Leolaia
Thanks for that explanation. It was very interesting and I learned a lot about a subject I've never really considered before.
Sirona
Thinking of becoming a Witness again and my reasons for doing so :(
by reniaa 383 Replies latest jw experiences
-
-
Sirona
BTW I've also PM'd a moderator to find out if the IP coding thing could be in error.
They'll probably clarify at some point soon.
Sirona
-
jgnat
Lay off the newcomer, Sirona. It is possible for two people at disparate locations to have the same hashed IP address. Some internet providers route ALL their users through a hub. In that case, anyone using that hub would have the same IP.
-
Leolaia
I agree that it is possible that they are posting from different computers. If you look at their IP history in this thread, one huge difference between chikikie and reniaa immediately jumps out. The IP for chikikie has been just this, without change, throughout the thread:
4g6qTbcNRCkAfZ+i
But reniaa has a wildly changing series of IPs, practically changing from post to post:
Kz7VoUwYfbeAUmnP
W8k6aLGA7Z1Hqp/t
gov6ytarjey6NE6z
VPYH7DCbXQFOeAcJ
TCtRDSNmnt35yes1
JflGbMcQ0dZsTHqZ
9+KcbLlxI44qCvE/
nsXk/mEVCliNolb9
JflGbMcQ0dZsTHqZ
nIugZAul159hZKsz
s9g73z9LviwSBo5R
xMh6twxebDUWfJoe
vTV0mqK4R8FfE+pw
nsXk/mEVCliNolb9
jza/9Gb3soaj1u/7
vCtxNIZBHIVTQ7KS
yNq7GHXCxsTl5YBC
HsQjQ47ds4O/UG0u
pkgPyDelEZj+fspU
thQ2j27Mp6p7VVUr
0N+Ywb57/c1ZPnsc
tgLg4+LdUsQG7cLz
yNq7GHXCxsTl5YBC
4g6qTbcNRCkAfZ+iThis indicates clearly that she has a dynamic IP. All of those IPs are available to those sharing the same ISP and they assignment of IP shifts between users dynamically. I don't know why reniaa shifts so much, maybe someone who knows more about IP addressing might know what setting it is that allows someone to change IPs so much. Maybe reniaa has connection problems, or maybe there is some setting that changes the IP frequently. Now, if you look up these IPs on Google, you can see that they are shared between the same posters from the UK: TheEdge, MidwichCuckoo, fleaman uk, mark hughes, hamsterbait, ArtfulDodger, evergreen, Gill, etc. These share 4g6qTbcNRCkAfZ+i as well. So all these IPs must come from the same ISP. And if you look for threads where more than one of these posters are posting, you can see shifts between these IPs from poster to poster on the same page of the thread. Here is an example:
I doubt MidwichCuckoo and evergreen are the same person; more likely, in the day between their posts, evergreen's IP switched to another one and MidwichCuckoo was assigned the same IP and posted in the same thread.
Could this have happened here? It may seem unlikely that less than an hour after chikikie posted, reniaa got the same IP, and then when chikikie posted a day later, the same IP was switched back to her (as opposed to any of the other many IPs), but it's still possible.
-
real one
I'm still stuck knowing it's jehovah that I believe in, or more precise the God of the bible, so if I break it down into a simple question? how can I find a religion that expressies that in me? your point are cool crusoe but I'm not ready to abandon that yet.
I certainly haven't ever focussed on armegaddon my thoughts are for the reality of living with the here and now in religion.
Reniaa
religion or rituals will get you nowhere. try a non-denominational church before you go back. Billy Graham is on TBN now. look at his sermon and tell me what you think. this man preached 30 or 40 years ago and everything he said back then applies to today. try listening to jw that long ago. it will have changed a lot
-
jgnat
Leolaia, your ability to absorb and analyse to such detail dazzles, just dazzles me.
-
chikikie
I think I may have an explanation,
Me and my sister are both on Aol broadband, I use a home computer the same one all the time and she sometimes uses her laptop as well as her home computer. I reakon this expains it, as mine stays the same, hers seems to change alot, perhaps freakly hers was the same as mine at the point. good detective work layla
-
reniaa
This indicates clearly that she has a dynamic IP
Oooo I'm liking the idea of having a dynamic Ip address, this is a very new computer with vista on I wondered if it was some new aol feature but i'm not complaining, I think however it's done, surely a changing ip is a good thing?
And thank you loads leolaia for your information on the stauros it was interesting and informative, I would have liked to talk further with you but this writing forum format is so frustrating and I don't want to belabour the issue, i've looked back at your research on it in your specific thread as well and it wouldn't be fair to keep you reiterating it :) I also found you were quoted in wiki on the subject oo cool.
I hope you don't mind if I ask one last question though.
