Posts by moggy lover

15

Do JW's flout Romans 14:1?

by yaddayadda in

romans 14:1 .

nwt welcome the [man] having weaknesses in [his] faith, but not to make decisions on inward questionings.

niv accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters.

moggy lover

It is my understanding, based on being part of this group, that the WT leadership draws a clear distinction between "[his] faith" and "THE faith" as publicly determined by them.

As far as THE faith is concerned, there is no negotiation, or debate. Once something is published in the WT, it becomes THE faith, which is encumbent on all the R&F to accept, unconditionally. As Knorr was once heard to say, "You can argue all you want, but once it comes off the presses it is TRUTH"

Naturally the WT teaching of 1914 falls into this category. If you don't accept it completely, until any change is allowed for by the leadership, you are NOT welcome in the assocation of believers.

"[His] faith" would constitute such procedural matters as, clothing, leisure activities, or matters even more banal. After suitable "adjustments" the person would, approvingly, no longer be regarded as "weak"

Cheers

6

Holy healing hankies

by glenster in

i'm sorry if this has been covered before--i'm new here.. does anyone have anything to corroborate the claim that russell used healing handkerchiefs?

(i read the page in which he basically implies that if you donate money to him you're less likely to get sick.).

i'm researching jw history for some articles i want to put on my freewebs site.

moggy lover

Interesting concept, but I rather doubt that Russell either believed in or taught such "pentecostal" beliefs. To the best of my understanding, the WTS has always been primarily an intellectual wind bag of a religion, with liberal doses of humbug and pseudo-philosophical gobbledegook thrown in.

I am not sure of Russell's position, but I know later WTS thought attributed such phenomena to witchcraft, and satanism.

Having said that, however, I know of at least one religious mentor of the 20th Century who did encourage such beliefs. HW Armstrong, founder of the famous "Plain Truth" and the Worldwide Church of God, discouraged his followers from seeking medical aid for illness, instead passing out pieces of cloth that had been "anointed" by himself.

Cheers

93

Christianity did NOT borrow from pagan "Dying-Rising" God motifs

by yaddayadda in

it is a fallacy that the early christians weaved the tale of a dying and rising god-man on the loom of mystery religions.

the idea of the dying-rising god as a parallel to the christian concept of the death and resurrection of christ was popularized by james frazer in the golden bough, first published in 1906. scholar edwin yamauchi (1974; easter: myth, hallucination, or history?

) has observed that, although frazer marshaled many parallels, the foundation was very fragile and has been discredited by a host of scholars since frazers ideas were at the height of their popularity in the 1960s.

moggy lover

As a Bible believing Christian, commited to upholding the integrity of the text of scripture, I would naturally take sides with yaddayadda on this issue.

In my opinion, Christanity, born into the world of humankind at a time and place that was a maelstrom of religious ferment and activity, had to fight all the way for its existence. Christianity first appeared as a development within Judaism, and the first controversies that the early Church had to deal with were those concerning the new faith's relationship to its parent religion, the most famous example being the circumcision debate described in Acts

As Christianity grew however, it had to come to terms with religious and intellectual movements that it met up with, often in an environment of agressive hostility, in the wider world. During those early years, the Early Church Fathers, our earliest theologians, had to evaluate these rival movements and try and establish a place for their own faith in relation to them.These early Christian Fathers were themselves for the most part, Gentile Greeks and Romans, and as they came to grips with their own faith and presented it to the world of their contemporaries, they were forced to relate it to the thought patterns of their society. Had they, for the sake of "purity" invented their own vocabulary and portrayed their religious thought in alien concepts, the religion of Christianity would have become a meaningless vacuity, and the true message, that of salvation being available to all, would be drowned in endless debate.

As the early Church Fathers grappled with several religious notions, many of which seemed to bear a superficial resemblance to their own beliefs, I believe they suceeded, not without disputation, in preserving the original message of Christianity, and its Author, in an atmosphere free from intellectual influence.

Those early years were not easy for this infant religion. Fighting off such twin problems as vicious persecution, on the one hand, and ambitious savants bent on hijacking the new faith on the other, it was a miracle that it survived at all.

