Posts by Narkissos

81

JEHOVAH

by minimus in

we all know that we do not know the correct pronunciation of the name of god.

over 6000 times, the tetragrammaton is mentioned in the ot.

yet for some reason, most bibles do not use the name jehovah or yahweh but a few times.

To address more specifically Minimus' question, I'd first say that the replacement of the tetragrammaton (YHWH) by "Lord" is not universal: the Spanish Reina-Valera Bible, or the Portuguese Ferreira de Almeida, which are still used by most pentecostals ans evangelicals throughout Latin America, regularly have an equivalent of "Jehovah" in the Old Testament (as has been said, there is no YHWH in any of the thousands of manuscripts of the New Testament, and on this point the NWT is clearly cheating).

Substituting "Lord" to YHWH was a Jewish practice in pre-christian times, either in the Hebrew reading "Adonaï" or "Elohim", or in the Greek Septuagint "translation" by "kurios" or "theos". The NT texts imply that, as is clear in Paul's reasoning on "kurios"-Lord, applied to Jesus, in Romans 10 for instance (the reasoning is lost when putting "Jehovah" in verse 13, as does the NWT).

My guess is that the "taboo" on pronouncing Yhwh in late judaism is a direct consequence of the rise of monotheism. Israel's god naturally had a name when he was one of the many gods in a polytheistic view (see for instance Judges 11:24, where Yhwh is the name of Israel's god as Kamosh is the name of Moab's god). When this god became God (starting from the Exile in Babylon, and specifically Isaiah 40--55), he didn't need a name anymore, and the traditional name was either theologized (as in Exodus 3) or deemed too sacred to be articulated...

65

this website is having an impact

by dothemath in

hello.........this is a first for me- i've been reading some of your messages for some time now, and i must say you guys study your watchtower far better than i ever did.

i'm still a part of the congregation (and an elder), but i have to say i agree with many of your criticisms of the organization.

we've become just like the pharisees that jesus condemned............at our last assembly, the do and co warned against apostate material over and over again..........so i certainly think you're having a tremendous impact on their actions.

Narkissos

Welcome Dothemath,

I have just found your thread now. Although I am a Newbie like you here, I was disfellowshipped for "apostasy" nearly 18 years ago. Like you I didn't want to leave the organization, because all my friends (and several of them very dear) were there. Nonetheless I understood that it would happen.

When I realized my views of the organization and its teachings had changed, I resigned from my translator work in the French Bethel and resumed my "special pioneer" service in Paris, desperately hoping to concentrate on the kind of "basic teaching" you were speaking about. This I could you during four or five months, and it was really a great time: doing Bible studies which were really Bible studies (without the "help" of the Society's literature). I never preached against the organization's teaching (only letting people draw rather different conclusions from their own Bible reading). However, I eventually found myself before a judicial Committee requiring a "yes or no" answer to a prescribed series of questions (1914, the two hopes stuff and so forth). Ironically enough, the hearing which began by the remark "We heard you're talking a lot about Jesus" ended with disfellowshipping on the grounds of 2 John 9-11 (not remaining in Christ's teaching).

In view of that painful though great experience you reminded me, my friendly advice would be: enjoy your "last days" in the organization, make them as enlightening as possible to those who love, be careful enough to make them last as long as you are conscientiously able, but know that they will probably have an end and get emotionally prepared to it.

Take care,

Narkissos

13

Were Daniel and Jeremiah contemporaries?

by shotgun in

i've recently read who wrote the gospels, it mentioned on a side note from the gospels that daniel was probably written around 200 bce not during nebuchadnezzars reign.. in daniel chapter 9 he mentions reading the phophetic words of jeremiah about the 70 years of servitude.

jeremiah lived in a different land (judah) while daniel was in babylon.

how would daniel have been able to get jeremiahs scrolls seeing they had just been written and also the position daniel was in as chief of nebuchadnezzars magic practising priests would not have bode well for real jewish worshippers to think about making any saturday morning placements with him.. the book i read states that jeremiah, daniel and most of the other books seperate from the talmud were not canonized until around 200 bce.. any thoughts on this or have you done or read anything on this subject.

