People 
| Reasons Why I Didn't Lose Faith in God After Leaving Jehovah's Witnesses |
| Written by Nils |
| Thursday, 10 September 2009 19:15 |
I am writing this series because it is evident that some who leave Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs) also lose faith in God for a wide variety of reasons. Among the reasons given are, leaving JWs because they lost faith in God or losing faith because of science and its apparent conflict with religion or because of God's apparent unsympathetic cruelty. Others I have read about have singled out the existence of "evil" as the reason they no longer believe in a loving Creator. I am very sympathetic with all these arguments because they are similar to my own doubts about God that needed rectifying during and after my life-long sojourn with JWs. However, conversely, my study of science has strengthened my faith in both the Creator, and the Bible as his Word of truth. Still, this was not an easy journey to make because it required a significant break from many "traditional beliefs" concerning science, God, and the Bible. http://www.nils4.info/a/q1.htm
As a qualifying comment, this information is directed primarily towards those who no longer or never have believed in God. If people of faith read this account, it may provoke within them a feeling to defend their faith. So I want to say in advance that if anyone holds, what may be termed as, "non-scientific" views upon the basis of faith, then they have an advantage over those who do not, myself included. There is absolutely no reason why a person of faith should feel uncomfortable with the following essay because what I am writing is nothing more than noteworthy opinions assembled for those who lack the faith to believe from the heart rather than the head. However, a person of faith should recognize that there are Biblical examples of Jesus satisfying his disciples with literal head-proof before the Spirit granted them heart-faith. For example, Thomas demanded tangible proof before he would believe that Jesus was resurrected (John 20:24-25). Jesus, when next encountering Thomas, immediately went up to him and displayed irrefutable proof by displaying his crucifixion wounds for all to see (John 20:26-29). Jesus did not scold Thomas for an apparent lack of faith, but did say that those who believe without proof were to be especially blessed because he knew that the majority of believers would be those that have never seen or fellowshipped with him [Jesus]. It should be mentioned that at the meeting Thomas missed, Jesus unhesitatingly offered proof of his identity, after which the disciples were "therefore" glad to see the Lord (John 20-19-20 .. Note, therefore is always based upon what comes before). So Thomas was not asking for anything different than what Jesus had already freely offered to the other disciples. In the forthcoming series, I plan to provide viable evidence based upon sound scientific, religious, and philosophical facts. How useful this information is will depend upon you. If you disagree with anything you read in this series, I encourage you to tell me why, and I will respond with additional information. If the material presented withstands reasonable criticism, then I am confident that it can serve as a basis for rethinking the importance of including belief in God as a fundamental necessity for our continued existence and happiness. It should be understood that to believe in the Bible first requires that you believe the God who inspired it. (Hebrews 11:6) However, belief in God apart from the Bible can be supported by scientific facts as it was in the case involving the world famous atheist, Antony Flew (Romans 1:20). ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Flew ) If you are interested in the questions that are to be answered, follow this link. http://www.nils4.info/a/q1.htm These are just a few of the subjects to be considered in forthcoming blogs. If you have any suggestions or additional questions you would like to include, please leave a comment outlining the details. Hits: 922 Trackback(0)
Comments (23)
  written by Randy , September 12, 2009 Good deal, Nils, let's get some series goin'! report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
 written by Daniel , September 15, 2009 Hello Nils, I really appreciate the tone change you've made over your "What May JWs and Atheists have in common?" blog. I refrained from commenting as I was in utter bafflement that you'd try to make your argument for theism to me, an agnostic EX-JW in such a manner. This is alot more my speed and I know I am going to enjoy reading your blog, without feeling attacked  smile You say in your blog about most Atheist/Agnostic Ex-JWs either having lost their faith in God before they left the organization, or because they've found the disconnect between science and faith too big of a gap to bridge. I would claim neither for myself and I know of few Ex-JWs who hold either of those as their reasons for their atheistic outlooks. Allow me to explain mine and hopefully I can clarify you. I cannot speak on behalf of others, but perhaps my own experience will help increase your understanding, even if it's just one person's understanding. I initially chose Atheism, but have moved to a more logically defensible position of true agnosticism more than anything. The reason for dropping God out of my life are varied and complex and I am certainly happy in my life and I don't feel having a belief