Posts by Narkissos

6

Can humanity live happily without God?

by JH in

jw
friends

.

if science made us eternal, and we could control everything on earth as if we were in the new system, would humanity still need a higher intelligence or god to worship?

in other words, is god only a provider?

Narkissos

If you mean strictly "God," in the monotheistic sense, the fact is most humans do live without it (or Him) all right -- probably no more and no less happy than the theists.

On the other hand, I think we can hardly dispense with some kind of "spirituality" or "philosophy" -- that is, a way to understand yourself and your life, as well as your relationship to the world and to the people around you. Maybe it's always related to "happiness", inasmuch as it is a way of finding some new kind of happiness when you're not happy? I wonder.

23

My Church is a Cult!

by diotrephes in

jw
friends

the founder of the church did just that.

1 corinthians 1:10 now i beseech you, brethren, by the name of our lord jesus christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

where is the wise?

Narkissos

Diotrephes: one thing you didn't answer is the diversity of what we call "early Christianity". True, none of the movements we unite under this label was "critical" or "liberal" in the modern sense. Even the johannine community who could express such "high" and "universalistic" ideas as "God is love" would practice the shunning of "apostates" (2 John 9-11). And, when you think of it, the johannine "love one another" is much more sectarian than the synoptic "love your enemies".

However, there remains the fact that there was not one "early christianity", but movements who had some common ideas and many differences, and which did conflict bluntly with one another. Such as James' "christian judaism" with Paul's "pagan christianity" in Galatians. Even the "bad Diotrephes" in 3 John is just a "good bishop" after the Pastorals.

The question is, what do we do of this early diversity? Pretend they were all in basic agreement, as Luke-Acts would have us believe, and accept it as the basis of our ideal "United Christianity", somewhat more liberal or more cultic according to our mood? Or accept the real challenge of diversity, which means that a "United Christianity" was never "intended to be", especially in the mind of its supposed founder?

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.

Narkissos

Peacefulpete: as for the phrase "Yhwh and his Ashera" (found in Kuntillet 'Ajrud but also in Khirbet el-Qom), the main problem is the possessive pronoun which normally never occurs with a proper name ('asrtH, HIS Ashera). I personally don't buy into Lipinski's explanation (in fact reviving and old rabbinic tradition), that "ashera" is only an equivalent of "bamah", "high place (sanctuary) with trees". My provisional guess would be that in Hebrew use, "'ashera" became a kind of common noun meaning "consort goddess" (prior to the deuteronomistic meaning "sacred pole or tree"). But this idea should be given further testing.

As for the phrase sm . bny . yw . ilt in Ugarit, I don't know of any scholarly challenge since I was not even conscious of it. My spontaneous (and perhaps mistaken) reaction is that "yw" would not be set between "bny" and "ilt" to mean "the name of the son of god, Yahweh". Moreover, it would be the first evidence I heard of for a northern form "Yw" aside from theophoric names. Maybe tomorrow I can find something about this in Paris: I'll let you know.

Sorry for the technical hijacking of this thread. One conclusion we would certainly agree on is that, whatever the details, the function of the divine name Yhwh is only understandable from the ancient polytheistic viewpoint; in a monotheistic context it had to be given a farfetched "spiritual explanation" by mainstream theologians (Exodus 3), avoided by common people and magically used by esoterism.

13

Are Jehovah's Witnesses colorblind?

by avengers in

jw
friends

my youngest son showed me a quote that in my opinion describes the mentality within the organization perfectly.

here it is: those that think it is permissible to tell white lies soon grow color blind.

they [the watchtower] adamantly teach that it is okay to ?hide the truth from your enemies,?

Narkissos

"Colorblind" is a very good image for the consequence of any binary ideology: black and white, right and wrong... When you see the world that way, you don't even realize you have lost its colors. One symptom of this is the "theocratic strategy", as one of many "for-the-cause" schemes.

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.

Narkissos

Many thanks Peacefulpete,

Although the evidence for the name Yhwh in Ugarit is scanty (very odd syntax in KTU 1.1 IV.14 if this is the real meaning!), the Ugaritic texts do provide a very enlightening background. The figure of Asherah as "Mrs. Maingod" (be it Yhwh or Baal), though still challenged (by Lipinski for example), deserves to be known. I'd just insist that "borrowed from Ugarit" is too bold a shortcut, since the texts we were lucky enough to find there are just a chance sample of the general culture shared, with local variations, in all the "Canaanite" realm.

