Originally posted by FMFSo we shall never know, fine, if you refuse to answer the simple question I see no point in engaging you until you do. Suffice to say that the historical evidence is at odds with the idea that the Bible was written for political purposes as is evidenced by the first century Christians who did not and would not hold public office and were as one historian described them - non-political.
You can see exactly what my claim is on pages 18 and 21. You assert that you have refuted it. Where? In which post did you refute it?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe Bible, OT and NT, set rules for the Hebrew people - the nation of Israel - and then for Christendom. I believe this was in order to establish a specific social and moral order and that this was recorded and defined by the Bible. If you don't think the purpose of the Bible was to establish a framework for social and moral order by way of a set of rules and beliefs, then you should just come out and say so.
Suffice to say that the historical evidence is at odds with the idea that the Bible was written for political purposes as is evidenced by the first century Christians who did not and would not hold public office and were as one historian described them - non-political.
Originally posted by FMFWas the bible written for political purposes FMF?
The Bible, OT and NT, set rules for the Hebrew people - the nation of Israel - and then for Christendom. I believe this was in order to establish a specific social and moral order and that this was recorded and defined by the Bible. If you don't think the purpose of the Bible was to establish a framework for social and moral order by way of a set of rules and beliefs, then you should just come out and say so.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAs I explained on page 18, my claim is that the Bible was written to lay out rules to underpin a social and moral order for a particular group and to record its history. That was the purpose it was written for. If you feel you can refute this, be my guest.
Was the bible written for political purposes FMF?
Originally posted by FMFYes I know and understand this, there is no need to repeat it ad nauseum. I will not accuse you of sophistry although its borderline in my opinion, but we are trying to establish whether or not the Bible was written for political purposes and if so how are we meant to reconcile certain historical facts that would seem to refute the idea that the Bible was written for political purposes that being that the early Christians were non-political. If you know anything about this then please let it be known, if not, then ok, lets move along.
As I explained on page 18, my claim is that the Bible was written to lay out rules to underpin a social and moral order for a particular group and to record its history. That was the purpose it was written for. If you feel you can refute this, be my guest.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut where is your refutation of what I claimed about the purpose of the Bible? You mentioned repeatedly that you had refuted what I said on page 18. Where?
Yes I know and understand this, there is no need to repeat it ad nauseum. I will not accuse you of sophistry although its borderline in my opinion, but we are trying to establish whether or not the Bible was written for political purposes and if so how are we meant to reconcile certain historical facts that would seem to refute the idea that the Bib ...[text shortened]... If you know anything about this then please let it be known, if not, then ok, lets move along.
FMF: the Bible was written to lay out rules to underpin a social and moral order for a particular group and to record its history.You understand it? OK. Good. So, do you agree with it?
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes I know and understand this, there is no need to repeat it ad nauseum.
Originally posted by FMFI have refuted your claim with regard to the idea that John 17 was a specific dogma of Jehovah's Witnesses not what you are saying with regard to the Bible being written as some kind of blueprint for a social order. Your idea that John 17 is specific to Jehovahs witnesses stands refuted by history, its not specific aspect of Jehovas witness dogma, its was the case from the inception of Christianity.
But where is your refutation of what I claimed about the purpose of the Bible? You mentioned repeatedly that you had refuted what I said on page 18. Where?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut what about my claim on page 18?
I have refuted your claim with regard to the idea that John 17 was a specific dogma of Jehovah's Witnesses not what you are saying with regard to the Bible being written as some kind of blueprint for a social order. Your idea that John 17 is specific to Jehovahs witnesses stands refuted by history, its not specific aspect of Jehovas witness dogma, its was the case from the inception of Christianity.