Cheers

23

Is it possible that worshiping "Jehovah" is worshiping a false god?

by A-Team in

for christians only:.

i was watching a special on cnn saturday about muslims and them worshiping "allah".

i said to my self "they are worshiping a false god.

moggy lover

Hi, AT, I agree with you in that worshipping the God of the Bible today with the name "Jehovah" is in fact worshipping a false god. And I advance two reasons for saying this:

1 "Jehovah" is not simply one of several possible variations of the Tetragrammaton, but is a wrong way to pronounce it. It is what we can call a mongrelization of it. The word "Jehovah" remember does NOT represent the letters YHVH. It only represents the consonants of that word. "Jehovah" in addition to YHVH, also represents the vowels of the Hebrew word Adonay [E d O n A y] So in effect, the word "Jehovah" represents two seperate words, which forced into a semantical impossibility, constitute in effect, a mongel construction. It is because of this that Jews everywhere refuse to use such a word.

Other proper names in the OT are not so affected, because they represent the semantic equivalent of the original Hebrew. For instance, "Jeremiah" represents the exact equivalent of the Hebrew name, in both consonantal as well as vocalized structures. This is the same with all the OT names. If you want to combine the same vowels with the consonants of YHVH, you can't do better than Yahweh, now almost universally accepted, even among pious Jews To say that "Jehovah" is the English way of saying Yahweh is nonsense, since the English way of saying Yahweh, is Yahweh.

2 Having said that however, even if we grant the WTS position of "Jehovah" any probity, we are still faced with a problem today.

If we were living in OT times, in the tribal structure of ancient Israel, yes, we could concede that we would, in addition to Temple worship, sabbath keeping, circumcision, dietry regulation, tribal distinctiveness, festival commemoration, geographical uniqeness, tithe keeping, priest supporting, sacrifice conducting, need to identify the God we worshipped with that distinctive name.

But I believe we have, thanks to the progressive revelation found in the NT, been unburdened with all that "Judaism" of the OT. Judaism no longer has a hold on us. If we have been made free in Christ, the Jewish system has passed away, having been fulfilled. That, I believe is the reason that the Yahweh of the OT deliberately allowed His OT "name", like Temple worship and sacrifice conducting, to fall into disuse.

There is a new Name we have to deal with. The name for which we are clearly recognized as witnesses of. [Ac 1:8] When asked "In what name they were empowered to preach" the apostle Peter responded with the Name that we are now emboldened to use. [Ac 4:10] This new name has taken us beyond the confines of any single earth-bound location, and has encompassed heaven itself.

When He was on earth, Jesus taught us that the God of the OT He identified with was called "The Father" - evidently something the OT Jews had been negligent to stress. There simply is no evidence, textual, historical, or even theological, that Jesus conveyed any other message. Only the repetitve and dogmatic assertions of the WTS

By continuing to stress this incorrect word, jehovah, the WTS has clearly identified itself as a highly regulated, and tribal, religious system - not even remotely connected with the NT system of worship.

Cheers

6

Playing with words...

by Lumptard in

jw
friends

i was talking w/ an elder last week about whether or not jws have the only correct interpretation of the bible.

me: is there only one correct interpretation of the bible?.

elder: yes.. me: if there is only one correct interpretation, then why does each religion that is based on the bible have a slightly different interpretation that coincides with what their leaders require of the religion's members?.

moggy lover

Well, I suppose there is a sense in which I am being facetious, but there is a difference between the two words "interpretation" and "understanding"

In fact, much of the "understanding" the WTS has on a particular passage of scripture is based entirely on their "interpretation" of it. For example take these simple four words of Act 13:2:

"The Holy Spirit said"

The WTS "understanding" on those words is entirely based on their preconceived "interpretation" of the function of the Holy Spirit, which is to regard Him, like the butter you spread on your toast, as a thing. Being a thing "it" becomes incapable of saying anything, so they "understand" those words to be:

"[Evidently] using the holy spirit, Jesus said" [1st Sept WT 1987, pg 12] The fact that they are negating what the word of God says, does not seem to disturb them.

The arrogance of WT belief sees them as having the Bible's "understanding" of any given text, while we only have our own "interpretation" of it. It is this dogmatic certitude, unencumbered by any need for clarity of exposition, which ensures that the R&F are kept ensnared in WTS doctrinal institutionalism.

Cheers. Great post, by the way.

34

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 1-21-07 WT Study (Day Near)

by blondie in

will try again, getting error message.

says posted 6 hours 3 minutes ago which is not true, less than ten minutes ago.

moggy lover

Great job again. May I say on behalf of JWD that your position as WT study conductor has been renewed, indefinitely.

Which means you can't retire!! So don't even think about it.

Oh dear - expressions such as "Deep into" the last days, "How can we maintain a sense of urgency" etc were being mouthed by frog like elders [including me] from the platform when I was still a pup, and had plenty of hair.

