Posts by CalebInFloroda

5

How to suck at your religion

by stuckinarut2 in

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/religion

CalebInFloroda

Of course, in all honesty, one has to ask also...

Do my convictions, religious or non-religious, cause me to do any of these same things?

Do I mock people of other convictions? If religious, what does this say about my religion? If atheist, what does this say about me as a person?

Do I validate my convictions by trying to convince others they are wrong? That mine are right? Do I give the impression that those who do not share my conclusions, my convictions, my views are illogical, lacking intelligence? One can be a Jew, a Christian, an Atheist, etc., and be guilty of these things too.

Do I praise critical thinking while at the same time not employing the scientific methods to my own views, convictions, beliefs? Have I learned everything possible about what I know believe or accept? Did I ensure my conclusions were not made out of emotion? Were they tested, tried, and validated by outside, disinterested parties before I embraced them?

Do I really understand the non-religious or religious views of the people around me? Or have I really stopped learning or am speaking before learning enough, always ready to criticize, tear down, spout what I believe is wisdom, religious or secular, when in reality I couldn't pass a college entry level test about the subject I am speaking of?

21

Silly Bible things you notice when your awake.

by Crazyguy in

i sure you guys can list others but here is a thought about the exodus story.

in chapter 1 the pharoah is concerned that the israelites are becoming to numerous.

and just as a side point we can assume pharaohs were not to dumb and even if they were the smart people of egypt studied in the temple 40 years and they studied all things not just religion.

CalebInFloroda

Thanks, stuckinarut2.

I'm not endorsing a universal acceptance of Scritpture as truth either here. What I am saying is that the Watchtower and their Governing Body is so hideous in their theology, that it stays with you in ways that can linger like a bad smell, even in ways you never realize.

Complaining about the Bible's non-historical narrative devices being "silly" is like arguing over the powers super hereos have in comic books. Who told you guys that this stuff was supposed to be anything but "silly"? Should we complain too that Aesop's fables contain a lot of talimg animals too? Guess what, they are of the same genre! Animals often talk in stories with morals.

The Watchtower is to blame, though, not anyone here. It obviously gets stuck with too many people that the Biblical narratives are supposed to be some type of written documentary when in fact that are little different from the parables Jesus used when teaching. If they were supposed to be history, I can understand this game. But the fact that this "game" is caused by lingering poison many of us still don't realize is still with us from the evil shadows of the Watchtower is even more disturbing.

21

A problem with the book of Daniel

by wozza in

left the wts some years ago, but just before i left we were studying the daniel book that they produced in the book study .. i noticed something wrong in the bible account of daniel and brought this up at the end of the study when the conductor asked if everyone understood that nights study,.

i think i may have started a topic here some years ago about this event ,it was a time when i started to question the wts in my heart and mind.the scriptures are lengthy so i will just shorten things by describing the stories in daniel and how one point really got me thinking about things and perhaps made the brothers wierd out about me sand distance themselves ,here it is..........dan ch 1-4. daniels ( who came to be called belteshazzar)in babylon along with shadrach,meshach & abednego ,daniel,after praying with these 3, interprets and states what nebuchadnezzars dream is( we all know this ,the image with the head of gold body of iron and copper etc) and they are rewarded by being positions of authority.

daniel made ruler of the province and chief prefect over babylons wise men ,the 3 were made overseers of the administation of the province ,all very important jobs ,.

CalebInFloroda

Murky is truly the word for it. And as I pointed out, Obadiah's one-verse reference is the only Scriptural evidence outside Jewish tradition that this happened after the First Temple fell.

My questions are why so far, even if Nebuchadnezzar had control of the area? 2 Kings 25.27-30 does mention that Jehoiachin was given "a throne higher than that of the other kings who were with him in Babylon," so there is some Scriptural reference to the Davidic dynasty being raised up and treated in a special way during the exile. But was this throne in Sepharad?

Whatever happened, it is equally curious that after the fall of the Second Temple, the Judeans and remnant of the House of David chose Sepharad to relocate. Why go so far away? Obviously they had a connection that did indeed predate the Roman invasion otherwise choosing such a long trek that took generations is equally hard to fathom.

So many questions, so little answers.

21

Silly Bible things you notice when your awake.

by Crazyguy in

i sure you guys can list others but here is a thought about the exodus story.

in chapter 1 the pharoah is concerned that the israelites are becoming to numerous.

and just as a side point we can assume pharaohs were not to dumb and even if they were the smart people of egypt studied in the temple 40 years and they studied all things not just religion.

