Well in the Jewish culture, the name "Mary" was extensively given to daughters .
I don't understand what you are saying here. Who else who you give a woman's name to? Sons?
Does this not sound phony to you? Matthew 24
by Terry 31 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
mP
@lars
how do you explain every woman mark is called mary ? what are the odds of everyone in an autobio even if it is short being called mary ? do you honestly believe every family in judea called their girls mary ? im sorry but that sounds insane. didnt any parents realise every other girl was already called mary ? do you know wehat mary means ?
-
Terry
In Latino cultures how many Maria's do you have?
In Islamic cultures how many Muhammed's do you have?
-
moshe
Matthew 24:37-41,
Jesus spoke of the flood of Noah as a real event- he apparently was unaware of the iceman mummy, Otzi, frozen on top of a mountain glacier (in about 3300bc) 1000 miles away from Israel. You would think the son of God would know the flood of Noah didn't cover the tallest mountains after all.
-
Leolaia
At Gilead, Bowen said that MT 24 and 25 have things so spliced together, that "not even" the GB knew what to make of it... yet. Those entire chapters are all over the place. If you just read it without thinking that you were sniffing holy spirit as you turned the page, I think one would be persuaded to conclusions similar to Terry's.
That's one reason why a redactional perspective, like the one I gave above, is fruitful for exegesis -- one can see the process as well as purpose in Matthew and Luke of splicing additional material to the more original discourse in Mark, as well as rewriting much of the text to adapt it in a particular way. Then one may also recognize that discourses themselves were composed by aggregating originally isolated sayings together, which may be elsewhere attested individually (such as in the Gospel of Thomas). Second, one may look at roughly contemporaneous versions of similar apocalyptic narratives, such as the one found in the Didache, which was probably written in the same community as Matthew. And one may look more broadly at how other apocalypses of the period, such as the ones found in 4 Ezra. Finally, one's interpretation may draw on the recognition that the Markan apocalypse (and the versions dependent on it) reinterprets the earlier Hebrew apocalypse in Daniel, and borrows much of the imagery and plot from that text. And observing how other contemporary apocalypses reinterpret Daniel might be helpful too. All of those things, which respect the text itself and its construction, give you a better chance of capturing the writers' intent than indulging in flights of fancy.
-
james_woods
All of those things, which respect the text itself and its construction, give you a better chance of capturing the writers' intent than indulging in flights of fancy.
But what if the writer's intent really was a flight of fancy?
-
Leolaia
It often is in imaginative writing. That doesn't mean there isn't a purpose or meaning that the author wants to convey, or would have been characteristic to its original audience. What I'm talking about is the difference between letting the text be your guide in determining your interpretative options versus reading whatever you want into the text, such as suggesting that the "signs from heaven" in the Olivet discourse refer to Sputnik and the space age (as once suggested in a GB meeting), or that "kingdom shall rise against nation" refers to events starting in 1914, or that "this generation" refers to the generation born in 1914 or overlapping groups of the anointed, or that the seven trumpets in Revelation refer to 1920s Bible student assembly proclamations, or that the "ships of Kittim" in Daniel 11 refer to warships during WWI, etc. Old biblical prophecies are constantly recycled as source material in new prognostications by whole new audiences, but these new prophecies invariably depart from the original scenario or range of meanings associated with the text.
-
james_woods
Yup.
-
mP
@terry
make a mental list of marys in mark. they are all marys. while there maybe many marias in spanish, theres a diff between many and all. the spanish often give compound names like maria eugenia etc which is not quite the same.
-
Terry
It often is in imaginative writing. That doesn't mean there isn't a purpose or meaning that the author wants to convey, or would have been characteristic to its original audience.
Somewhere between "Fan Fiction" and a screenplay for a film "based on true events" is Scripture.
A human with a conscious intention is at work with a crafting, inventive agency for presentation.
As long as the perceived "facts" are present the work is invested with "soundness" and probity (they might well insist).
But, I am offering up the idea that the human agency in crafting scripture--when it reveals itself as in Matthew 24) should toss up a RED FLAG.
We need to stop, step back and exclaim: "Wait a damned minute! How can I take this so seriously as to scrutinize each word for deep meaning? How can I base my future on it?"
The Watchtower writers (and many Evangelicals) take each and every word as though GOD PUT HIS FINGER ON THE PAGE.
You simply can't in good conscience automatically swallow this crapload of "creative writing".
Worse still, you can't TEACH and ADMONISH others to take YOUR personal opinion as though it were prophetic certainty!
It could all very well be more invented speculation and missed intentions and garbled dialogue than an ironclad guarantee of future happenings.