you to clear off their doorstep or put your leaflets and JW propaganda straight in the bin as hostile? If you count the questions and posts on here that refute your beliefs, then I guess you'll regard that as hostile too?

Methinks you've done that because you have NO answer.

[**bustysinclaire**]

I will reply to you this time CD, most posters although definitely not in agreement with me put their opinions across in a very respectful and friendly way. It is you who are hostile. Xx

As far as I am aware apart from yours most have been stating opinions not actual questions, any questions other than yours have been answered to the best of my ability and respectfully.

The links put by the way are answers, the do need to be read to find the answers. Links are posted as answers, so if an answer is wanted I had thought coming straight from the horses mouth as it were would be better than mine.

Going from door to door even hostile replies are treated with manners and respectfully dealt with as the situation would require at the time. People are within their rights to react whichever way they choose. So no, normal reactions even if we don't agree with it or may even be disappointing it is not classed as hostile.

The trouble with you CD is you assume far too much and know very little. You do infact respond and put your self across in the exact same way as you accuse others of doing. Maybe harry has described you in the correct way, as a "pit bull with a bone" I wouldn't have used that description myself because I do try to be respectful even when i am not being agreed with.

[cee-dee]

As ever, you've avoided answering the question(s) put to you. You were asked a question at #267, later you were asked again to respond to #267 but to no avail.

The JW links are not answers and neither is what is in the link.

You know you are on very thin ground with the JW "way" because you're taking the (distorted and selective) words of man as the words of your jehova when they're no such thing.

If it were possible to stand Jesus Christ before you today, you wouldn't believe it was really "Him", you'd only take note of the words written by men long after he'd died 2,000 years ago. Such words of man have been edited, redacted and added to many times.

[**bustysinclaire**]

yes dear xxx

[cee-dee]

No answer eh?

OK, I'll give you a couple of quotes to explain away. Let's start at "the beginning"?

Genesis 1:3-5 

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.  And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Genesis 1:14-19 

 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth. And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

Not content with creating light on the first day, it was created again on the fourth day??????

So there we have it that light was created twice eh?

By the time the Earth was "created", there'd been light for billions of years.

There's loads of complete contadictions in the Bible, would you like a list?

[**bustysinclaire**]

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.a

2 

Now the earth was formless and desolate,a

 and there was darkness upon the surface of the watery deep,b

b

 and God’s active forcec

c

 was moving about over the surface of the waters.d

3 

And God said: “Let there be light.” Then there was light.e

 4 

After that God saw that the light was good, and God began to divide the light from the darkness. 5 

God called the light Day, but the darkness he called Night.f

 And there was evening and there was morning, a first day.
6 

Then God said: “Let there be an expanseg

 between the waters, and let there be a division between the waters and the waters.”h

 7 

Then God went on to make the expanse and divided the waters beneath the expanse from the waters above the expanse.i

 And it was so. 8 

God called the expanse Heaven.a

 And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
9 

Then God said: “Let the waters under the heavens be collected together into one place, and let the dry land appear.”j

 And it was so. 10 

God called the dry land Earth,k

 but the collecting of the waters, he called Seas.l

 And God saw that it was good.m

 11 

Then God said: “Let the earth cause grass to sprout, seed-bearing plants and fruit trees according to their kinds, yielding fruit along with seed on the earth.” And it was so. 12 

And the earth began to produce grass, seed-bearing plantsn

 and trees yielding fruit along with seed, according to their kinds. Then God saw that it was good. 13 

And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.
14 

Then God said: “Let there be luminariesa

o

 in the expanse of the heavens to make a division between the day and the night,p

 and they will serve as signs for seasons and for days and years.q

 15 

They will serve as luminaries in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 

And God went on to make the two great luminaries, the greater luminary for dominating the dayr

 and the lesser luminary for dominating the night, and also the stars.s

 17 

Thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth 18 

and to dominate by day and by night and to make a division between the light and the darkness.t