CalebInFloroda

They are silly if you are holding on to the belief of Jehovah's Witnesses that these texts are historical and should be the basis for religious belief.

If, like Jews, you recognize these are parables, fables, legends, etc. that teach ancient mores, then you don't expect the devices to be literal.

And, by the way, Lot and his daughters are not supposed to be admired like the Watchtower teaches. The Jews despised their descendants, and the incestuous relationship between Lot and his daughters was told that way in Genesis partly to ridicule the origin of Israel's neighbors who were seen as the children of Lot.

In Jewish Scripture Lot is an idiot who kept going back, even after being saved once by his uncle, to a city that is violent toward outsiders. But thinking the opposite is what happens when you don't let go of JW theology.

21

Silly Bible things you notice when your awake.

by Crazyguy in

i sure you guys can list others but here is a thought about the exodus story.

in chapter 1 the pharoah is concerned that the israelites are becoming to numerous.

and just as a side point we can assume pharaohs were not to dumb and even if they were the smart people of egypt studied in the temple 40 years and they studied all things not just religion.

CalebInFloroda

It isn't too silly when one remember that there is no real division between Bereshit and Sh'mot in the Torah. It is continuing a saga.

Also it isn't immediate history either but opera. While based on the historical traditions, Exodus is narrative of the type found in a Haggadah, and in fact most are still to this day directly based on the pattern found within even though it is generally recognized in Judaism that the actual history is different.

The unnamed Pharoah is part of the drama started earlier, acting as the first of a series of adversaries to the fulfillment of the promises made to Abraham, Issac, and Jacob. (Gn 12.2; 13.16; 15:5; 28:14, etc.) It isn't the complete story, either, as it is merely the written tradition arranged from many different traditions of what had be told in Haggadah fashion to direct the Seder along. Passover Seders predate the finished Exodus work, and this of course implies the traditions do as well.

What is missing from the Torah is the tradition that a Redeemer was destined to free the Israelites from bondage and replace the Pharoah as the leader of the inhabitants of Goshen. For this reason the Pharoah is disturbed about losing a large number of his subjects to this unheard of, yet-to-born Redeemer of the Israelites. Thus only the boys are instructed to be killed by Pharoah since it was believed that proper leadership could only be validly exercised by males.

It is unfortunate, but JWs have convinced people that you can read the Scriptures with full comprehension outside their culture. It never works. Remember that Scripture was written to supplement the already functioning Liturgy of Judaism, not act as the foundation for their beliefs. Exodus was written to be proclaimed at worship services, not as a writing upon which to base religious beliefs...unless you still believe what the Watchtower teaches.

21

A problem with the book of Daniel

by wozza in

left the wts some years ago, but just before i left we were studying the daniel book that they produced in the book study .. i noticed something wrong in the bible account of daniel and brought this up at the end of the study when the conductor asked if everyone understood that nights study,.

i think i may have started a topic here some years ago about this event ,it was a time when i started to question the wts in my heart and mind.the scriptures are lengthy so i will just shorten things by describing the stories in daniel and how one point really got me thinking about things and perhaps made the brothers wierd out about me sand distance themselves ,here it is..........dan ch 1-4. daniels ( who came to be called belteshazzar)in babylon along with shadrach,meshach & abednego ,daniel,after praying with these 3, interprets and states what nebuchadnezzars dream is( we all know this ,the image with the head of gold body of iron and copper etc) and they are rewarded by being positions of authority.

daniel made ruler of the province and chief prefect over babylons wise men ,the 3 were made overseers of the administation of the province ,all very important jobs ,.

CalebInFloroda

Kepler,

I'm a Sephardic Jew, a descendent of the Jews from Seferad (I will use the alternative spelling of "Sepharad" from this point forward so the connection is easier to make.). Recently Spain passed a law of Aliya ("Right of Return") to me, my family, and other Sephardic Jews who were unjustly sent away from our homes and land during the Spanish Inquisition by means of the Alhambra Decree of 1492.

Part of receiving one's citizenship back includes learning your history, and fortunately my family spent over 16 years tracing ours back, beginning in the 1990s. So a lot of this is still very fresh in my mind, though I have to admit I didn't know a lot of it before. I am going to simplify it here, and some of the details differ between sources, but here is the gist.

To begin with, when the First Temple fell, according to Jewish history and tradition, Nebuchadnezzar took the House of David and cared for it in a special place where the descendants of the monarchy could still retain some freedom as well as the dignity afforded royalty. According to tradition and Scripture, the Babylonians had control of the Iberian Peninsula, which is Sepharad or modern Spain and Portugal.

