Posts by CalebInFloroda

26

Was this the garden of Eden/Noah's flood?

by little_Socrates in

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101208151609.htm.

jeffrey rose, an archaeologist and researcher with the university of birmingham in the u.k., says that the area in and around this "persian gulf oasis" may have been host to humans for over 100,000 years before it was swallowed up by the indian ocean around 8,000 years ago.

rose's hypothesis introduces a "new and substantial cast of characters" to the human history of the near east, and suggests that humans may have established permanent settlements in the region thousands of years before current migration models suppose.. .

CalebInFloroda

@ StrongHaiku

We are not talking stumbling across an ancient document that was hidden in the earth for thousands of years. The Hebrew Bible was not suddenly discovered by the Jews, nor did they come across this text and say: “Hey, let’s build a religion based on what is written here.” This is very different. The Hebrew Bible was composed by a living and functioning religion and its adherents by a culture that is very much still alive.

The problem lies in that some believe what they were taught either by their exposure to the Watchtower or Christianity in general and then judging the text and the Jews by the incorrect information they were taught.

For Jehovah’s Witnesses and many fundamentalist Christians, the Hebrew Scriptures are something to base a religion and doctrines upon. But the Hebrew Bible was written by a culture that already had a religion and doctrines. The Hebrew Scriptures are a reflection of already developed doctrines and religious beliefs. Christians and JWs use the Scriptures to base their religion on, claiming that it is to be used as the basis for religion. But the text was used by people who claimed their religion was revealed prior to their composition of the Scriptures. For the Jews the Scriptures are not supposed to be used to base a religion or doctrines upon. For the Jews the Hebrew Scriptures are based upon their already existing religion.

Jehovah’s Witnesses judge doctrines based on what Scripture says.
Jews interpret Scripture by what their religion says.
Jehovah’s Witnesses have a religion that claims to be based on a book.
Jews wrote a book based on their religion.

If you reject Scripture on the basis that its stories can’t be used to base a religion on, then you are rejecting Scripture based on a misuse. It was never designed to act as the foundation for a religion. It was designed to explain how Jews saw themselves in relation to the world.

Some of the stories, from the Jewish point of view, were intentionally meant to have fictional characteristics. Others are understood only in the light of the living tradition from which the stories flowed. Other parts of the text were taken from the liturgy of the Temple.

The Hebrew Scriptures are not intended to function independent of the culture or the religion that developed them any more than the religious texts of Buddhism, Hinduism or the Book of Mormon are meant to be used independently of the religions that fostered them. Would it be logical to judge a book designed to be used by and understood by Buddhist monks negatively because it wasn’t good for creating a religion that was different from and contrary to Buddhism? Of course not! Then why are we judging the Hebrew Scriptures by standards set by Gentile Christians?

The illustration of finding a piece of current fiction thousands of years from now doesn’t apply here because we are not talking about a text that started a religion. We are talking about a culture that started a book based on their already living and breathing religion. That is very different.

24

Why I believe in God. Why I don't believe in God.

by The Rebel in

jw
friends

hi i am delighted to be apart of the community.. having left the witnesses one of my first challenges was my believe in god.

naturally.. i have concluded that i am alive and conscious.

now my intuition tells me god exists, but my analytical thinking tells me god does not exist.

CalebInFloroda

a) Now we have left the Witness community, and are hop[e]fully developing critical thinking skills, how has this effected your beliefs in God?

Mentally and/or emotionally acknowledging the existence of G-d is neither logical nor efficacious. If G-d exists then it stands to reason that more of a response than mere acknowledgment that there is a G-d is called for.

An orphan doesn’t benefit much from acknowledging they have parents they have never met. The orphan can “believe” in the existence of their parents and have “faith” they are out there, but this does little to change the status of an orphan. What would actually matter is if the orphan did something about the possibility of their parents still be out there and able to be contacted. An orphan who goes out and finds their parents changes their status from being an orphan. But if upon locating where their parents can be found, the orphan desires not to meeting them but merely have faith in their existence then nothing has changed.