in a supreme creator is going to improve my quality of life. Most of my reasons for choosing Agnosticism and abandoning theism/Christianity are based on taking a look at paleo-anthropology and the history of ancient civilizations, particularly of what the belief of the time was. The close examination of the beliefs of the ancient Egyptians all the way to the formation of the Roman Catholic Church (and their subsequent compiling of the 66 books that compose the modern bible) show an interesting story, that when looked through the socio-political spectrum of truth, leaves little room for belief in my young, newly critical thinking mind. I've come to see Judeo-Christianity and the doctrine and symbolism associated with it as an ongoing extension of the beliefs held by ancient peoples long ago. The similarities of astrological symbolism (12 tribes, 12 apostles, The symbolism of Christs return just as we entered the astrological age of Pieces, the fish) are just all too much for my skeptic nature to handle as coincidence. As we were both JWs, I don't think I even need to explain the similarities of Roman Paganism (which they got from the Greeks, who got it from the Egyptians) that got adopted into the birth of the modern Christian movement, some 1400 years ago. Add on top the Jewish creation story being a perfect hybrid blend of the Egyptian and Summarian creation stories and it became hard not to doubt the majority of what is held in the bible as being little more than the fables and historical record (through the tellers eyes) of the early period of an ancient civilization. In the end, what really made me question was a comedy sketch from the late comedian, George Carlin. He said that Relgion has the greatest B.S. story ever told... "There's a big, invisible man in the sky and he has a list of 10 things he NEVER WANTS YOU TO DO! If you do those things, he'll send you to a place of burning fiery torment where you'll be tortured FOREVER AND EVER. But he loves you...and he needs MONEY!" Thats an accurate way of describing how I feel about the God that most modern religion pitches to me, and thats why I abstain from believing in that god. I feel I am a more empowered, enlightened person than I would be if I conformed to the man-made version of the way this god wants to be worshiped. The point is, when viewed through the skeptics lens, whatever we know beyond what we can see is exactly that...man-made. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
written by Daniel , September 15, 2009 (Part 2) I believe in the potential of humanity on it's own, that if there is a God that exists out there who created us, he created us to be exactly what we are. If we are made in his image, maybe he's a little flawed too then, but I sincerely believe that if we are a created species, God gave us all the tools we would need, in and of ourselves, to overcome our problems as a species. I do not think its prudent to wait for a God to fix what is wrong with the existence we have made for ourselves; like our dying planet or our inter-tribal squabbles that have held this species down for so long. Its easy to see how religion, who through its various facets represents God, can and should be held responsible for much of the damage done to humanity in the first place. I am agnostic. I fully admit the possibility of the existence of a divine creator, infinitely more intelligent and powerful than us humans can comprehend, but on the flip-side of that argument, if he exists, I think we as a species know so extremely little about him, its hard to picture what/who he/she/it really is. If God does exist, he might be the most consistently misrepresented person of all time. I feel no gaping hole where God used to be in my life and feel no overwhelming drive to replace what I feel I do not need. I look forward to further discourse with you on this and to read further entries to your blog. - Dan report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
 written by Leila , September 15, 2009 What Dan said! All of it! Leila report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
 written by DOUGLAS CLARK , September 16, 2009 THE WATCHTOWER HAS BEEN INFILTRATED BY IMPOSTORS, WHO ARE LEADING THEM IN THE WRONG DIRECTION. DON'T LOSE YOUR LOVE FOR JEHOVAH, SINCE HE WILL SOON EXPOSE THEM ALL AND RESTORE PURE WORSHIP. HAS ANYONE SEEN sixscreensofthewatchtower.com report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -1
 written by Daniel , September 16, 2009 I find that hard to believe Doug, considering that the watchtower was founded and created by impostors in the first place..its only bred and expanded what it started on all those years ago. Impostors fleecing other impostors, the blind leading the blind. Russell, Rutherford, Knorr and Franz all just grew the sickness that was created in the 1880s and made it worse. I relate it to a cut that gets infected. Russell made the cut, Rutherford rubbed feces in it and the leadership has only encouraged the infection to spread and worsen from that time forward. Did you know Jehovah is a made up name? Its just "YHWH" with the vowels of "Adonai" grammatically placed into it. Made up name for a make believe God. I'm not going to hold my breath and wait around for Jehovah to cleanse his orginization. I've got much more valuable things I need to be doing with my life. Why would I ever go back? Even with a complete change of leadership, I have 0 faith in anything built on the foundations of the Watchtower. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