Given that stauros = stake the word then (in all words refering to it stauros, xylon, even crux), using the word stake even if there is a possibility that a cross shape of sorts was involved in his death although not confirmed (your nearest source barnabas 100 years+? says tau T shape scriptural deduction been the only way to try and figure out how jesus was executed there was one error in the patubulan theory which involves binding/nailing to it before dragging it as part of torture :- Simon of Cyrene assisted in carrying the crosspiece, indicating that Christ was unlikely to have been bound to it or nailed to it already) Therefore are witnesses are more correct in using "stake" in purity of translation?
reniaa
-
reniaa
religion or rituals will get you nowhere. try a non-denominational church before you go back. Billy Graham is on TBN now. look at his sermon and tell me what you think. this man preached 30 or 40 years ago and everything he said back then applies to today. try listening to jw that long ago. it will have changed a lot
Change is a reality of the christian church in all it's denominations for the last 2000 years not just perculiar to witnesses, sometimes change is good , we'd still be burning witches on the stake if it wasn't, But sometimes it is bad bringing in pagan practises that are unrelated to the religion.
Billy graham was good man from what I read on wiki (i'm english and not really seen much on him) even if liking the media attention a lot, he is not without contraversy on public and privately expressed views that differed on one issue but you can look it up lol
In defence of the witnesses any religion wanting to go back to a grass roots literalist view of the bible would have to change a massive amount from modern christianity. But not so much in their defence I think they are too strict which reflects a more old testament style than jesus's words style (although I'm still exploring how christian church was in Paul's time when they had to put into practise what jesus tought, making their own decisions on circumcism etc on principles rather than anything jesus said on the subject because he didn't lol)
it's complicated and atm i'm really just enjoying reading my bible and trying to get the feel of the people and places in a way I couldn't when I was younger :)
-
Leolaia
Well, thank you too reniaa, because you gave me to chance to look some things up and discover a few new facts I didn't know before.
Given that stauros = stake the word then, using the word stake even if there is a possibility that a cross shape of sorts was involved in his death although not confirmed (your nearest source barnabas 100 years+? says tau T shape) witnesses are more correct in using stake in purity of translation?
Well, I personally feel that "cross" is the best word for this sense because it derives from the actual word used by the Romans, crux, and most people understand that it was an instrument of execution -- which is essentially the defining characteristic of this use of stauros. "Stake" doesn't cut it because that's just an upright pole, with no implication of gruesome execution. It doesn't capture the loathsome, ugly, and scandalous nature of the cross (apparent in, for example, 1 Corinthians 1:18-31). "Torture stake" is wrong too because the instrument was primarily a means of execution -- torturous to be sure, but it wasn't simply an apparatus used to torture people. Much better is "execution stake". But the problem with this is that, since "cross" is well-known to everyone as the word of the instrument used by the Romans to execute people, the use of a different word instead of the familiar "cross" may lead some to assume that the stauros COULD NOT have been a traditional "cross". That, of course, is what the Society wants people to assume, when in fact the evidence indicates that the Romans widely used the patibulum such that the T-shaped cross was likely very common, just as common if not more common than the simple execution stake (as indicated by the texts that said that the stauros in general was T-shaped). So if a translation were to use "execution stake", it would have to have a footnote clarifying that the "stake" typically or commonly had a crossbeam. Just as one should understand that the word "cross", as a term for the Roman execution instrument, doesn't necessarily imply a crossbeam. Since the indications are that the stauros did indeed have a crosspiece more often, and since the stauros of Jesus probably did have a patibulum that Jesus and/or Simon of Cyrene carried to Golgotha, I see no real problem in the fact that English readers tend to interpret the word "cross" as implying a shape. But if one wants to be really pedantic, then a footnote noting that the form of the cross was variable could be made. But "cross" really is the word in English that specifically refers to the instrument used by the Romans, so that is why it is used by virtually everyone to translate stauros when it refers to an execution instrument. The Society's position, which goes much further to claim falsely that the word DID NOT refer to execution stakes with crossbeams, is really more of an attempt to make JWs unique among professed Christians.
BTW, although Barnabas was written at most 100 years after the supposed time of Jesus, it was actually much closer in the time of the composition of the gospels, which themselves were written about 40-70 years after the crucifixion. In fact, when you compare its use of OT exegetical traditions with the gospels, Barnabas is in many ways more original and primitive. That is to say, it attests the first stages of interpreting OT traditions before they have been cast in the form of a narrative, as they appear in the gospels. See the discussion in Koester's Ancient Christian Gospels on how Barnabas preserves "the earliest stage and, at the same time, the best example of such scriptural interpretation" (p. 224-228), and JD Crossan's The Cross That Spoke, which goes over the exegetical traditions individually.
