Posts by Doug Mason

5

Kingdom of Heaven Like a Mustard Seed

by cameo-d in

"the kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed which a man took, and sowed in his field:.

"which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

why is the kingdom compared to a bitter seed?.

Doug Mason

cameo-d,

For you, and for anyone else interested in the Kingdom of God as described in the Parables, I scanned a chapter from the book by G. Eldon Ladd on the subject. You will find it at:

http://www.jwstudies.com/Kingdom__Ladd__chapter_4.pdf

Doug

5

Kingdom of Heaven Like a Mustard Seed

by cameo-d in

"the kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed which a man took, and sowed in his field:.

"which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.

why is the kingdom compared to a bitter seed?.

In this parable (Mark 4:30; Matt 13:31-32), we see that the parable says the Kingdom of God is like a man (God) planting a seed. It is not speaking of its harvest.

Jesus was telling his followers that even though what they were seeing was tiny and insignificant, yet it really was the “Kingdom of God”, which must therefore not be despised by them, even though it had come in a form they had not expected.

Jesus was showing them that the Kingdom of God was already present and active among men but it had come in a form they had not expected. The story is not about how the how the Kingdom would grow or about how the Kingdom would come in the future.

In ancient Semitic idiom, the mustard seed was a proverbial symbol for that which is tiny and insignificant. Given the principles of parabolic interpretation, nothing else should be seen or implied; the remainder of the parable is simply colouring.

Doug

14

Moses's mistake

by highdose in

ok heres another thing that always worried and puzzled me... moses made great sacrifices to lead the isrealites and endured great hardship to do so... but he makes one mistake and suddenly all that counts for nothing and he gets no rewards for his pains at all!????!.

this has never seemed fair to me.

basicly what is seems to be saying is that you can lead a exemplary life at great cost to your self, but if you make one mistake... thats it youv'e blown it!.

Doug Mason

WTWizard,

I assume your reference to David relates to the book of Chronicles. The writers of that history, who were living at least 150 years after Babylon fell, were trying to influence their community when they wrote it, and their focus on David is shown by the number of chapters they devoted to him.

At the time, the Davidic monarchy had disappeared and the priesthood had taken over that authority. So for some local reason the writers of Chronicles manipulated the historical record to assert the Davidic heritage.

The example of their record of the King Manasseh illustrates their approach. Manasseh is the epitome of a sinner in the book of Kings while the writers of Chronicles made out he was a repenting sinner. This was the only way that the Chronicler could explain away the long reign by this evil king. So he invented a story of Manasseh's contrition. Likewise with his manipulation of the stories of David (whether he really existed was irrelevant).

"The Chronicler is not a historian in the strict western sense. To him Israel’s history was pregnant with spiritual and moral lessons, which he brought to birth through a kind of historical midwifery. He is not concerned so much with the bare facts of Israel’s history as with their meaning. If all valid historical writing is interpretative, the Chronicler’s is highly interpretative.." ("Old Testament Survey", page 542, Lasor, Hubbard, Bush).

Doug

29

the name Jehovah in the New Testament

by jahrule in

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> </w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" latentstylecount="156"> </w:latentstyles> </xml><!

[endif]  [if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"times new roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif].

Doug Mason

I would class WTS theology as semi-Arian, and that Arius would class the WTS as heretical.

Arius taught that the Holy Spirit was a Person, but that he was created by the Father and the Son together, and that the Holy Spirit was subservient to them.

Doug

29

the name Jehovah in the New Testament

by jahrule in

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> </w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" latentstylecount="156"> </w:latentstyles> </xml><!

[endif]  [if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"times new roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif].

Doug Mason

Rather than carry over the methods used in the Hebrew Scriptures for the Divine Name(s), the early Christians developed their own set of sacred words that are now known as the "Nomina Sacra".

In this process, and there were 15 words created using this method, they abbreviated the selected divine word with two letters and then they drew a line over these letters, to show what they were.

Searching the www for "nomina sacra", in the context we are discussing, will provide the details.

Doug

14

Moses's mistake

by highdose in

ok heres another thing that always worried and puzzled me... moses made great sacrifices to lead the isrealites and endured great hardship to do so... but he makes one mistake and suddenly all that counts for nothing and he gets no rewards for his pains at all!????!.

this has never seemed fair to me.

basicly what is seems to be saying is that you can lead a exemplary life at great cost to your self, but if you make one mistake... thats it youv'e blown it!.

Doug Mason

When these Bible writers recorded their history, their sole purpose was to influence their own community. Their records were concerned with theology, rather than with historical precision.

It does not matter whether Moses was a real person or not. It does not matter if people were really led out of Egypt. Indeed, it is likely that the Israelites were hill dwellers of Canaan all the time.

The purpose of stories about Abraham, Moses, Joshua, and so on served the purpose of showing the community that God had given them the land they were occupying.

This intended lesson influenced the writer when he gave the reason Moses was not permitted to enter the land promised to Abraham. Before entering the Promised Land, the people had to wander in a deserted land until all doubters had died.

We can only surmise at the lessons intended for that ancient community. Perhaps they were meant to learn that only the unblemished and those who had genuine faith were permitted to cross into the Promised Land. For us, we can see a modern lesson, in which entrance to our future Promised Land is based on the same premise that one must be unblemished before God.

For the Christian, this state is available as a gift that is available only through faith in the unblemished life and death of Jesus Christ.

Doug

29

the name Jehovah in the New Testament

by jahrule in

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:punctuationkerning/> <w:validateagainstschemas/> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> <w:dontgrowautofit/> </w:compatibility> <w:browserlevel>microsoftinternetexplorer4</w:browserlevel> </w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:latentstyles deflockedstate="false" latentstylecount="156"> </w:latentstyles> </xml><!

[endif]  [if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"times new roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif].

Doug Mason

The bias of the NWT in regards to its use of "Jehovah" in its Greek Scriptures is shown in a piece I wrote at:

http://www.jwstudies.com/Translating_with_prejudice.pdf

Doug

5

Who did the Title Christian come from.

by acolytes in

to my understanding christians are called christian based on the scripture in acts 11 v 26.. reading this scripture i get the impression the title "christian" was a name given to them by people who were preashed to by them.

my question is by whose or what authority does a follower of christ need be called a christian.. acolytes.. .

Doug Mason

"Christ" is actually a title, not a name; it means "Anointed". However, over time, Paul used the title Christ as the proper name for Yeshua ben Yosef of Nazareth. Whether he originated this usage or reflected a common use, I don't know.

It should be realised that at the time, the Christians were a Jewish sect and part of Judaism. In the latter part of Acts, Paul was still going through a Jewish purification ceremony.

Did the sacking of Jerusalem in AD 70 play a part in creating a marked separation? Did the Christians' use of the (Hebrew) Scriptures play a part (mostly use of the various versions of the LXX)?

How much influence did the primacy of Antioch play in the demarcation between the Jews and the Christian sect? Antioch (Paul's base) was plagued by followers from Jerusalem who were requiring obediance to Jewish ways.

Doug

28

Do you still read the bible?

by boyzone in

i can't.

i can't even bring myself to pick up the book anymore but i'm still a christian.. not sure why, just this feeling of guilt when i read it, and guilt if i don't.. anyone else have an aversion to the good book?.

.

Doug Mason

I think these point out that it's not WHAT you read but HOW you read.

I suggest that solid middle-of-the-road background material would help break the NWT influence. By that, I do not mean commentaries but information on the people and their lives at the time a Bible piece was written. It is critical to understand that these writers were not writing to us, they were writing to their own people, dealing with an immediate and local need, using their own local idioms and ideas.

Books that are suitable for providing such background material depend on your own level of comprehension. I find the series of Dictionaries published by IVP most enlightening and balanced in their view ("Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch", and "Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books", are two of the titles. They also have "Dictionary of the New Testament" titles available.)

Other similar books often go under the title of "Old Testament Survey" and similar.

Discovering how the Bible came into existence is another direction of study.

In other words, climb outside the limited view that the WTS shackled you with and see the Bible as a very human book, written by people for people. Which means that you do not read it through the eyes of our culture.

Doug

12

Male and Female temple prostitutes

by ssn587 in

the following verses make me wonder just how prevalent prostituion at the "temple" was in ancient times.. the verse in deut.

23: 17 about becoming temple prostitutes didn't they israelites have a tabernacle until solomon built the temple during his reign?.

deuteronomy 23:17 none of the daughters of israel may become temple prostitutes neither may anyone of the sons of israel become a temple prostitute.

Doug Mason

The Chronicler is not a historian in the strict western sense. To him Israel’s history was pregnant with spiritual and moral lessons, which he brought to birth through a kind of historical midwifery. He is not concerned so much with the bare facts of Israel’s history as with their meaning. ( Old Testament Survey: The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament , Second Edition, , p. 543, Lasor, Hubbard and Bush, Eerdmans 1996) It was more important to the biblical writers to be relevant than to be true. ... For all of them, their greatest concern was not getting the past “correct.” Rather, it was to collect, revise, and compose traditions in order to produce texts about the past that would be meaningful to their communities. ( How to Read the Jewish Bible , chapter “ Revisionist History: Reading Chronicles ”, p. 136, Marc Zvi Brettler, Oxford University Press, 2005, 2007) The recollection of historical traditions in this period was different than it is now. There was little or no interest in history for its own sake; that is, for what it taught about the real past. History mattered because of what it taught about the present, including the legitimacy of the main priestly clan. Moreover, ancient historians may not have realized that they were manipulating “facts.” ... Just as the Chronicler adds material when it suits his purposes, he also leaves material out. Sometimes material is left out simply because it is no longer relevant. ...Comparison of Chronicles and its sources reveals hundreds of cases where the Chronicler changed his sources in various ways —not only minor updating of language and spelling, but also significant ideological changes. ( Brettler, pp.131-133) As complicated as translating a foreign language can be, translating a foreign culture is infinitely more difficult. ... It is far too easy to let our own ideas creep in and subtly (or at times not so subtly) bend or twist the material to fit our own context. ... The very act of trying to translate the culture requires taking it out of its context and fitting it into ours. ... Rather than translating the culture, then, we need to try to enter the culture. ( The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate , pp. 10-11, John H. Walton; publishers, IVP Academic) It must be acknowledged that Biblical narrators were more than historians. They interpretively recounted the past with the unswerving purpose of bringing it to bear on the present and the future. In the portrayal of past events, they used their materials to achieve this purpose effectively. ( The NIV Study Bible , book of Jonah, “Introduction: Interpretation”) The biblical writers may not have understood their task simply as relating what happened in the past. ... A ncient history writing was not journalism; it was closer to storytelling than to the objective reporting of past events. ... T he primary objective of ancient history writing was to “render an account” of the past that explained the present.

Ancient historians had axes to grind —theological or political points to make. Second, a civilization rendering an account of its past also entailed an expression of the corporate identity of the nation—what it was and what principles it stood for. Hence, the historian’s primary concern was not detailing exactly what happened in the past as much as it was interpreting the meaning of the past for the present, showing how the “causes” of the past brought about the “effects” of the present. ... The Bible’s historical literature is aetiological in the sense that it seeks to “render an account” of the past —to provide an explanation (aitia) for circumstances or conditions in the historian’s day. Whether the events that the Bible relates as past causes or explanations actually took place as described was not the ancient historian’s primary concern. ... To attempt to read the account of Israel’s history in the Bible from a modern perspective as strictly a record of actual events is to misconstrue its genre and force it to do something that it was not intended to do. ...

In the Bible, history was written for an ideological purpose. History writing was theology. (Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books, Arnold and Williamson, pp 418 – 421, IVP)

[ Comparison of the Chronicler’s presentation of Cyrus’ Decree with the text as preserved on the famous Cyrus cylinder provides a clear example of the Chronicler’s preparedness to manage history and to manufacture a religious intent.]