To disbelieve in G-d is pretty much the same thing. It means nothing to disbelieve in that which doesn’t exist. I don’t believe in the boogey man, but that is easy to say and do because there is no such thing as “the boogey man.” Saying that you don’t believe in a G-d that you also believe is fiction is like saying you don’t believe that Scarlett O’Hara was ever a real person. Scarlett O’Hara was never, ever a real person, so it does little to claim a disbelief in someone that was never ever there to believe in to begin with.

What rarely if ever gets discussed is disbelieving in a G-d one knows is there. What also gets talked about rarely is how one can disbelieve in something that doesn’t exist since it has to exist on some level in order to be rejected. And there’s also the subject of why “belief” in things or the lack of “belief” has any bearing on their existence.

That being said…

b) Do you think it wrong to dismiss intuition over analytical thinking?

I cannot see the value of my intuition as it was my “gut feelings” that got my caught up with the Jehovah’s Witnesses in the first place. I was one of those who claimed to have found a “ring of truth” in their teachings—and it does seem to have that if you don’t know any better. I was just a teenager at the time, anyway.

But I also know that you can’t go through life being analytical about everything. I can attest to the truth behind the illustration of the lover who demands proof of your love for them. When they ask “do you love me?” you won’t get far in proving to them that you do if you only offer analytical evidence. A scientific report offered to your sweetheart won’t get you that romantic evening you were hoping for in such a situation.

The whole G-d concept is like that. It isn’t about being scientific. But one cannot approach it honestly without using reason and critical thinking. It’s a holistic sort of thing.

I think Christianity and the Western world and society that came from it has convinced too many people that the G-d concept is an “either/or” scenario. You “either” believe in G-d and leave behind all reason “or” you dismiss G-d because when you accept reason and likewise dismiss everything else it means to be human, like using intuition.

Sorry, but my “either/or” days of living a life of ambiguity intolerance and compartmentalization are over. That is the JW way of doing things.

Life has to be accepted and lived and embraced on its own terms. That means you can’t let preconceived ideas interfere with your “tasting things for yourself.”

Accepting G-d does not mean rejecting analytical thinking. Just ask the Roman Catholic priest that developed and introduced the big bang theory, Georges Lemaître. Do you know how many atheists I’ve spoken to who have no idea that a theist developed this now widely embraced theory?

And rejecting G-d does not mean that one rejects spirituality or the transcendent. Many non-theists employ various approaches to life which can be described as spiritual. Some religions like Buddhism and Judaism even allow for adherents to be atheist. The idea that atheists somehow stop being as human as the rest of society or give up culture or ritual is totally absurd.

It’s all about balance.

26

Was this the garden of Eden/Noah's flood?

by little_Socrates in

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101208151609.htm.

jeffrey rose, an archaeologist and researcher with the university of birmingham in the u.k., says that the area in and around this "persian gulf oasis" may have been host to humans for over 100,000 years before it was swallowed up by the indian ocean around 8,000 years ago.

rose's hypothesis introduces a "new and substantial cast of characters" to the human history of the near east, and suggests that humans may have established permanent settlements in the region thousands of years before current migration models suppose.. .

CalebInFloroda

@Vidiot

Actaully that question was rhetorical to show that there is no logic in claiming that the Noachin flood is supposed to be read as historically accurate.

The point I was making is that "creation-flood" stories are one of two types of ancient cosmogony models that were considered integral to the legendary origin stories of almost all Mesopotamian societies. You couldn't tell a "history" story without setting it in at least one of these narrative backdrops.

The Jews chose both the model that states that life came directly from the cosmic ocean to form the earth as we experience it and the other that claimed that human and animal life had a pre-existence before a catastrophic flood that wiped away the previous world but planted the survivors of that flood as the foundation of this current one.

Being without a collegiate background, the Governing Body is quite ignorant of how ancient cosmogony played into Scripture and how this changes the meaning therein.

26

Was this the garden of Eden/Noah's flood?

by little_Socrates in

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101208151609.htm.

jeffrey rose, an archaeologist and researcher with the university of birmingham in the u.k., says that the area in and around this "persian gulf oasis" may have been host to humans for over 100,000 years before it was swallowed up by the indian ocean around 8,000 years ago.

rose's hypothesis introduces a "new and substantial cast of characters" to the human history of the near east, and suggests that humans may have established permanent settlements in the region thousands of years before current migration models suppose.. .