I can remember year texts all fraught with an anticipation of imment doom going back to the year dot.

I am still waiting for a WT that actually has a Bible study in it. Like what does "Reconciliation with God mean"? or a word study on Righteousness, or a commentary verse-by-verse on the book of Romans.

The possiblity of waiting for pigs that fly seems more appropriate.

Cheers and thanks, matey.

63

Label the act for returning to JWism for family only (e.g. Gumby)

by UnConfused in

i think it's a deserving act of love to make the sacrifice to rejoin a cult in order to stay connected to your family.

it's putting your love of your family over so so many things.

what could we call it so we could easily understand someone's actions who also does this?

moggy lover

How about "Gumb-oil" as a verb: To gumb-oil.

Hence my humble "Revised Clam NT" [RCNT] of Lu 15:30, "When this son of yours gumb-oiled, you kill the fattened calf"

Cheers

28

What other ancient Greek Manuscripts contained the divine name?

by yaddayadda in

the society in appendix 1a of their 'kingdom interlinear translation of the christian greek scriptures' refers to nine other greek manuscripts as containing the divine name, and they quote from jerome as referring to certain 'greek volumes' containing the tetragrammaton.

can anyone shed any light on what these greek manuscripts and volumes are and their dates of writing?

here is what the society says in full: .

moggy lover

Hi, Yaddayadda, here are the ten mss mentioned by BRef on pgs 1563, 1564:

1: LXX P Fouad 266. Dated to the 1C BC contains 117 fragments of the book of Deuteronomy, where the DN is written in square Hebrew characters in 49 different places. This is one of two mss of the ten mentioned that were written in the BC era and may thus have been in circulation when the NT was being written

2: LXX VTS 10a, dated to the end of the 1C AD loo late for the 70s when the Nt was being written. Contains the DN in ancient Heb characters in 20 seperate locations in Jonah, Micah, Habakkuk, Zeph ann Zech

3: LXX EJ 12. Contains just one fragment of Jonah, where the DN is written in ancient Heb script. Dated to the same period as no 2

4: LXX VTS 10b, dated to the mid-first cent AD contains the DN in three places in Zech, written in ancient Heb

5: 4QLXX Levb, one of the scrolls found among the dead sea in cave 4, has been dated to the 1st C BC. The second of the two mss written in the BC era, contains the DN in Greek letters IAO. It is a fragment of Lev 3, and 4. The DN occurs in Greek, twice. Could have been in circulation when the NT was written, thus the writers would have access to Greek texts in which the DN was written differently.

6: LXX P Oxy vii 1007, dated to the end of the 5C AD or early 6C AD. Contains the Tetragram in two places: Gen 2:8, 18 and written as ZZ with a horizontal line through the centre. These fragments were discovered in Oxyrinchus, Egypt, and published in 1910

7: AQ Burkitt, dated to the 3C AD contains a fragment of the OT Translation of Aquila and published by F Crawford Burkitt in 1898. Contains the DN as written in ancient Heb

8: Aq Taylor, a fragment of the same work as no 7, but containing different portions of the OT. Published by C Taylor. It is also a later fragment than no 7, since this one is dated to the 5C AD. The DN is written in ancient Heb, but a differnt script, enabling scholars to date this differently to no 7

9: Sym P Vindob. G 39777, dated to the Third or Fourth centuries AD, this mss contains a representation of a Greek translation of the OT done by a Christian Ebionite convert to Judaism. Contains the Tetragram in archaic Heb characters. The fragments cited in BRef contain portions of Pss 91-103

10: Ambrosian O 39, dated to the 9C AD contains the DN in recognizable Heb script. Contains portions of Pss 18-36

Hope this helps

Cheers

4

Scan of Pioneer Book

by Brigido in

anyone know where i can get a scan of the pioneer book?

i've searched on here and can't seem to locate a link for it.. any help would be appreciated.. thanks,.

brigido.

moggy lover

Oops, I seem to have goofed somewhere. The link does'nt seem to be working.

The next thing is to try "Bible study and research" the same page you are on now, and scroll back to Nov 01 06 You will see the book listed there.

Cheers

4

Scan of Pioneer Book

by Brigido in

anyone know where i can get a scan of the pioneer book?

i've searched on here and can't seem to locate a link for it.. any help would be appreciated.. thanks,.

brigido.

moggy lover

Hi, Brigido, if you are thinking of the book "Shining as illuminators in the world" then try this link, first posted by Atlantis:

http://www.jehovahs-witnesses.com/10/123244/1.asx

Cheers