 written by JoJoJones , September 18, 2009 When I left the Jehovah's Witnesses 'religion' I didn't lose faith in God. It never occurred to me to lose faith in HIm: I didn't truly connect Him with the WTBTS in the first place. I personally cannot imagine losing faith in God. I believe Him to be real and completely, totally separate from the WTBTS that feeds so much guff to the so-called 'rank and file'. I'm just glad to no longer be a Jehovah's Witness, so grateful to no longer be a part of that misleading, full of fallacies 'religion'. I love God and am so thankful that He created life on this precious planet of ours. There is no end to the wonderment of the earth, the sea, and the cosmos. I am so grateful to Jesus for dying an unimaginably horrible death for humankind! Leaving the organization did not affect my belief in God. I do not associate the two with each other. The organization is false and uncaring of the 'rank and file', and God is real and true, and He loves us more than we can imagine what the depth of love is. I really believe this, but I can see how people might just want to 'throw in the towel' when they dissasociate themselves or are disfellowshipped from this cruel and heartless organization. There is no excuse for the way the WTBTS teaches people to shun other people. It is disgusting and sickening. The conditioning done in this organization is terrible. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
 written by Nat , September 19, 2009 I am an ex witness who is confused as to what to believe. I have been leaning towards atheism but i am open minded and interested in hearing from former jw who have still managed to keep their faith. I look forward very much to your upcoming blogs Nil. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
 written by Darrek , September 20, 2009 Nils: Great article! You did a complete 180º in your blog and I really appreciate it! It was very neutral in that there were no assumptions and it was written in a very NON Dogmatic way. I still don't agree with it but thats ok! Keep up the blogs if you enjoy them I still read them! report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Darrek , September 20, 2009 I forgot to add that I lost my faith not because of the Witnesses, although that did happen later. I lost my faith in the bible which lead me to do research into the witnesses. My conclusions? I was blinded by both faith and religion. To me it really doesn't matter who is right when it comes to this topic, if there is a god and he is the god of the bible and the BIG A comes I will not follow him, I will not worship him, I may not even talk to him. This may sound harsh but I want nothing to do with a god after reading about his actions in the bible. I think people make up way to many excuses for God and his actions. No one ever gives humans that kinda leeway. Anyways still a good article! report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
 written by Pilgrim , September 20, 2009 To Dan, Part I Thanks for your response Dan. I learned a lot from my previous Blog about what Randy's audience finds interesting. While it was not my intention to attack anyone in my last blog, not even JWs, what I said was apparently interpreted that way. So I am glad that this blog seems to be presented in a way that evokes less hostility. Thanks for your input. I welcome comments on how to improve my communicating skills. What you have said is perfectly understandable to me and happens to touch on issues that I had to resolve as a graduate student and still come accross new information that continues the struggle. It is especially difficult when watching some of the History Channel's Biblical topics without cringing at the historical liberties they often take. I will be going into more detail on this subject in future blogs. I am not sure where Biblical archaeology fits into my schedule of subjects but it will be included somewhere. What you object to is why I think the Bible says that a person must first believe in God if they are going to be instructed by him through his word (Hebrews 11:6) To believe in God without the Bible relies more on science and philosophy, in my opinion. Dan said: [The reason for dropping God out of my life are varied and complex and I am certainly happy in my life and I don't feel having a belief in a supreme creator is going to improve my quality of life.] I am glad to hear that you are happy. I personally would have a hard time with aging if I thought this was all there was to life. Normally, most of us have this personal craving to never die that I think is both a gift and a burden from God according to Ecclesiastes 3:11. Usually, it seems that the feeling of somehow being eternal is hard to let go of without cultivating a total indifference toward life like the enlightened Buddha. You know what I mean, an "I just don't care attitude." That way if you get sick or experience some life threatening situation, you remind yourself not to be concerned because what difference does it make anyway. I struggle with that, and can't quite give up caring. I really still don't want to die no matter how hard I try think how great heaven will be. That is why I say the desire to live can also be a burden. Nils report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Pilgrim , September 20, 2009 To Dan, Part II When there are many topics brought up in a comment, it