CalebInFloroda

@Half Banana

Pretty much thumbs up with much you have to say.

I do want to point out to those who read my comments that I am using a different meaning to the word "mythology" than commonly used in the vernacular. Most people use it to refer to a false story but in philology it refers to a creation-origins story.

Longfellow's famous poem, "Paul Revere's Ride" (a.k.a. The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere) is also this type of "mythology," as it tells of the origins of freedom in the American Revolution. In this sense the stories of Genesis chapter 1-11 are "mythology" in the sense that, despite the settings to most of them, they are stories with a purpose to serve as the Torah's own backdrop, preparing the reader for the stories of Abraham and those that follow. They have genuine Jewish roots that are based on traditions handed down by generations through Hebrew society despite employing techniques not original or exclusive to Semiites.

The traditions that formed the basis of these type of written accounts have some basis in either a historical reality of some sort of historical-cultural need, and theoretically they could in some instances have a basis in real occurrences like those surrounding Paul Revere. But, especially in reference to the Hebrew Bible the stories have been transformed into tales explaining the origins of life and the universe from the standpoint of Jewish religion. However well set in genuine history or not, the stories have been transformed into the present mythology genre and must be approached as such, not the stories which inspired them.

While this is not mean to counter the stand of those who believe that nothing in the Hebrew Tanakh could possibly be true, it is meant to explain that such an argument is irrelevant as the stories, false or true in origin, have been transformed into mythology for a purpose transcending the transmission of history itself. "Mythology" in this sense is a reflection on reality, explaining it in various ways such as poetry and song, in ways that only the genre itself can transmit ideals and cherished views of a culture.

33

Why did Jesus have to die?

by Crazyguy in

let's think about this for a bit.

adam was tempted and sinned by eating of the fruit.

he missed out on immortality by being denied the tree of life.

CalebInFloroda

The idea of a personal Messiah that comes to redeem humanity NEVER occurs in the Hebrew Scriptures in that you never, ever read things like "the Messiah will do such and such" or "the Messiah is expected to fulfill this or that prophecy." There IS however talk of a future age in which peace and prosperity come to all, but the words "Messianic age" or mention of people being "ruled by the Messiah" don't appear.

It was the Christians who began interpreting the Hebrew Scriptures this way as they began to claim that such and such verse applied to Jesus of Nazareth. Their claim is that Jesus was a figure foretold in the Hebrew Tanakh but in ways hidden from the Jews, ways that can only be unlocked by joining the "one true religion" governed by a body of elders who lived in Jerusalem but condemned the unbelieving Jewish world around them. When Jesus unexpectedly died the death of a criminal excommunicated from Judaism, his followers merely applied texts from the Hebrew Bible to support the events (again "hidden" in the Scriptures and requiring the special insight of those anointed ones in Jerusalem to comprehend). Jesus didn't have to die anymore than the Messiah was expected to. It just happened he was killed as a criminal, and those who believed in him wouldn't let go of their beliefs. They would next force the Hebrew Bible to serve their needs.

The term "messiah" in Hebrew means one who has been appointed to an office of oversight, like a priest or an official, employing the ritual of anointing the subject with oil before witnesses as a "swearing in" type of ceremony. It does not refer to a redeemer or someone who saves anymore than someone who is called "sworn in" means they will save others.

You will also note that Christians have to rely on their own translations of the Hebrew texts to ensure that their prophecies about Jesus fit their Messiah. A simple comparison of these "proof texts" about Jesus in something like the NJPS Tanakh will show that like the JWs, most Christians cannot make their religion work unless they rely on a translation that takes many liberties with the actual text.

26

Was this the garden of Eden/Noah's flood?

by little_Socrates in

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101208151609.htm.

jeffrey rose, an archaeologist and researcher with the university of birmingham in the u.k., says that the area in and around this "persian gulf oasis" may have been host to humans for over 100,000 years before it was swallowed up by the indian ocean around 8,000 years ago.

rose's hypothesis introduces a "new and substantial cast of characters" to the human history of the near east, and suggests that humans may have established permanent settlements in the region thousands of years before current migration models suppose.. .

CalebInFloroda

Part of the reason for the similarities in stories and the "pattern" people are seeing in discoveries like these has to do with the ancient Mesopatonian cosmogony.