I also fully agree with your reservations about the "Biblical" side of the picture. To most present scholars the great "Yhwh-Israel vs Baal-Canaan" scheme is a fictitious product of the "Deuteronomistic historiography" (extending to the so-called Exodus and Conquest).

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.

Narkissos

Gumby: Yhwh in Ugarit, really? I'd like to know the references... Of course El is known in Ugarit as the Father of gods or supreme god, which is reflected in many Bible texts as well. One of the most interesting is the plainly polytheistic Deuteronomy 32:8f, which (when reconstructed by crossing the Hebrew Masoretic text and the Greek Septuagint which are two different attempts at hiding the first meaning) reads: "When Elyon (title of El) apportioned the nations, when he divided humankind, he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of El (= gods); Yhwh's own portion was his people, Jacob his allotted share." That is: Yhwh is only one of El's sons, and he receives Israel as his portion whereas his god-brothers are given other peoples.

However, this does not explain the name "Yhwh". In the Biblical texts as well as in inscriptions such as Mesha's stele it appears rather as a southern godname (whereas Ugarit = Ras Shamra is on the Phoenician coast, north of Palestine). There is an old theory by Driver, still held by some, that interprets it as a title, from the Biblical expression Yhwh Sabaoth: it would be "He [El] who creates the [heavenly] armies" (and imply the pronunciation yahweh); but I don't find it very convincing, especially because of the distinction between El and Yhwh. When you compare Bible texts with Ugarit's Yhwh seems to be more in the position of Hadad = Baal, the most prominent son of El. But I'll try to give a fresh look at this someday.

Belbab: syllabic writing (including the vowels) is much older than consonantic alphabetical writing (such as Ugarit's, and Hebrew): in Sumerian and Egyptian for instance. And, to me, the explanation of Yhwh in Exodus 3 seems to be a late attempt to explain away the personal name of a god which has become God in the meantime, and for this reason does not need a name anymore. Anyway, I liked your quotation very much...

Minimus: I just use "Jehovah" when discussing this subject (by the way, I'm not a theist anymore).

30

Hello

by Netty in

jw
friends

just wanted to write a post to introduce myself and say hello.

im new here, although i've read many of the posts here for a few months now.

i was raised as a jw since i was 4 years old, elders daughter, pioneered the whole bit.

Narkissos

Welcome Netty!

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.

Narkissos

Faraon: very interesting when you think of the old representation of the god Yhwh as a bull (as reflected in the so-called Solomon's temple or in the story of the golden calves)

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.

Narkissos

Gumby: the latin forms "Jahoua" or "Jehoua" which eventually led to the classical spelling "Jehovah" did arise around the tenth century, that is, shortly after the work of the Jewish Massoretes on the Hebrew text. This vowel-pointing (known as "perpetual qere'") was to serve as a reminder to the Jewish reader that he should read "Adonaï" (= Lord) or "Elohim" (= God) instead of Yhwh. The latin Christian scholars very probably mistook this as a clue to the pronunciation of Yhwh, which it was not intended to be.

From older (mostly Greek) witnesses, including some magical papyrii (when forbidden in orthodox practice the name was used in a magical way), the evidence points to an original reading as "Yaho" or "Yahweh".

About the current Bible translations, I wrote about the Spanish and Portuguese Bibles still using "Jehova", but I forgot to say that most French Catholic and non-confessional versions use "Yahweh" consistently in the Old Testament.

23

My Church is a Cult!

by diotrephes in

jw
friends

the founder of the church did just that.

1 corinthians 1:10 now i beseech you, brethren, by the name of our lord jesus christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

where is the wise?

Narkissos

Welcome Diotrephes,

I don't know in which cheek your tongue is but you are smart.

A few remarks however: In 83 CE (which is not nearly reckoned like that at your time) many of the scriptures you quote are not written yet. "Christianity" is everything but a united "religion". The "Matthew" trend would look upon Paul as an "apostate". So would the "Pastorals" upon "John" a few years later...

However, you made the following point (whether you intended it or not): the globalizing vision of the New Testament as collected during the 2nd century would probably be seen as a cult by our standards.

I only doubt what your conclusion is: "Long live the cults", or "To the hell with uncritical christianity"?

Looking forward to reading you...