is difficult to respond to them all because of the length limit imposed upon replies. So my response to your comment Dan will be stretched out. Dan said: [I've come to see Judeo-Christianity and the doctrine and symbolism associated with it as an ongoing extension of the beliefs held by ancient peoples long ago. The similarities of astrological symbolism (12 tribes, 12 apostles, The symbolism of Christ's return just as we entered the astrological age of Pieces, the fish) are just all too much for my skeptic nature to handle as coincidence.] On the surface, what you say does sound understandably discouraging. It would seem that the Bible is no different than any other ancient work of literature so why should we consider it so special. Again, that is one reason why I think belief in God is necessary in order to overcome these seemingly insurmountable hurdles. However, in saying that, does not mean that I don't think there is good evidence to justify belief in the Bible. The truth is, I think that we have to believe both the OT and ancient history on the basis of faith at some level anyway. Just think how difficult it would be to understand what is going on today if you did not know the idioms or sayings common to our day. What might you think a "hot dog" would be other than a canine with a fever? I think the same can be said for the science of anthropology if you can call it a science. That is my perspective regarding deep history or the period from the origin of modern homo sapiens and their decent down to about 4,000 bc, which incidentally, is about the period that the Bible begins human history. This 4000 bc origins reference would only apply to those who believe that the first 11 chapters Genesis were written in a chronological fashion and not as a reliable summary of history without conventional time references. Such a summary would be accurate with regard to its relevant facts but not necessarily its exact chronological reference which was not the reason why the record was transmitted from the "beginning." To accurately interpret the historical record of the Bible, we have to be familiar with the way historical information was transmitted and the meanings attached to a language of about 8,000 words that did not use any vowels. Each word was written as a sort of what we would call an abbreviation which generally also omits vowels. This leaves a lot of room for interpretation. As an aside, why do you suppose God would do that? My primary problem with definitive historical analysis is the lack of positive information it provides. Realistically, it is almost impossible to disprove something using history as your basis. Historical interpretation is very subjective. Just use the assassination of President Kennedy as an example. How do you think history will treat his demise? Next, do you think there was as much controversy about the assignation of Julius Caesar? If there was, we sure don't know about it except for his final words. In general, history can only affirm something to be true because negative evidence, (no evidence to date) can be contradicted at any time like the argument about the supposed non-existent Hittites. So what I think we need to do is examine the actual records themselves to see if they say anything meaningful today about why we are here and what is to become of us. In other words, who was the OT really written for and why? I will have more to say about this in future blogs. I will also continue to respond, time permitting, to the rest of your comment Dan in future Parts of this comment. Until then, glad to be given the opportunity to share my point of view regarding Biblical History. Thanks for your comment. Nils report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
 written by cusm , September 23, 2009 Very interesting, thanks everyone for posting their thoughts. I struggle daily and every night with this topic as I lay in bed. I did the fade about 6 years ago after being reinstated from a DF'ing (which is an entirely different subject). Like many here, the main issue I have is that that org positions themselves as the same as Jah and demands the same loyalty. Having this background and training it is a challenge to not loose faith in God when losing faith in the org. I truly feel the vast majority of the "friends" have a real and unique brotherhood, i.e. international love with racial harmony. I pray every night for faith and that all I've been taught to believe in the bible is true, but like Thomas, it's hard w/o any proof. Jesus was merciful with Thomas, I'm hoping for the same. Please keep this discussion going. Also, if anyone has any insight, a question I ponder often: We know suns eventually burn out and turn into black holes. That being true, how can the earth survive forever? report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
