sokpuppet
05-02-2009, 12:22 AM
I sort of understand the extremities of your views now. My experience with JW's is that they are very clear about their views. Their faith in the gap between them and 'us' is almost infinite, until you say shuv-off with your black ink fixation.
The 'document' is such a 'white' noise of reference. Anything and everything is justifyable in that thing. I just don't trust it as a valuable reference for anything. I don't care who 'wrote' the 'bits' of it, I just don't trust the historical honesty of the people who had the 'privelidge' of 'editing' it. Every time I pick up that book and look at it, I can't get past the fact that it's only a selected 'choice' of what suited the purposes of the people who called it the BIBLE.
Even if I could believe that 'God' wrote a document for us to be guided by, I don't believe the 'document' as it is, is the one to trust. I'm sure that in the abstract sense, it has much of the original 'truth', but, I can't get past the idea that a bunch of 'Romans' sat around in a chamber deciding what was OK and what wasn't.
The 'document' is such a 'white' noise of reference. Anything and everything is justifyable in that thing. I just don't trust it as a valuable reference for anything. I don't care who 'wrote' the 'bits' of it, I just don't trust the historical honesty of the people who had the 'privelidge' of 'editing' it. Every time I pick up that book and look at it, I can't get past the fact that it's only a selected 'choice' of what suited the purposes of the people who called it the BIBLE.
Even if I could believe that 'God' wrote a document for us to be guided by, I don't believe the 'document' as it is, is the one to trust. I'm sure that in the abstract sense, it has much of the original 'truth', but, I can't get past the idea that a bunch of 'Romans' sat around in a chamber deciding what was OK and what wasn't.