 Then God saw that it was good. 19 

And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.
20 

Then God said: “Let the waters swarm with living creatures,a

 and let flying creatures fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens.”b

u

 21 

And God created the great sea creaturesa

 and all living creaturesb

 that move and swarm in the waters according to their kinds and every winged flying creature according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 

With that God blessed them, saying: “Be fruitful and become many and fill the waters of the sea,v

 and let the flying creatures become many in the earth.” 23 

And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
24 

Then God said: “Let the earth bring forth living creaturesa

 according to their kinds, domestic animals and creeping animalsb

 and wild animals of the earth according to their kinds.”w

 And it was so. 25 

And God went on to make the wild animals of the earth according to their kinds and the domestic animals according to their kinds and all the creeping animals of the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
26 

Then God said: “Let usx

 make man in our image,y

 according to our likeness,z

 and let them have in subjection the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and the domestic animals and all the earth and every creeping animal that is moving on the earth.”a

 27 

And God went on to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.b

 28 

Further, God blessed them, and God said to them: “Be fruitful and become many, fill the earthc

 and subdue it,d

 and have in subjectione

 the fish of the sea and the flying creatures of the heavens and every living creature that is moving on the earth.”
29 

Then God said: “Here I have given to you every seed-bearing plant that is on the entire earth and every tree with seed-bearing fruit. Let them serve as food for you.f

 30 

And to every wild animal of the earth and to every flying creature of the heavens and to everything moving on the earth in which there is life,a

 I have given all green vegetation for food.”g

 And it was so.
31 

After that God saw everything he had made, and look! it was very good.h

 And there was evening and there was morning, a sixth day.

I cant see a contradiction at all CD. Sorry x

Jehovah created light for day and lesser light by the luninaries eg stars and moon and other lesser lights like the northern lights etc.

He separated day and night, heavens (sky) and earth.

You give a list if you like, but they won't be contradictions if read correctly, there will always be perfectly good explanations. The problem will be is that you wouldn't accept any reasonings from any JW or links etc so it will be a waste of your time. Xx

[**bustysinclaire**]

sorry for the higgledy piggledy posting, please ignore the extra letters on the end of sentences, the are cross refeferences scriptures.

my internet isnt brilliant and on my mobile C&P is prety much hit and miss.

on my pc now so this is what was c&P'd

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/b/r1/lp-e/nwtsty/E/2018/1/1#study=discover

gene4sis 1 1-20

[cee-dee]

There couldn't be a better illustration of "It depends what version you read". That clearly shows that they're the words of man.

[**bustysinclaire**]

But it IS showing no contradiction. You then have to accept which version  is the correct one and the one JW's use is the best translation of the holy scriptures you can ever read. Along with all the other that the bible gives there is no doubt of the Existence of God and his word the Bible. The only thing then is whether the individual chooses to believe it or not. You don't, I do, millions don't, millions do.  

The outcome will still be the same, which will be verified very soon. xxx  

[**bustysinclaire**]

Re reading both translations I still don't see a contradition, there isn't one.

I think all that tells us is, you want to try any which way you can to be right and are clutching at straws, and you are the one with no real answers to prove the issue of God exists is wrong.

I don't wish to get into a battle with you, you think I am completely wrong and off my rocker, that's fine CD, really xx

[**bustysinclaire**]

This is food for thought as you have to be convinced of Gods existance first before you can consider and come to right conclusions on anything else like the bible being relevant today.

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/does-god-exist/

[cee-dee]

If you can't see the differences then there's no hope for you. Throw those blinkers away.

By mentioning the "JW version" that clearly illustrates that differences exist and if you're relying on "your version" with the idea that "you're right" and that if the JW's are relying on what was written long, long ago you have to remember that when the earliest writings on the subject were made, whoever wrote them had no idea how the Earth, the rest of "our" Solar System or the Universe was created or indeed how long ago that was.

You say "you have to be convinced of Gods existance first before you can consider and come to right conclusions"?

That means that you can't come to the same conclusions as you if you've not been convinced already? If you've got to be convinced first, what's supposed to convince you?