The cosmogony was the accepted "scientific" model of the time, so to speak. The ancients of the area believed that life and the earth came to exist by means of the cosmic oceans of which the universe consisted. In the minds of the ancients there was no void or vacuum of space. All there was existed in a cosmic soup of waters.

Deities were an accepted "reality" in this cosmic model. Where the heathens generally ascribed humans as an afterthought or closer to an accidental side effect due to creative projects or regular functions of the gods, the Hebrews believed humans were a direct creation. The center of the world was generally believed to be in the vicinity of the four major rivers known to these people, especially the Euphrates. While other models existed, this was the one shared by the inhabitants of the Mesopatmian cultures.

Instead of defying the "scientific" model of the day, the Jews merely inserted their mythology into it. This is why one reads in Genesis 1.6 that the waters had to be divided from waters to create the world and 2 Peter 3.5 states "earth was formed out of water and by means of water." All the elements known by these ancients that made up the universe were believed to have originated in this cosmic soup of waters.

There were two cosmogony myths, one in which the gods directly created the universe from the waters and another in which a previous existing humanity and world of animal life was birthed from the destruction of what previously existed by means of water and introduced into a new one created through the waters. The Hebrew texts kept both stories, interpolating their mythology and legends and history into it (not doing so would have made the Hebrew stories laughable had they rejected the common "science" of the day).

This represents only the Mesopotamian cosmogony however, and not necessarily that of other ancients who existed concurrently. The idea that life began in the "nearby" vicinity is to be expected of any ancient society whether on the western or eastern side of the planet. Too often people read the Mesopotamian cosmogonies as universal, when reality they are just the best known in Western society. Coincidences are usually seen only because people are often comparing Mesopotamian mythologies with other Mesopotamian mythologies instead of these with lesser known ancient cultures.

The Jewish pattern of mythology is not unique in that it used the shared Mesopatamian cosmogony as a backdrop for its stories. People often try to validate the details of the cosmogony when in reality the "truths" lie not in the backdrop but in the character interactions with G-d that take place over this backdrop. This is why it is somewhat silly to prove a global flood or make a search for a Garden of Eden, as these are not the original elements of the stories. The characters and dialogue are the central facets of the narratives from chapters 1 to 11, but they are merely set on this stage. Trying to prove that the "sets" and "backdrop" are true is like claiming sets on a Broadway stage are reality as well. The Jews merely used the "same stage" every other group around them used to tell their origin legends.

That is why I dismiss so much of this "science" that tries to prove the flood and those other ancient details of Genesis. It comes from reading these texts in a vacuum, ignoring their Jewish construct and seeking to support some literalist's need to validate their own fundamentalism, never bothering to check if their interpretations makes a mockery of the holy texts and the religion that gave birth to them.

26

Was this the garden of Eden/Noah's flood?

by little_Socrates in

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101208151609.htm.

jeffrey rose, an archaeologist and researcher with the university of birmingham in the u.k., says that the area in and around this "persian gulf oasis" may have been host to humans for over 100,000 years before it was swallowed up by the indian ocean around 8,000 years ago.

rose's hypothesis introduces a "new and substantial cast of characters" to the human history of the near east, and suggests that humans may have established permanent settlements in the region thousands of years before current migration models suppose.. .

CalebInFloroda

Great point, freemindfade.

Things to ask about these accounts in Genesis are not whether they were historical but why were they composed at all.

1. Since Judaism never developed an "original sin" doctrine, what is the reason behind the Garden of Eden narrative's preservation by the Jews?

2. Why preserve a flood story shared by heathens who worshipped idols and pass it down as part of the lineage narrative that leads to Abraham?

3. When were these narratives composed and is there evidence of redaction in their transmission? What does such redaction suggest?

4. Why would the most ancient story of creation, the one that contains the story about Adam and Eve, be given second place to a much later tradition that now occupies chapter 1 in Genesis?

These are more important things to consider than whether or not these stories represent factual history because they get to the reason for the narratives, their meanings, and whether or not they were meant to be considered as fact in the first place.,

26

Was this the garden of Eden/Noah's flood?

by little_Socrates in

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101208151609.htm.

jeffrey rose, an archaeologist and researcher with the university of birmingham in the u.k., says that the area in and around this "persian gulf oasis" may have been host to humans for over 100,000 years before it was swallowed up by the indian ocean around 8,000 years ago.

rose's hypothesis introduces a "new and substantial cast of characters" to the human history of the near east, and suggests that humans may have established permanent settlements in the region thousands of years before current migration models suppose.. .

CalebInFloroda

While I am not saying that such narratives are free of some historical basis, I am warning against the trend where people attempt to make connections between science, history, and archeology that in the end make Scripture look bad.

While I acknowledge that the Noachin flood might have origins in both surrounding cultural and historical reports, there isn't enough data to draw any complete lines that tie all things together in nice little packages.

Granted you may not be doing these things with this type of information, but too many people do. A critical approach attempts to look at the text and accept it on its own merits, and that may be one that is meant to be legendary or at least given a legendary setting. Others often look at such data and see proof for the settings of a story that may have never intended to be accepted as set in fact.

Truths often get passed along via artistic mediums, not factual reports. Looking at the Genesis settings and trying to make them fit historical facts can cause wrong conclusions.

It's like trying to prove that Eva Durate de Peron sang a song about Argentina, finding out she did hum something on the night of her husband's election, and using this to say there is a basis for believing that the events on the balcony as portrayed in the musical "Evita" happened as Rice and Lloyd Webber constructed them. The story behind "Evita" is true, but the settings and scenes and the fact that they sing through the entire libretto are not.

Trying to prove the story of the flood is real by data suggesting floods is like trying to prove Evita sang every word that came out of her mouth until she died. You can debate this for years, and in the end you will miss the true details about an enigmatic woman because you were focusing your attention on the wrong things.

26

Was this the garden of Eden/Noah's flood?

by little_Socrates in

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101208151609.htm.

jeffrey rose, an archaeologist and researcher with the university of birmingham in the u.k., says that the area in and around this "persian gulf oasis" may have been host to humans for over 100,000 years before it was swallowed up by the indian ocean around 8,000 years ago.

rose's hypothesis introduces a "new and substantial cast of characters" to the human history of the near east, and suggests that humans may have established permanent settlements in the region thousands of years before current migration models suppose.. .

CalebInFloroda

The narratives of Bereshit in the Torah, what most Christians refer to as Genesis, are not meant to be taken as historically accurate.

They are culturally shaped narratives that carry lessons in morality, religious reflections on history, and a cherished mythos of the Jewish people deigned to set the stage or background for the Mosaic Law. While some of the individuals mentioned may have a historical basis of sorts depending on how you look at things, the main objective behind these writings was not to reduce them to "proof texts" as Jehovah's Witnesses do. They are our legends and mythology, our origins expressed in ancient ways that we Jews pass on as we find our place in the world and struggle to survive down through the ages.

A literal Garden of Eden? An actual Ark for a real worldwide flood? These claims are very painful to listen to again and again. I find it quite insulting that non-Jews take it upon themselves to misrepresent the reasons for these texts and their place in our society. Twisting them to fit some preconceived idea that they must be literally true on some level is demeaning and intellectually dishonest. It also blinds people to the underlying moral lessons that get obscured when people claim that the details are more important than the interpretation of them from the people whose texts they are.

My personal opinion is that if you can't speak the language they were originally composed in, then you are not in a position to tell others what these texts are or are not really about.

13

The Jehovah's Witnesses, the Royal Commission and the Catholic Church

by OrphanCrow in

a catholic forum has a discussion thread: "jehovah witness now appear with the royal commission".. i have made the comment before that dr. applewhite's appearance in support of the jws is not surprising if you consider that the royal commissions' findings will impact the structure of the cathoilc church as well.

the catholic church has a vested interest in the jws' hearing - if the jws are forced to change their organizational structure, so will the catholics.. the following post is an excellent discussion on the similarities and differences between the catholic church and the jws structure.

http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?id=174461.

CalebInFloroda

I was working as a translator off and on for the Catholic Church during the years of 2004 to 2006. Had I any idea what I was walking into at the time, I would have gone elsewhere. But it was the last part of my educational requirements, and was only technical work that happened apart from anyone else. When I was done, I was done, but it did afford me a bit of a glimpse into what was going on on the inside.

It was during this time that the John Jay Report came out in the summer of 2004 that first spelled out the actual numbers for the Catholic Church to ponder over. As an employee at the time we were given this report to read and study, as well as had access to the CARA reports that would follow. We were also made to take part in the USCCB's new child abuse prevention and reporting seminars, finger printed, and made to pay almost $100 from our salary for a police background check. If you worked in any capacity for the Church, then this is what you had to go through, even if you never worked around children, whether Catholic or not and, like me, were there for a short period time on a temporary ad hoc basis, regardless of the capacity.

The numbers of the John Jay Report and subsequent CARA/USCCB reports were quite different from the talk I had previously heard from all sides. Catholics admitted to about "1% of priests" being involved whereas others outside that religion would make it seem that almost all the priests were peodophiles. The reports revealed about 4% of priests were involved, with reports going back from 1950 through 2000. The biggest numbers of reports stemmed between late the late 1960s and the early 1980s. Most of the priests involved were either retired or dead, but the majority of living ones at the time were still bein allowed to serve and were free...something that changed quickly in the States after that report came out.

The most disturbing part of the report was the numbers of criminal acts one priest could be guilty of, namely hundreds or even upwards of 1000 or more acts, according to the studies. Except for about little less than a quarter of these events, the guilty priests were just secretly moved from one parish or diocese to another. The others were reported to police, but again this was less that a quarter of all alleged reports of sexual abuse.

From what I understand by the time I finished my last project, the Church was making progress with dealing with victims as victims and pedophiles as criminals but not without problems. CARA and other reports showed that there were still a handful of parishes in the United States that were uncooperative, that refused to give full details of what occurred in the past, and outright rejected direction from the USCCB requiring the implementation of new safeguards and programs. I took a peek recently to see if these had finally changed their direction and, according to a 2014 report from both CARA and the USCCB they have apparently not.

If the reports are accurate there are now less than 1% of priests currently being accused of sexual crimes today, new ones since 2000. While the reporting to authorities should be close to 100%, as the 2014 reports demonstrate it still is not, at least in the United States. Sadly there are still thousands of victims who have yet to see full justice across the globe in these matters, the U.S. included despite its recent efforts at change. A parish or diocese will file for bankruptcy when it seems it can or at least should try to honor judgments made on behalf of victims. The process of justice, where it exists, occurs but slowly, and some countries are not as cooperative with the authorities about what has been happening and look nothing like the USCCB model.

What has this to do with the JWs and most recent revelations in Australia? If anyone recalls, at the time of the John Jay report a play opened that won the Pulitzer Prize, entitled "Doubt." It was later made into a movie starring Meryl Streep in the lead role. While set in the past, about when the time when the abuse scandals were just beginning, the story appears to be an accurate description of the still untold struggles of laypersons and nuns who fought this criminal activity head-on for decades. What most don't realize is that many in the Church tried to set things right from the very beginning, but the clergy would not have it. The fighting voices however would not sleep and refused to be silent. Parents, teachers, victims, and yes some clergy and nuns kept the struggle up until they became the majority, until they got noticed, and finally until the public at large finally added their voice.

It's more than 50 years since when it started, much too long if you ask me, but for the first time since it can be said that the Church itself, along with secular authorities, are making strides in the right direction. The fact that the Holy See is holding tribunals at the Vatican itself under the direction of a pope who is believed to have been chosen due to the voice of such people who wouldn't be silent, well that says something. That tells you that our voices and actions can make a difference.

No love here for the Catholic Church, but I hope what I've written makes a point and demonstrates the importance and the power of not remaining silent. We can all by what we are doing change things in the Watchtower and force the GB's hand. It may take a while, but it will happen.

I hope the further activity of the secular authorities regarding the RCC help to set matters right as much as I hope that what Pope Francis says he is doing and plans to do is not a farce. I am not going to hold my breath of course, but my hope is for the victims and justice.

If you've never seen "Doubt," watch it. Though fictionalized, it is based on real events, stories that played out again and again, one that portrays real unsung heroes out there (some which may be you), a difficult one to watch but that shows we can't stop talking about it, can't stop posting it across social media, can't stop the fight. We are all making a difference.