For instance, Obadiah, which was written not too long after the Babylonian invasion of 587 BCE, states near the end of its brief composition:

The exiles of this Israelite army will possess the Canaanite land as far as Zarephath, and the exiles of Jerusalem who are in Sepharad will possess the cities of the Negeb. --Obadiah 20.

Exactly how Nebuchadnezzar transferred these Jews there is still not known, but even according to non-Biblical tradition that is what happened.

The return to Jerusalem from Spain after Babylon fell was a very slow process, especially for the Judeans (members of the Tribe of Judah, including the House of David). The history and tradition get very murky here. When we traced our family roots back we found a myriad of stories, nothing definitive and nothing so conflicting either.

What is known is that the Hasmoneans were never expected to rule, and more than the House of David had an aversion to their exercising kingship over Israel. The only thing we are sure of is that some of the Judeans were back in the Promised Land by this time and some were still in Sepharad. The ascension of the family of Judas Maccabeus to the Jewish throne did, however, stop any further resolve on behalf of the majority of the Judeans still in Spain. And, as we all know, it was from Hasmoneans that (after the introduction of Pompey onto the historical scene) the remnants of this dynasty got mixed with the blood of what eventually became the Herodian monarchy.

Did all Judeans return to the Iberian Peninsula during the time of the Hasmonean rule? No. Again, according to history, tradition (both Jewish and Christian), and even my family's own tradition and lineage, some members of my tribe remained in Judah until the time of the fall of the Second Temple in 70 CE.

When the Second Temple fell, the Jews of the Diaspora divided into the two groups we are most familiar with today, with some going north into Ashkenaz (modern Poland, Austria, and Germany), many of which of the priestly Cohen family, and the rest returning to Spain, mostly Judean, some from the tribe of Benjamin.

The track is hard to follow, but my particular ancestors arrived back in Spain via a trek that took generations, stopping in Rome and Greece along the way. By the time they arrived Islam had risen and taken control of Sepharad--yes, that is how long it took!

During the persecution of the Spanish Inquisition the Catholic authorities believed that the claims of the Jews they were persecuting, that they were of the royal House of David, was just a ploy to get the Christians to have sympathy for them (as this would mean the Christians were persecuting the very family of Jesus of Nazareth). To this day there are many Catholics who continue to claim that the Jews of Iberia were lying about their connection to the famous dynasty, but the history and traditions (though not entirely conclusive) do speak otherwise. And as the Catholic Church is now helping those of Sephardic ancestry to uncover their roots (for some reason the Catholic Church kept very accurate records of who they persecuted during the Spanish Inquisition, how, when, and why), it is becoming increasingly clear that there is a big "gulp" in the throats of many as the claims to Judean and Davidic ancestry are becoming harder and harder to dismiss.

What routes were taken? How did the reach these places? Where is all the evidence? Not all of it is there. We know where we were at during certain points of history, but how we got from point A to B is not always yielding.

21

A problem with the book of Daniel

by wozza in

left the wts some years ago, but just before i left we were studying the daniel book that they produced in the book study .. i noticed something wrong in the bible account of daniel and brought this up at the end of the study when the conductor asked if everyone understood that nights study,.

i think i may have started a topic here some years ago about this event ,it was a time when i started to question the wts in my heart and mind.the scriptures are lengthy so i will just shorten things by describing the stories in daniel and how one point really got me thinking about things and perhaps made the brothers wierd out about me sand distance themselves ,here it is..........dan ch 1-4. daniels ( who came to be called belteshazzar)in babylon along with shadrach,meshach & abednego ,daniel,after praying with these 3, interprets and states what nebuchadnezzars dream is( we all know this ,the image with the head of gold body of iron and copper etc) and they are rewarded by being positions of authority.

daniel made ruler of the province and chief prefect over babylons wise men ,the 3 were made overseers of the administation of the province ,all very important jobs ,.

CalebInFloroda

By the way, Doug is correct in that the Book of Daniel has to do with the Hasmonian dynasty. The narratives and visions and tales of Daniel are Apocalyptic re-imagings of the intrigue of the period.

For a book to be prophetic it would have to have to be composed by a nationally recognized prophet of the Jewish nation or their disciples, consist of the public oracles (pronouncements) delivered to the nation, and be completed before the Hasmonian dynasty took control.

When the Hellenists were conquered by the exploits of Judas Maccabeus and his house became a monarchy, the House of David, which was still partly in Seferad (Spain) after having been located there during the Babylonian exile, stopped in its tracks and did not complete its return to the Holy Land.