[j_uk643]

Religion isn't science though numerous important figures in science eg Newton, to Einstein at various times, held religious beliefs
The originator of the so called big bang theory was an ordained priest.

If you went back in time a hundred years or so, the Universe was thought to be very much smaller, static, and unchanged

That has all gone. Revision happens

Many people hold ideas which have nothing much to do with facts or reason, but seem hostile to religion for whatever reason
One need not look too far to confirm that

The suggestion that aliens landed in ancient civilisations based on the shape of some trinkets found that look a bit like a 50s or 60s delta wing aircraft ....or more likely a moth lol

That  since part of the universe is contracting , the majority cannot be expanding, yet both use the same measurement system to determine that , and are consistent, shows a distinct lack of understanding

Facts are often ignored when its convenient to hang on to cherished beliefs
The psuedo science ....the twin towers came down because the outer damage enabled a blast furnace type effect which melted the steel

Blast furnaces don't even work that way
Black smoke is a clear indication of incomplete combustion
All molecules have specific bond energies

Arguably in certain areas of science, some theories are more counter-intuitive than the idea of a single God

If I placed some of those in biblical texts, they would probably be rejected

[**bustysinclaire**]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

If you can't see the differences then there's no hope for you. Throw those blinkers away.

By mentioning the "JW version" that clearly illustrates that differences exist and if you're relying on "your version" with the idea that "you're right" and that if the JW's are relying on what was written long, long ago you have to remember that when the earliest writings on the subject were made, whoever wrote them had no idea how the Earth, the rest of "our" Solar System or the Universe was created or indeed how long ago that was.

You say "you have to be convinced of Gods existance first before you can consider and come to right conclusions"?

That means that you can't come to the same conclusions as you if you've not been convinced already? If you've got to be convinced first, what's supposed to convince you?

---

what ridiculous gobbledegook. CD xxx. (Respectfully)

[cee-dee]

As ever, no attempt at a reply.

The trouble with the brainwashed is they can only trot out the lines they've been brainwashed with. You can't have a sensible discussion with them.

[**bustysinclaire**]

I did reply CD.

But where was your question?  You were just making personal statements as far as I can tell, not asking anything worth asking.

[cee-dee]

Where was the question? The thread is full of questions. Take a read back.

[Anonymous]

Maybe harry has described you in the correct way, as a "pit bull with a bone" I wouldn't have used that description myself because I do try to be respectful even when i am not being agreed with.

Sorry Busty but I meant that BOTH of you (hence the pic of 2 dogs) are like a dog with a bone, and I don't see the description as disrespectful. All it means is to be fixated on a particular topic.

You are both as bad as each other. Neither of you will let it go.

I'm not sure if such a battle on a public forum promotes your religion in a very good light.

[cee-dee]

It's not a religion that's in "a very good light" anyway.

It was founded by one bloke, reorganised by another and from it's history, became dictatorial.

The belief that Armageddon will restore peace on Earth is unfounded. Armageddon could (will?) happen in a few ways.

Either man will wipe out the human race or an impact of a space object will do it or in finality, when the sun reaches the end of its life, it'll expand and melt the Earth.

[**bustysinclaire**]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Maybe harry has described you in the correct way, as a "pit bull with a bone" I wouldn't have used that description myself because I do try to be respectful even when i am not being agreed with.

Sorry Busty but I meant that BOTH of you (hence the pic of 2 dogs) are like a dog with a bone, and I don't see the description as disrespectful. All it means is to be fixated on a particular topic.

You are both as bad as each other. Neither of you will let it go.

I'm onot sure if such a battle on a public forum promotes your religion in a very good light.

---

I know you meant both of us harry  I wa just disagreeing with you on that point. 

And I am sorry if it seemed as though I was implying you personally to be disrespectful, you have always been anything but. Thank you.  Xxx

I suppose I should have learnt by now that CD will bite at Any given opportunity and I do agree with you that such a battle is not a good witness.  Even if I didn't mean it to be or for it to look like one, we do have to think outside the box and have a forsight into how others may see it.

So thank you harry. Xxxxxx