written by Nils , September 25, 2009 To Struggler, (Part 1) Thank you so much for your response. Based upon what you said, I am sure it took personal courage to post your reply and ask your question. I want to briefly respond to your comment in general because I am unable just now to give it the full attention it requires. To begin with, I believe you are correct in saying that the Organization demands our unquestioning loyalty similar to the Israelites under the Law. However, Jesus came to release us from all religious organizations and assist us to become individual believers based upon our own unique experiences. He gave the church to us as a means of maintaining good associations that building us up, not tearing us down with imposed guilt and fear. However, I also agree that there is a measure of security to realize that the Organization extends worldwide and you feel a kinship to every other Witness in the world based upon political neutrality and conditional love. However, I will add that my experience has shown that the same links apply within the Christian community. I feel quite comfortable in going anywhere in the world where there is a Christian church, and know I would get similar treatment. You may find that hard to believe but it is true, to my surprise. The Society, whether intentionally or by accident, has so poisoned our minds against religion that we think every non-Witness is just lurking in the shadows seeking an opportunity to corrupt us, even without our knowing it apparently. (Continued to Part 2) report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Nils , September 25, 2009 To Struggler, (Part 2) The main science question I wanted to comment on is what you asked about the earth existing forever. That is a good question with a "yes" answer appearing to be supported by the Bible. However, upon closer inspection, a yes answer is clearly wrong, in my opinion. As you know the term "forever" doesn't always mean forever in the actual Hebrew. It can also mean something like an indefinitely long period of time like the Aaronic Priesthood which was said to last "forever" (Exodus 28:43). The Bible also says that when the heavens and earth have served their purpose, they will become like an old garment to be thrown away. (Psalm 102:25-27; Hebrews 1:10-12) Additionally the Bible speaks specifically of a beginning of time at 2 Timothy 1:9-10, and an implied beginning and end of time at Ecclesiastes 3:11. That time had a beginning and will have an end was the most astounding revelation associated with Einstein's theory of relativity. When time "ends" then all the "forevers" in time are literary ended also. We are told there will be a "new heaven and a new earth" (2 Peter 3:13; Isaiah 65:17; Revelation 21:1). Whether that means this earth renewed or another new earth God will create in another dimension, we don't know for sure. Paul said that when the last enemy death is destroyed, there will be a significant change to when God will be all in all (1 Corinthians 15:24-2  cool report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Nils , September 25, 2009 To Struggler, (Part 3) The biggest line of evidence is what the Bible says will happen to our bodies eventually. It was not God's intention for us to live in a material universe forever. Our bodies were not designed for that. We are perishable (we can be physically killed like Jesus said at Matthew 10:2 cool Information about the Body: http://freeminds.org/blogs/she...art-1.html Information about Partaking of the Memorial Emblems: http://freeminds.org/doctrine/...-wine.html Nils report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Nils , September 25, 2009 For some reason I couldn't account for, the link above does not work. Try this on instead to see if it works. Information about Partaking of the Memorial Emblems: http://freeminds.org/doctrine/...wine .html Nils report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
 written by Neil , September 29, 2009 Daniel pretty much hit my reasons right on the head! Besides what he mentioned, which has a lot to do with why I abandoned the Bible as the word of god, there are other things. I will just mention one. I happened to be a huge skeptic on all paranormal claims. I have researched extensively and found that there is NOTHING conclusive anywhere that paranormal events occur. It's all just anecdotal evidence, which is not evidence. Take, for example, people who hear strange voices. These people usually have schizophrenia or some other malfunction of the brain. But what would people in Jesus day have said? They didn't have modern science to actually diagnose this as a naturally occurring defect that people are born with. People in Jesus day would have turned to the only explanation they knew to turn to in the face of the unknown- evil spirits (or the supernatural, anyway). So, my point is, was Jesus really fooled into thinking people were possessed by demons? What reason do we have to believe that people were EVER possessed by demons, considering all is now quiet on the demon front since science progressed. It would seem logical to conclude that these demons in peoples' head never really did exist. Rather, people didn't have explanations for anything back then. But, now, we do! So, were Jesus and the rest of the townspeople correct in knowing someone was possessed? How would someone as knowledgeable as Jesus be fooled? And what good reason do we have to believe that in the day of Rome there really WERE supernatural events occurring like the ones mentioned in the Bible. Where did all these demons go now? I guess they got bored and moved on. Or, they are just shy. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Pilgrim , September 29, 2009 Daniel's Friend, Thanks for your comment. You asked a good question and this is where a choice has to be made. Since theists are aware of the apparent dilemma you propose, how can they respond Scripturally. My explanation to myself is that Paul is said to have had a "thorn in the flesh" that he described as being from "a messenger (demon) of Satan." (2 Corinthians 12:7; Job 2:6 AMP) Today, we hypothesize that the problem had something to do with his eyes. So probably, today his condition could be treated medically without any divine intervention even though it was apparently beyond treatment by the medical profession of his day. For me, that means what you said could be entirely true and people may have had treatable maladies that were caused by demons who took advantage of a person's natural physical weaknesses. I have never fully understood "demon possession" except for the apparent thrill they may get out of the act itself. Some demon possession must have been strategic as with Paul's case. So the schizophrenics like "Son of Sam" may be a strategic move by Satan for reasons not fully understood by us today. The Bible says we are at "war" with demonic forces in the heavens today (Ephesians 6:11-12). Given that what you said is true, not all of the problems Jesus dealt with were demon possession, however. And even if he may have dealt with epilepsy how do you explain that the person was healed. That doesn't happen today. Then you have to look at the Biblical theme that predicted Jesus' birth and ministry beyond all odds. Within a generation after he died, all the Jewish records were destroyed for tracing a messiah's birthright. No Jew today can trace their lineage back to Jesus' day. So the significance of being of David's lineage is of no value today. Also look at the dispute between Isaac and Ishmael, is it just a coincidence that Abraham has more acknowledged descendants and any other living person today? (Genesis 15:5 & 22:17 & 32:11-13; Hebrews 6:13,14 & 11:12) Also what about the fact that the current crisis that could end in a nuclear holocaust is just an extended fight between Abraham's two sons? These coincidences give me faith that the Biblical record is relevant today. So whether Jesus was curing diseases that we can cure today with medicine doesn't matter to me. The fact that he cured them does. If you have an objection to my answer other than just agreeing to disagree, please give me the opportunity to respond. Thanks again for your input. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Nils , September 29, 2009 To Neil Neil, the above comment was written to you as "Daniel's Friend." I responded to the email comment that I was sent which didn't included your name. My fault. No slight intended. Thanks again for your expressed interest in my blog. Nils (Pilgrim) report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Neil , September 30, 2009 I think either you may have slightly misunderstood what I was getting at in my message or maybe I misunderstood your response. Either way is fine, I will just clarify. You said, '' what you said could be entirely true and people may have had treatable maladies that were caused by demons who took advantage of a person's natural physical weaknesses.'' My point was that I am skeptical that these maladies were EVER demons. I don't think they were. I think they were natural conditions misunderstood by the people of the day and so they explained these conditions with the only thing they knew, superstition. However, they were probably naturally occurring phenomena. To me, this is no different than when you hear your house creaking and making noises at night. There are people who really think these are ghosts or demons haunting them and their house. But wouldn't a more logical explanation be that the wood in the house is expanding or contracting because of temperature change(among other things) and is therefore creaking and cracking under the weight of the house? So my point is that if we have a natural explanation that completely covers an issue, it seems superfluous to keep explaining it supernaturally, whether it happened now or in the past. As for people being healed today: there are people who THINK they are being healed by faith healers, and that is all that is needed for a fabulous story. They have eyewitnesses of the faith healer tapping their forehead followed by the anecdotes they tell their friends about their healing. On stage during a healing, people with walkers or canes routinely toss them away and start dancing after the faith healer ''heals'' them. This is the same type of scenario as in the Bible, except it's not written in a holy book. To be fair, I do NOT think these people today are being healed. I'm just stating that afterward the result is the same as the healings that Jesus performed: eyewitnesses and anecdotes. To know if these people in Jesus day or today were TRULY healed, we would need a follow up with the person a couple years later. When this is done today, these people are back on their walkers, wearing their glasses again, or dead. And some STILL claim they were healed!