Posts by Narkissos

27

thoughts...

by dustin_adam in

please note!

this is more of a philosophical question, and i am posting it merely to get feedback on what i like to term doctrinal circular logic (ie.

the bible is true because the bible says it true) i have tried to remove my own conclusions that i made from this, so if they shine through somewhere, i apologize.

Narkissos

Most of these scriptures do not refer to perfect people or perfect behavour, but coming in to a more complete understanding of what Christ has done for us.

I think this applies to most pauline (or sub-pauline) texts, but hardly to Matthew or James, who call for a radical, absolute, supramoral stance or attitude in life, without any reference to "what Christ has done for us".

By the way, in Matthew 19 I rather feel irony in the first part of the dialogue (v. 16ff), which sums up the "common morality" of the Decalogue (plus the Levitical "love your neighbour as yourself") and leads to the young man's admitting he is not satisfied with that (v. 20). The second proposition (v. 21), unacceptable as it was to the young man, was quite serious to Matthew, since the "perfection" it required is equated to "entering the Kingdom of heaven/God" in v. 23f.

I believe there is a definite strand of "perfection" teaching, both in Matthew and James, which is very different from the Pauline definition of "perfection" (or "completeness", or "maturity") as a subsequent development of a religious, mystical salvation based on Jesus' death/resurrection. The only common point in those views, perhaps, is that they have nothing in common with the shallow WT concept of "genetic perfection" which is altogether foreign to the Bible.

27

thoughts...

by dustin_adam in

please note!

this is more of a philosophical question, and i am posting it merely to get feedback on what i like to term doctrinal circular logic (ie.

the bible is true because the bible says it true) i have tried to remove my own conclusions that i made from this, so if they shine through somewhere, i apologize.

Narkissos

On perfection:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/66196/1.ashx

And welcome Dustin!

2

Martyrdom fact or fiction

by peacefulpete in

it is a glorious work for thomas the israelite (ismaelite) the apostle of the lord to tell of the works of jesus after he came out of egypt unto nazareth.

hear (understand) therefore all of you beloved brethren, the signs which the lord jesus did when he was in the city of nazareth: as it is said in the first chapter.

did the apostles die martyrs deaths for what they believed to be true?

Narkissos

Very interesting. One important case (outside the Twelve) would be Paul, since the end of his life remains mysterious in Acts (in order to provide a chronological setting for the Pastorals?).

Regardless of historicity, I think the obsession with martyrdom in Judaism goes back to the Maccabean revolt (2nd century BC) at least. The comparison of 1 Maccabees with 2 Maccabees clearly show the theological development of the motif (also apparent in Wisdom, with the elevation of the martyred righteous as "son of God", as I posted in another thread). In the NT it is ubiquous, from the eschatological/mission discourses of the synoptic Gospels to Revelation which pay the greatest homage to martyrs... However, the tradition that all apostles had to match this requirement is probably later (perhaps reflected in the embarrassment about the Beloved Disciple's old age in John 21)...

18

What does perfect mean??

by Sargon in

supposedly adam was perfect, jesus was perfect; and witnesses hope to be perfect in the new system.

but what does perfection mean.

is it a physical state or is it freedom from sin?

Narkissos

The notion of "perfection" attributed to Adam or Jesus is WT language, not Bible language. I can't see any Bible text stating that Adam or Jesus were "perfect".

The closest Bible concept is "sin". It is not mentioned at all in the Adam story (legend). It is originally a ritual notion related to ceremonial uncleanness (for instance in the case of a woman cleansing from the ritual "uncleanness" or "sin" related to childbirth, or a cured leper reinstated in normal life -- no moral flaw involved...). However the word has also acquired a metaphorical, figurative moral meaning as we know.

Occasionally, Jesus may be declared "sinless" (Hebrews 4:15). This needs not mean "moral perfection" in an absolute sense. The basic sense is the post mortem justification of a man whose death suggested he was a serious sinner (cf. Galatians 3). Interestingly, Hebrews also employs the vocabulary of "perfection" about Christ: not to say that he was perfect, but he had to be perfected as a result of his life, death and elevation (2:10; 5:9; 7:28). This is probably an allusion to the vocabulary of priestly consecration, which suits the context (another subject). Anyway, there is no idea of terrestrial Jesus as a "perfect man", different from the others in this respect. Even Paul's heavenly "Son of God" theology, which is related to the Redeemer character of Gnosticism, doesn't declare the man Jesus sinless: by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and in relation with sin, he condemned sin in the flesh (Romans 8:3): the "Son of God" identifies with a "sinful man".

Finally, when NT texts (e.g. Matthew 5:48) mention "perfection" (or "completeness") as a moral or spiritual goal, it is a goal that can and has to be achieved here and now, remarkably unrelated to any cosmic millenial restoration, or to any "ransom sacrifice"...

My point here is that WT teaching is not to be confused with Bible teachings.

12

When Was The Last Time You Prayed?

by minimus in

jw
friends

Narkissos

Sorry HS, that was not me! (I was in Louviers, Normandy, not in Boulogne...)

Some managed better in Paris. For instance there were several JW musicians playing every night in the Lido cabaret orchestra (nude revue and champagne...), without any problem with the hierarchy... ( too)

11

The phomnneail pweor of the hmuan mnid

by Pleasuredome in

aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at cmabrigde uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae.

the rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm.

tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Narkissos

LOL!

Actually it works better in the text than in the title, in which syntactical structure is less apparent... In a constructed sentence, you know what kind of word to expect at nearly every place.

102

The Trinity in the Old Testament

by hooberus in

"and god said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

" genesis 1:26 .

note the plural "our image", "our likeness" yet from other verses it is clear that man was created in gods image and likeness (singular).. "so god created man in his own image, in the image of god created he him; male and female created he them.

Narkissos

Just a really candid question: is not "sacred writer" equivalent to "Bible writer" in English Protestant (including WT) use?

55

When Was The Last Time You Prayed?

by minimus in

jw
friends

Narkissos

I don't remember when, but it still happens from time to time even though I don't believe in "God" anymore.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/63990/1.ashx

Anyway, even when I was a JW or when I later thought I was a "Christian", I prayed whenever I felt like it -- but I hated whatever made prayer a routine (such as grace before meals and so on).

It reminds me of a French Bethel story, I was not an eyewitness to it but it may be true: one day the "brother" in charge of the switchboard was unexpectedly called to offer prayer before a meal and began: "Hallo, Jehovah's Witnesses speaking..."

93

would you hit a woman if she hit you first? (for men)

by pudd in

i would like to as the men on the board a question.

if your wife/partner were to slap you during an argument, would you feel that if you were you to hit back it would make you equal?.

we all know that violance, no matter how minor is wrong, but this is a question about equality.

Narkissos

Just to lighten the subject up: remember the reply from the old barrister to his sturdy and shrewish female nurse, in Billy Wilder's "Witness for the prosecution"? -- "If you were a woman, I would slap your face."

To answer the question, I never did and wouldn't like it (I think) -- but never say never...