Posts by

8

I just heard

by _Atlas in

i just heard.

bros from new orleans were down on baton rouge for the convention.

others were in texas over the weekend for their convetion too.

_Atlas

Right now someone is on the typewriter...

Maybe they'll go out with a bang on that last bi-monthly Awake!!!

8

I just heard

by _Atlas in

i just heard.

bros from new orleans were down on baton rouge for the convention.

others were in texas over the weekend for their convetion too.

_Atlas

I just heard…

Bro’s from New Orleans were down on Baton Rouge for the convention…

Others were in Texas over the weekend for their convetion too…

SO GUESS WHAT?

AUTHORITIES DID NOT ALLOW THEM TO COME BACK TO THEIR HOUSES BECAUSE OF THE STORM APROACHING!!!

They were spared just as we talked about here on this post by Skyman:

www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/96967/1.ashx

Any thoughts?

3

I Swear, The Ancient Way

by _Atlas in

a little internet search revealed people acknowledging the fact that this was an ancient indo-european custom but shuffling about the latter meanings in latin of the word testis, testify, testicles.

does the bible implies this was the case in these passages?

was this a custom on the ancient times?.

_Atlas

Genesis 24:2-9 & 47:29 Abraham and Israel respectively asked a servant and Joseph to swear by ‘placing the hand under the tight’.

It is being suggested that this means placing the hand on the testicles, since it is thought that this was an Hebrew euphemism for the latter…

A little internet search revealed people acknowledging the fact that this was an ancient Indo-European custom but shuffling about the latter meanings in Latin of the word Testis, testify, testicles…

Does the bible implies this was the case in these passages? Was this a custom on the ancient times?

Here are some interesting info gathered from around:

Speaking of Protestants, both protest and detest are from the Latin testare, to bear witness, i.e., to testify. Protest is to "speak forward" in public, while detest is to "speak out downward", that is, to curse or condemn. It is somewhat surprising to learn that testicle is another member of the family. A testicle is a "little witness", presumably a proof of virility whereby a person proved he was not (God forbid) a female or eunuch. (Medieval Canon Law had to be changed to establish that the rule saying "All priests must possess two testicles" did not

mean the priest could keep the articles in question in his pocket.) Other "bear witness" words are attest, testament, and contest. The last originated as a legal term, basically the same thing as a trial. It's "bear witness together", which is what happens from the judge's point of view when both sides finally get assembled in one place. Incidentally, the division of the Christian Bible into Old Testament and New Testament is due to a mis-translation. The Greek word diatheke meant both "will" and "covenant", and the Latin translators picked the wrong meaning when they substituted Latin testimentum instead of some form of convenire (come together, or agree) to describe the old and new agreements between Man and God. As a side note, for a couple thousand years, a man swearing an oath (testifying) placed his hand on his genitals instead of a Bible. Presumably the gesture meant, "May I be less than a man if I fail to tell the truth." In those days, of course, women couldn't testify in court for two reasons. (The English Bible delicately says that so-and-so "placed his hand upon his thigh" when testifying.)

_________________________________________________________________________

I wonder whether the significance of this act (touching the inner thigh in connection with the giving of an oath or a blessing) is related to a similar ancient Indo-European practice, with which the Hurrians of Haran may well have been familiar, used in connection with giving of an oath or testimony. In fact, the Indo-European root word for testify is the same as for testicle. The connection is not easy to make without knowledge of the practice. Observers of the interactions of chimpanzees have observed them making the same gesture, as an act that confirms social status and trust. As in the story of Abraham, it is the personage of lesser authority —the one doing the "testifying" or swearing— that is allowed to place his hand in such a sensitive place, and the fact that it is permitted is a sign that the oath or obeisance is accepted by the superior party.

__________________________________________________________________________

The Hebrew word in some passages is 'yarek,' meaning 'thigh' in the Old
Testament. That ritual might derive from the belief that the thigh is a
center of power, probably because it's near the genitals. Some interpreters
argue that it is a swearing upon the genitals, with "under the thigh" being
a euphemism in Hebrew.

Dr. Lee Stone, in his book "The Power of a Symbol," said that the "most
ancient way of administering the oath was by placing the hand between the
thighs, on the genitals. These were regarded as the Christian and the Jew
regard the Bible, as being the most sacred of tangible things" (10, pg. 45).

Dr. P. C. Remondino, in his book "History of Circumcision from the
Earliest Times to the Present" said that "It was partly this custom of
swearing, or of affirming, with the hand under the thigh, by the early
Israelites," which led many to believe that their hand was being placed on
the testicles (11, pg. 35).