(excluding the dead ones). So what if we could have done a follow up on those people in Jesus day that had been healed? Would they still be healed? I guess we will never know. What we do know is that people today have these same healing experiences and truly believe them, even when years later their ailments are still there. So if these modern healing experiences were being logged into a holy book today, there is no telling what people in 2000 years would think. They would probably believe it must have been true healing, when it wasn't. report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Nils , September 30, 2009 Hi Neil, Part 1 There may be a slight misunderstanding about what I was trying to get at. I used Paul's "thorn in his side" as an example of what I thought might be a modern sickness that could have been solved medically today but was accredited to demons in his day. My interpretation of Paul's comments is that demons may be able to cause modern medical illnesses. So I agree with you that, today, we probably would not call many of the maladies they had then as demon possession. But according to my interpretation of the Bible, they could be both. I also agree with you that there are psychosomatic problems that appear as sicknesses of the body when they are actually sicknesses of the mind and can be healed if a person is fooled into thinking something powerful has assisted him like a new pill or a faith healer. So the question is whether "demons" have anything to do with these types sickness today or back in Jesus' day. Of course, that has a lot to do with whether you believe the accounts in the Bible or not. To me, your objections would cover the general stuff but not the unexplainable. It is my guess that the same arguments were presented by the Jews back then to discredit the Jesus' power. Apparently, even Jewish mystics back then could do some of the things Jesus did ( Matthew 12:22-26). So, as a counter point, the Bible includes many healings that were impossible to fall into the category you describe that involved blindness from birth that was confirmed by parental authority, (John 9:19-23) uncontested lameness of a public figure (Acts 3:2-10) and even resurrection of a high-ranking synagogue member's daughter (Mark 5:22-23 & 5:35-43). There is even a account of where a women healed herself by faith in the power of Jesus to heal. (Matthew 9:20-22; Mark 5:24-34) So the actual Biblical record covers all the bases of possible sickness that were apparently convincing to the people of that day, even the Jewish authorities. Their explanation was that Jesus did it by the power of Satan (Matthew 11:22-26). So while they might have a negative explanation, they did not contest the healings. However John the Baptist was given the miracles of healing as a means for him to identify the messiah. (Matthew 11:5; Luke 7:22) But, the question is, was any of this true or was it just an exaggeration of common illnesses misinterpreted because of superstition? (Continued to Part II) report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Nils , September 30, 2009 To Neil - Part II continued My argument for authenticity is that there have been many charlatans in the past that have not started movements that extend down to our times. What Jesus did in only three years launched a movement that has grown into the largest religion the world's has ever known and one that is connected to Isaac, Abraham's son. Ironically enough, a rapidly growing second is Abraham's other son, Ishmael's descendents. The most impressive though is the fact that the Christian faith was founded on the blood of many many martyrs. What motivated such zeal in an era with no cell phones or tv movies? We see Islamic or Buddhist martyrs today but the circumstances are different and the numbers are very small. About the closest thing that could be counted would be the Jonestown poison cool aid episode. However, unlike Christian martyrs, the Jones people had no choice and would have been killed if they tried not to participate. The fact that so many early Christians were willing to give up their lives singing gospel songs as they died is impressive. They must have been convinced by powerful signs to make such a sacrifice based on the three year ministry of an obscure Jew who probably didn't travel more than 60 miles away from home in his whole life. Another spooky aspect of this whole scenario is that we do not know how the mind works and where its independence comes from. My own personal opinion based upon a fair amount of growing research by prominent scientists is that the mind's actual direction comes from the quantum realm. The subject is Quantum Consciousness. The quantum realm appears to be the "fabric" of reality where our universal laws of physics no longer apply. It is theorized that time doesn't even exist in that realm because our reality is embedded within that fabric as a cyclic feature controlled by time. It is as if our reality is some sort of projection. If you can somehow get into the fabric you will get out of time. There are even science fiction stories starting to play with time and are apparently based studies like these. If you can get into the fabric of reality, you can move either forward or backward in time with ease. If this is true, than all the supposed "miracles" associated with demons and angelic activities is explainable by a known mechanism. That would explain God's apparent "omnipresence" (Jeremiah 23:23-24) and his ability to know the beginning and end of all things (Isaiah 46:9-11). It would also explain how Jesus, apparently was able to move independently of matter and time after his resurrection into his "glorified" body. Jesus resurrection was the most impressive of all with no clear historic denial to this day. (John 20:19-20) Quantum Consciousness would also explain a lot of things that we now associate with "black magic" and other unexplained paraphenomenal events. It is something to consider don't you think? Thanks again for your response. Nils report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Write comment
|
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed