by proplog2 50 Replies latest jw friends
Gary
On my way out, i showed photocopies of those 1932 quotes to my mother, sister and brother. Then, i asked them what was the unforgivable sin. Since all were quiet, i recited the wt definition (denying the holy spirit) for it for them. It didn't get through.
SS
An embarrassing example of the WTS's anxiousness to graft their own misanthropic worldview onto the flock at the expense of any rigorousness or editorial restraint.
Am I missing something here? Is this about Exodus 3:13? I don't claim to be a master exegete -- far from it -- but in that scripture, isn't Moses asking about himself and his future -- the opposite of what the study book states? To paraphrase, he says, "Look, if I go these guys and say 'the God of your forefathers sent me' and they say 'oh yeah, what's his name?', what the heck am I supposed to say then?" He's not asking God's name; he's worried about himself -- what he's going to do, and how he's going to feel, and what's going to happen to him -- if in his future he goes to the sons of Israel and they give him a hard time or he's not up to the job. Maybe he's thinking they'll say "Hey, we know about lots of gods -- Ra, Osiris, Isis; which one do you say you're from and why is he -- or you -- so special to us?" In any case, this question, along with the earlier and later ones, is an objection he's raising to try and get out of going.
After reading all your comments on this thread, I must say----Leave the Faithful & Discreet Slave Class alone! They make no errors. We are the ones that misunderstand!
Am I missing something here? Is this about Exodus 3:13? I don't claim to be a master exegete -- far from it -- but in that scripture, isn't Moses asking about himself and his future -- the opposite of what the study book states?
True North,
Please check my earlier post.
Ozzie
Please check my earlier post.Ozzie
Thanks Ozzie. I overlooked the end of you earlier post. Right you are.
BTW, how do you suppose they ended up in print with something that's so obviously the opposite of what they are saying it is?
proplog2
You are the dumb one because you have failed to understand what our dear brothers are teaching us. The fact of the matter is that Moses asked Jehovah two questions. The first is asked in verse 11 followed by a second question in verse 13 and it is the last question that is referred to in paragraph 2. Further, the Society's comments are well supported by commentary on verse 13 as discussed in pp.37-38 in EXODUS- Word Biblical Commentary, Vol.3, by John I Durham, 1987, Word Books, Waco, Texas.
scholar
BA MA Studies in Religion
Proplog2 you are way off base and your reasoning is all wrong. IN fact your post makes me question your reading comprehension skills not the Society's writing accuracy. The gaggle of echos that praise your misstep is only telling of how blinded they are by their hatred towards the Organization.
True North essentially is on the right track.
When the Society states in the Draw Close publication that Moses asks God not "about himself, his future, or even the plight of mankind" they are clearly making a point that Moses appeared not to be selfishly focused on his own situation or even on his fellow Israelites. In stating that although (it is assumed) that Moses knew God's name, his question to God in asking God's name, has a "deeper meaning" which the Society goes on to explain. (The Society does not say that Moses asked this question FIRST as your post seems to wrongly suggest.)
Your taking the Society's statement literally that "Moses did not ask about himself" and connecting it to Moses question of God ("Who am I that should go to Pharoah...) and asserting that this is a "DUMB" mistake is not only silly it shows an ignorance of the meaning of the passage and Moses' question to God and even of language and grammer.
FYI the Question Mark doesn't ALWAYS signal a question to be answered by another. It is also used for Rhetorical questions and even for STATEMENTS that are expressive of doubt and sometimes sarcasm. (But who am I to tell you this?)
Moses was not asking in some philosophical way "Who am I?" Nor as the Society ACCURATELY states in THIS conversation with God at the thornbush, Moses was not even very concerned with his own self. HIs question clearly has the meaning of asking God what authority, what gives him the right to serve as a spokesman for the Israelites and to enter into the presence of Pharaoh to plea on their behalf. Thus if you care to review God's response it was not about MOSES but he tells Moses that he, God, will be with him, in other words Moses has the commission and will be given the strength by God to do what he has to secure the peoples' freedom.
Hopefully next time you will put a little more thought into your reasoning and spare yourself some embarassment.
AS for what others have said about the Society's writing. Yes, for those who are extremely literate, educated or who even just read very well, the publications are often written at a level that is overly simplistic, even dull and sometimes frustratingly patronizing. I suspect that a large majority of visitors to this forum are above the cut in their intelligence and literacy.
However, the Society has for a long time, really since the Knorr Era purposely written its materials at an extremely low literacy level. This allows good communication of the ideas to large proportions of the population and it also faciliates translation into multi-languages without the need to struggle with obtaining local nuances of meaning when more sophisticated writing is used.
Interestingly, or perhaps sadly, the Society can claim to proudly be ahead of other religious and secular institutions which are all embracing a "plain language" approach and beginning to deliberately construct all written communications below the 8th grade literacy level which is where the vast majority of the population falls.
If you want wonderful prose read Dostoyevsky, Cervantes or Dickens. If you want an idea in a passage to be understood by both college professors and nine-year old Inuits, then the Society's writing department can do the job and there is something positive to be said about that.
-Eduardo
proplog2....Hey, nice catch, that was a good one! :))
Regardless of who's right and who's wrong the way the society opens in those two paragraphs is extremely patronising! It is written for the level of a 3-year-old - but then again most Borgites like to be spoon-fed! It makes me sick
Drip........drip............drip..........drip............drip..............drip.................BRAINWASHED...........drip..............drip...............drip.............