Without a large number of Judeans and some Benjamites in the land, oracles could not be delivered nationally unless they were taken to Iberia too. Except for Obadiah, no oracles were offered for all the Jews in the Diaspora, thus the age of prophets ended. It would be these Jews in Seferad who were later dispelled from Spain with the Alahmbra decree of 1492.

21

A problem with the book of Daniel

by wozza in

left the wts some years ago, but just before i left we were studying the daniel book that they produced in the book study .. i noticed something wrong in the bible account of daniel and brought this up at the end of the study when the conductor asked if everyone understood that nights study,.

i think i may have started a topic here some years ago about this event ,it was a time when i started to question the wts in my heart and mind.the scriptures are lengthy so i will just shorten things by describing the stories in daniel and how one point really got me thinking about things and perhaps made the brothers wierd out about me sand distance themselves ,here it is..........dan ch 1-4. daniels ( who came to be called belteshazzar)in babylon along with shadrach,meshach & abednego ,daniel,after praying with these 3, interprets and states what nebuchadnezzars dream is( we all know this ,the image with the head of gold body of iron and copper etc) and they are rewarded by being positions of authority.

daniel made ruler of the province and chief prefect over babylons wise men ,the 3 were made overseers of the administation of the province ,all very important jobs ,.

CalebInFloroda

Actually there is another answer that is often never considered by JWs and many Christians.

In the Hebrew Bible, the book of Daniel does not appear in the section of Navi, "The Prophets." Instead Daniel appears in the section of Ketuvim, "The Writings."

Also, we Jews have an official list of 55 prophets. Guess who is NOT on the list...Daniel.

Now yes, if you read Daniel as prophecy or history then there are a lot of oddities, maybe more so than what you find in other parts of the Bible.

But it is not odd for writing in the genre of Apocalypse. In this genre you come across dreams, visions, fables, dramas, political intrigue disguised as battles between monsters, but little if any history. Everything is in signs, all symbols.

But here is something else that is missing: prophecy. In the strictest sense there is no foretelling of the future, just re-descriptions of the present, especially on the political scene. The intention is to claim that the darkest points of history will always eventually end in Israel's favor, in Jewish theology that is.

It was Christians who first began to read prophecies into them, especially in reference to their Messiah. So it is odd because you might not be reading it as Apocalypse.

18

How did Matthew Use the Word "Generation"?

by BluesBrother in

another "generation" thread....i know!

when splane wanted a scripture that demonstrated the bible's use of the word he went all the way back to moses and used ex.

1.6. he could have stayed in the same book and used matthew chapter 1,written by the same hand.

CalebInFloroda

The problem is they are looking at one word, "generation," and we are letting them do it.

In language you cannot understand words in a vacuum. You must understand them in context.

Amen, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.

"This generation" from Matthew 24.34 reads in Greek:

HE GENEA HAUTE

Which means, literally, "the generation, this one" or "the generation now" or "the current generation."

This is what it means a few sentences before, at Matthew 23.36:

Amen, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.

TEN GENEA TAUNTEN

Again, the expression means "the generation, this one" or "the generation now" or "the current generation."

(The words may seem a little different, but that is because of syntax. In Koine Greek the words are inflectional and change spelling due to where the words appear in context, but the roots remain the same.)

Matthew 23.36 and 24.34 are almost identical. And they both refer to the generation that saw the Second Temple fall. They can't refer to a future generation because Jesus is not referring to the "end of the world" when he uses this expression.

The idea that wars, famines, and earthquakes will mark the end of days is countered by Jesus. In all three records of the Eschatological Discourse (Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21), Jesus always begins by telling his disciples that such things DO NOT mean the end is upon them.

In Matthew 24, before he tells of wars, famines, and earthquakes, he states: "Do not be deceived." He then ends this discussion about wars, famines, and earthquakes with the words: "See that you are not alarmed, for these things must happen, but it will not yet be the end. "--Matthew 24.4-6.

The same thing occurs in Mark 13, with Jesus stating: "See that no one deceives you...When you hear of wars and reports of wars do not be alarmed; such things must happen, but it will not yet be the end...These are the beginnings of the labor pains."--Mark 13.5-8.

Note especially how it is worded in Luke: "See that you not be deceived, for many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am he,’ and ‘The time has come.’ Do not follow them! When you hear of wars and insurrections, do not be terrified; for such things must happen first, but it will not immediately be the end"--Luke 21.8-9.

In each instance Jesus is recorded as saying that people can be deceived by those who will use events like wars, famine, and earthquakes to declare that "the time has come." Jesus' own words about these: "Do not be deceived" and "do not follow them!"

So the so-called "sign" used by Jehovah's Witnesses to proclaim we are in the end is the counterfeit sign used by those who will mislead others about the end.

In Matthew the only true sign in the first part of the discourse regarding the true end of times has approached is the spreading of the Gospel everywhere. (Matthew 24.14) But it isn't a time indicator. The way it appears in Mark 13.10 and Luke 21.13 seem to resound with Jesus' instruction about ignoring the "times and seasons" and instead busying oneself with spreading the Gospel as recorded in Acts 1.6-8. In other words, Jesus never gives a real means to calculate the end. The comparison of these verses shows that Jesus is telling his followers to pay no attention to such nonsense because they have nothing to worry about but the assignment given.

In Matthew 24.15-28 Jesus seems to be referencing the destruction of the Temple. This section, as you will note, also ends with a warning that his followers not to be deceived that the end of times is upon them, even though it means the Second Temple will be removed from its place.

The Parousia, however, and the genuine end of times appears to be explained in apocalyptic imagery in Matthew 24.29-31. These expressions are very much like one finds in Daniel, Ezekiel, and Revelation, but they are void of the wars, earthquakes, and famines, etc.

The discourse seems to have a primary conclusion with verses 32-35 (and it gets extended further, perhaps by redaction, not merely through the rest of the chapter but filling the following one as well). It appears that Jesus, having just used the expression when in the Temple (as noted at Matthew 23.36) along with the fact that this lead to his eventual discussion about the Temple's destruction, that here Jesus is again referencing merely his own current generation and speaking merely of the Temple's fall at Matthew 24.34.

The truth of the matter is that the Second Temple really did fall during the time of "the generation this one" or the current generation of Jesus. Because Jesus is answering several questions at once doesn't mean all the words apply to both eras, that of the Second Temple's destruction and the End of Times. Nowhere does Jesus ever say that one event symbolizes the other, and there is no text in the New Testament that states the Temple's fall is a symbol of the Last Days. That is a post-Biblical idea.

This isn't to say that the two events might not symbolize one another, but there is no definitive rule in Scripture declaring that they will of have to. The Jehovah's Witnesses have only said they would. But again the Witnesses are also the ones who claim that earthquakes, wars, famines, etc. are signs of the end. Remember, Jesus says they are not. We are being deceived if we believe those who say they are.--Luke 21.8-9.

In light of this one cannot say that such counterfeit signs have anything to do with the words of Matthew 24.34. Events that Jesus say do not mean the end is upon us do not occur over the period of a "generation," neither can a future generation really fit the Greek phrase used by Jesus.

74

That's it! The Jesus stories are most reasonably explained as myth. History makes this obvious.

by Island Man in

a careful examination of the historical pagan religious context existing at the time of the genesis of christianity leads any reasonable person to conclude that jesus is just another one of several similar myths.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kn7teoa9ark.

CalebInFloroda

I think for some of us who leave the Watchtower, like my friend here, we need Jesus to be completely false - Caleb

Nothing could be further from the truth.

The simplest way to undermine the Jesus of the gospels is to read the gospels and take every word seriously.

He was a thoroughly unpleasant person. A family-destroying, egomaniacal, false prophet and deluded cult leader.

However I find Carrier's theory to be compelling.-- Cofty

Cofty,

I think you read my comments incorrectly. I was speaking about what my friend had said. If you read the entire post from which you quoted, another individual said that they, themselves, needed Jesus to be a myth. In fact, it is in the quote you presented.

I was just saying that perhaps others feel the same.

To claim as you have that "nothing could be further from the truth" about comments like these from my friend, means either:

1. You have an ability to look into people's minds and see whether or not they really mean what they say, such as "I need Jesus to be a myth" or "I really like the cake you made."

2. You are claiming I am lying about my friend's comments, which means you are also claiming the same ability in reference to what I have stated.

But I think you just mistook that I wrote it was an axiom that all who reject Jesus need him to be a myth. That would be ridiculous. Remember, I'm Jewish. If I meant it in such a fashion I would be insulting my own people.

It was curious to hear those comments from my friend, yes. And I find them hard to comprehend. But I have heard other similar things. When studying demonology as part of my theological training I saw one person leave the program upon our assignment to visit a so-called haunted house. When asked by the instructor why the student said that they could not accept the idea of seeing anything that might possibly change their convictions about spirits.

So my comments were based on what others have said. My comments were that some people choose to be ignorant by not even looking at facts because they want to hold onto what they believe. I wasn't saying that those who reject Jesus aren't being honest with reality. One more time, I'm a Jew. That would be a silly thing for a Jew to say.