Narkissos

In my opinion, the book of Daniel cannot have been written in the third century or in 200 BC either. The second part of the book, and especially chapter 11, is a direct reflection (in the apocalyptical style) of the political situation in Palestine between 167 and 164 BC, that is during Antiochos' attempt at hellenizing judaism (which is described in detail) and before the Maccabean victory (which is not described).

As for the "Daniel" (with different spelling in Hebrew) of Ezekiel 14:14, it reflects an ancient non-Israelite legendary character (as Noah and Job) which is now well known by the Ugarit (Ras Shamra) texts of the 2nd millenium BC.

41

Emotional Terrorism.

by Englishman in

jw
friends

sirona's thread about bullying got me thinking.

there's another type of bullying, which, imho, can be far worse.

i'm talking about psychological bullying, where fear of a persons hysterical reaction forces us to act in manner that fits in with what the person wants.

Narkissos

Very interesting subject!

I feel there are at least two different types of e.t. (as of many pathological behaviors): the hysterical type and the obsessional type. Threats of suicide, for instance, would mostly belong to the first type, and trivializing the other's feelings would rather belong to the second one. In the first case stopping to be the expected audience may be useful (which does not mean stopping to hear, but responding in an unexpected way). In the second case open confrontation and verbalizing the unsaid may be best.

And I would ask: aren't we all, to some degree, emotional terrorists? Is there a human relationship totally free of any kind of manipulation? I doubt it. Froggy pessimism perhaps...

59

What do you belive happens to us after we die?

by Singing Man in

jw
friends

i was raised a jehovah's witness and like most are aware, they presently belive that by and large everyone who dies ceases to exist.

i accepted this fate for most of my life and i guess i still do for the most part, but now that i do not go to the meetings what am i to accept death to be, as i will die as well as my friends and family at some point.

i think that idea of being in gods memory made sense to me as i have excepted it for forty five of my fifty years of being alive.

Narkissos

I think I'd address the question from two different angles:

1) Where was I before I was born? I just was not, and I won't be anymore. The sunshine was no less bright before I was here to see it, and it won't be less bright afterwards. It will just be seen through different eyes.

2) What am I? As a biological individual in the human species I am also a "subject" of language and culture. What I call "I" is also the result of thousands of people I have met, either personally or through cultural media (tales I heard, books I read, movies I watched and so forth). These people I bear, consciously or not, in what I call "me". Even while I'm alive I'm already living in people I met and to whom I gave something of myself, whether I'm aware of it or not. This is not to stop when I die. In that sense I believe in "resurrection in the flesh". That is, in the others' flesh.

(Typical European thinking I guess...)

21

Evidence of 'jesus' ... scientist claims it is fake

by Simon in

interesting story.

personally, the lack of evidence for someone supposedly so important is a bit pathetic.. i remember a wts that said "there is more evidence that jesus lived than julius ceasar died in rome".

notice the twist - of course there is plenty of evidence that julius ceasar lived, and lots of writings that he died in rome.

Narkissos

Aside from the "James' Ossuary" stuff, I feel there is a lot of evidence for the existence of Jesus. Which doesn't mean I'm buying the "Jesus story" from the Gospels (which one, by the way?).

Simon writes: "The oldest date of *anything* mentioning Jesus is around a 125AD." I don't agree. One is not to mix up "material evidence" (the oldest extant Gospel copy that has been found to this day) and "literary evidence": the latter is plenty that Paul's genuine epistles, for example, have been written in the 40's and 50's -- and they mention Jesus very often, however in sharp contrast with the Jesus' movement in Jerusalem as represented by James. Paul's epistles could not have been written later: Paul's heirs later did write letters in his name, such as the deutero-pauline (Colossians, Ephesians) and the Pastorals (Timothy, Titus), which are obviously different in content.

My provisional conclusion would be the following: there was certainly a rabbi named Jesus in Palestine in the first half of the first Century C.E. But the Gospels hardly give us a clue about who he really was. His (fully jewish) movement was followed on in Palestine by his brother James. However it spread much over the borders of Palestinian judaism, and Paul's thinking was decisive in making its hellenistic form in the diaspora the new international religion we know as "Christianity". By the way, Paul had no interest in the personality and teaching of the historical Jesus, only in the mythical-theological figure of the Resurrected One. In this and many other things (like circumcision) he stood in open conflict with the historical followers of Jesus -- and historically he won... The Jesus' stories we find in the Gospels are productions of several schools of this new "Christianity", probably including some genuine tradition, but not so much...

31

Help - it's drawing me in again

by AJN in

hmm, not sure how to write this - here goes:.

i left the jw's about 15 years ago however my 18 year old son is a witness.

we haven't seen each other for many years and the only contact we have is via the telephone occasionally (all this is cool btw).

Narkissos

Hello AJN,

I'm a newbie too but I just happened to read your post, and I liked it.

I'd say all the truth in "the Truth" is the truth of life. Every religion or philosophy lives by it, but it doesn't belong to anyone. There's something crooked in pinning a flag on it.

Just "breathe in the air", you're entitled to it, you don't need any label.

Take care,

Narkissos

88

What Was "IT" That Finally Made You Leave The "Truth"?

by minimus in

jw
friends

anything in particular, or was it a combination of things??

?

Narkissos

Quite a lot of things -- which occurred when I was a translator in the French Bethel:

- Having to do less teaching (I was a special pioneer before) -- that is, less time to persuade myself while trying to persuade others.

- Dealing with the logical problems in the WT literature (when you have to translate every word of it a lot of flaws become apparent -- especially in F.W. Franz's productions at that time).

- Seeing the whole thing from "within the sanctuary": it was not so bad (the French Bethel was probably much cooler than the Brooklyn HQs), but it gradually demythologized the "organization" in my mind. Joking daily with a lot of people there, including some Bethel elders, about the WT doctrine and policies really opened my mind.

- Starting again to read something (novels, theology, philosophy) besides the WT literature, first to improve my literary skills (I had chosen to pioneer instead of going to college), then just for the pleasure of it.

- Learning Hebrew and Greek, first to be able to do a better work (especially when translating the Aid book), but later enjoying the ability to read the Bible without the NWT and the WT "explanations".

- And on top of that being in love -- the best thing to know what really matters in life and what doesn't.

19

Appealing a Disfellowshipping

by Nosferatu in

jw
friends

have any of you ever had a successful appeal to a disfellowshipping?

Narkissos

Gadget,

I would say the first hearing was about 2 hours long, and the appeal approximately half an hour. But (fortunately) my memories are fading...

19

Appealing a Disfellowshipping

by Nosferatu in

jw
friends

have any of you ever had a successful appeal to a disfellowshipping?

Narkissos

Well, I did try the appeal procedure, just for the fun of it.

In the first place, the judicial process began shortly after a friend of mine and I partook in the Memorial. A few weeks later, we had the surprise of receiving not one but two COs in the local congo. We were first summoned, without any allusion to the Memorial thing, but with the following concern: "Well, guys, we're hearing you talk a lot about Jesus." A few days afterwards we were called before a JC made up of local elders, and had to answer by yes or no to a series of questions (about 1914, the "two hopes" stuff, and so on). This ended by disfellowshipping on the grounds of 2 John 9-11 (stepping forward from Christ's teaching).

As I found the motive rather funny in view of the context, I did appeal. On the appeal Committee, one week or so later, the two COs were sitting. I remember I burst laughing when I saw them. The second hearing was logically very short.

I realized everything was planned right from the beginning (and probably from the French Bethel I had just left a few months before).

That was back in 1986...