It is likely that the passages above inspired the popular claim that
'testify' derived from 'testicle," but the claim is disputed with
alternative derivations and interpretations. A popular claim also alleges
that Greeks and Romans would touch their own testicles while swearing,
however there is no evidence in support. The "testicle" theory argues that
the testicles were used for oaths because they represented virility, power,
and represented the man's future generations, and the source of life.

The new theory asks whether the "inner thigh" posture (the "yarek oath"
or "yarek prayer") acknowledged the man's circumcision. In Judaism the
circumcision is the male's covenant with God and is also called the
"Covenant of Abraham," because it began with the Patriarch Abraham. Two
references to the "inner thigh" oath (above) refer to Abraham, whose
circumcision would have been new and revered. Abraham would have
circumcised his slaves, who later performed "inner thigh" oaths to Abraham.

31

Mr. P.O will it blow or not?

by skyman in

how fanatic was your po i bet not as fanatic as mine.

one night there was a fire in a petrolium storage facility one block from the kingdom hall the police had baricades up and vacated the area around the hall.

the po called and told all us that jehovah would not let the place blow up while meeting was going on so meeting was still going to be held and he asked all of us brothers to call and inform the congregation that jehovah will protect us and to tell the congregation about an article of a hurricane that destroyed a town but jumped over the kingdom hall.

_Atlas

Great post Skyman….

I think the country was Argentina… and Bros trapped in the hall were kind of used as an example that the high ground was safer… Totally inconsistent with JW tradition as your PO’s attitude will attest…

I got reminded of the issue last year when the Tsunami stuck the Indian Ocean… I heard some say that Brothers who were in the Hall that Sunday morning were spared because halls were on high ground (not to mention that a hall on the beach should provide quite a view of some good hard bodies when driving in to Sunday meetings…) In fact I heard that the desk at Bethel was spreading the good news that Bros who went to the meetings were spared.

I had a flash back at a situation on my part of the world a while ago.

I will only say that some dates are not the best time to roam the streets over here… The meeting was scheduled for that particular day an our PO (being the usual zealot) decided to have the meeting. Sure Big J will protect you!!!

When I was deciding if I would go on that day to the Hall, I had a little argument with my spouse… I happily went down a list of mis-happenings to Brothers on their way to and from the Hall on previous years and off course the Argentina stuff…

We skipped this meeting.

Luckily no incidents took place that day, but I get goosebumps thinking about what could have happened to entire families … can’t think of how I could one day make a call like that… That basically took care of my ambitions to seek ‘higher privileges’…

I felt the most intelligent being in my hall on the next meeting since everyone else showed up…

6

The Business Man Parable

by _Atlas in

when the time is near to complete the deal he, instead of making the trip personally, sends his son to refine it for him.

vicepresident jones jr. flies to asia and meets for a while with representatives from the foreign company.

when he is done he returns to headquarters and leaves plenty of instructions.

_Atlas

Carmel:

That Christianity in the most part has taken the literalist approach to understanding the scriptures is lamentable, but then that is the history of all the world's religions. When metaphorical and symbolic images are interpreted literally, all kinds of contradictions creep in and soon sects and divisions result from the conflict. Christianity, above all the worlds religions, has become fractured and disunified, mostly over scriptural hairsplitting.

Exactly Carmel. I used this example on several JWs and it brought the conversation to an end (I interpret that as a positive sign). JWs forget that most people do not learn the biblical languages and can only pick between interpretations of different schools of thought. Most will stick with their fathers? religion. Dooming these people on this an several other issues is like claiming that God only gives pass and fail grades and brush aside accounts like that of David and others where good intentions outweigh bad actions?

Blues:

in fact would a reasonable and just father figure or God judge anybody as wicked simply because they trusted the religion of their community? even if it was 'wrong' in some points of doctrine... It certainly is not an act of wickedness to follow a mistaken belief , especially if that belief is still broadly in favour of God and teaches good habits to one's fellow man.
The whole idea of "False Religion" is an invention of narrow minded fudamentalists who just have to prove themselves

more righteous than another person

On this issue I like the approach of some Christians that teach that all others are good but they just follow what they think is best. On these and other issues they show a maturity that the JWs lack. Perhaps since their churches are more ?developed? they turn away from this stance. Like the emphasis on themselves; It seems pretty obvious that they are failing to prove it to the rest of the world now-a-days?

Perhaps this parable plants the seed in some lurkers? minds and show them that the characteristics they attribute God with, conflict with many of their teachings.

6

The Business Man Parable

by _Atlas in

when the time is near to complete the deal he, instead of making the trip personally, sends his son to refine it for him.

vicepresident jones jr. flies to asia and meets for a while with representatives from the foreign company.

when he is done he returns to headquarters and leaves plenty of instructions.

_Atlas

That’s precisely my point.

Given the relation between God and his son, should this be such an issue to cause division? Would God be loving and forgiving if he would judge people for trusting their religions on this?

IMHO the picture Christianity paints of God is in direct contraposition of the good qualities they attributes to him...

Why should Christians differ from this point of view?

BTW the second post was a mistake… sorry about that.

6

The Business Man Parable

by _Atlas in

when the time is near to complete the deal he, instead of making the trip personally, sends his son to refine it for him.

vicepresident jones jr. flies to asia and meets for a while with representatives from the foreign company.

when he is done he returns to headquarters and leaves plenty of instructions.

_Atlas

Why it didn't show on the list?

6

The Business Man Parable

by _Atlas in

when the time is near to complete the deal he, instead of making the trip personally, sends his son to refine it for him.

vicepresident jones jr. flies to asia and meets for a while with representatives from the foreign company.

when he is done he returns to headquarters and leaves plenty of instructions.

_Atlas

Mr. Jones is the CEO of this Mega company who is interested in dealing with a small company on the far east. When the time is near to complete the deal he, instead of making the trip personally, sends his son to refine it for him. Vicepresident Jones Jr. flies to Asia and meets for a while with representatives from the foreign company. When he is done he returns to headquarters and leaves plenty of instructions. The staff from the far east company, after a couple of weeks, start finishing up the paper work for the deal when they start wondering who they met. Was that CEO Jones Sr.? Although in some places in the meeting minutes he tells otherwise on other circumstances it seems to the foreign language Asian staff that he was CEO Jones Sr. instead. Everyone has their own personal interpretation. So eventually they decide on the latter and prepare to sign the deal. When the time comes to do so the real CEO, Mr. Jones Sr. flies to Asia. Surprised the members of the small company ask him for Mr Jones Jr. thinking he was the CEO. Mr. Jones Sr. explains that Jr. was here to fine-tune the negotiations and he was not the CEO but only a VP though he had his approval to do so?

Would Mr Jones Sr. be a good business man, a good father and an fair person if he decides to scratch the whole deal for confusing him with Jr., his emissary, right hand, vicepresident and only loved son?

Would God do the same?

7

Lodging: The Gazite Way

by _Atlas in

recently i had a conversation about samson and the bible passage where he "comes into" (nwt) a prostitute.

a jw came back with info on the topic such as:.

on ?insight the scriptures?

_Atlas

Peacefulpete:

Thanks for the references. I?m fairly new at all this and it is obvious that I got a lot of research to do on sources. Thanks for the lead I?ll make sure I?ll pursuit it.

Leolaia:

I see your legend is well deserved. Thanks for the references? I sure got a long way to go. (I really resent you bringing up that guy Perseus in the conversation. I got some unfinished business with him. He will meet the new Atlas someday LOL) Can you (or Peacefulpete) PM or post here a brief summary that leads me to other borrowed stories that permeated into the Bible? It will sure help me in the long run.?

Everyone:

How about the WT?s efforts to pave a road over the obvious reference to Samson ?going into? a prostitute? Is there any other evidence that lead them to this conclusion?

Atlas

7

Lodging: The Gazite Way

by _Atlas in

recently i had a conversation about samson and the bible passage where he "comes into" (nwt) a prostitute.

a jw came back with info on the topic such as:.

on ?insight the scriptures?

_Atlas

Recently I had a conversation about Samson and the bible passage where he "comes into" (NWT) a prostitute.

A JW came back with info on the topic such as:

On ?Insight the scriptures? under Hospitality:

The WT implies that prostitutes diversified their business by using their homes as guesthouses and sex was only optional.

Under Samson:

It is argued that since Samson continued delivering amazing acts he was therefore cleared of misconduct and this means he did not engage in immoral acts with the prostitute. Out comes the translator that also believes so. This man argues that Samson knew he would find lodging from that kind of woman. (P. Schaff, 1976) Also it is pointed that the account does not says that he woke up with her at midnight it only says he woke up. Ergo he slept alone!!!

Somewhere else that wasn?t specified:

They say (I do not own a WT CD so if any researcher may please quote them on all this) that since the Gazites may felt sure they will caught him in the morning since he was indulging himself in carnal sin, and somehow decided to wait ?til then, then this was kind of a war strategy to allow time to escape and fool Samson's enemies. Do the old world ?Geneva Convention? allows a minimum waiting time after sex for enemies?

I can almost hear them saying: "Are you guys stupid or what? Did you ever thought Samson would commit such a sin? Do you now see why you guys need us to interpret every single thing on the Bible? Forget about reading the Bible, you can?t just get it right?"

_Atlas

Posts by _Atlas