Posts by Doug Mason

5

A little help please - Question regarding the first Canon

by Joey Jo-Jo in

i am confused, so was it constantine who created the first canon or was it athanasius throught constantine, or was it just athanasius before constantine?.

Doug Mason

Joey Jo-Jo.

I recommend three books that provide excellent descriptions of the events of those first four centuries. I presume you will be able to read details online about these books:

“JESUS WARS: How Four Patriarchs, Three Queens, and Two Emperors Decided What Christians Would Believe for the Next 1500 Years” by Philip Jenkins (The Fifth-Century Political Battles That Forever Changed What the Church Teaches About the Son of God.)

“AD 381: HERETICS, PAGANS AND THE CHRISTIAN STATE” by Charles Freeman. ( In AD 381, Theodosius, emperor of the eastern Roman empire, issued a decree in which all of his subjects were required to subscribe to a belief in the Trinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This edict defined Christian orthodoxy and brought to an end a lively and wide ranging debate about the nature of the Godhead; all other interpretations were now declared heretical. Moreover, for the first time in a thousand years of Greco-Roman civilisation, free thought was unambiguously suppressed.)

“A NEW HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY” by Charles Freeman. ( Freeman shows that there was a host of competing Christianities, many of which had as much claim to authenticity as those that eventually dominated. The imposition of ‘correct belief and an institutional framework that enforced orthodoxy were both consolidating and stifling. Uncovering the church’s relationships with Judaism, Gnosticism, Greek philosophy and Greco-Roman society, Freeman offers dramatic new accounts of Paul, the resurrection, and the church fathers and emperors.)

Doug

6

A view of Philippians 2:6-11

by Doug Mason in

the christ hymn in philippians 2:6-11.

(the authentic letters of paul, arthur j. dewey and others, pages 194 -196).

several of the terms used in verses 6 to 8 echo the terminology found in the story of the creation and fall of adam in genesis 1 and 3 in the greek translation of the hebrew bible (the septuagint) that paul and all of the authors of the writings that comprise the new testament knew and used.

Doug Mason

The “Christ Hymn” in Philippians 2:6-11

(“The Authentic Letters of Paul”, Arthur J. Dewey and others, pages 194 -196)

Several of the terms used in verses 6 to 8 echo the terminology found in the story of the creation and fall of Adam in Genesis 1 and 3 in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (the Septuagint) that Paul and all of the authors of the writings that comprise the New Testament knew and used. Adam is said to have been created in the image and likeness of God (Gen 1:26-27); and he succumbs to the "Serpent's" seductive suggestion that, if he asserted himself, he would become equal to God (Gen 3:5). The similarity of the language in Phil 2:6-8 to the language in these Genesis passages points to another way of reading the "Christ Hymn:" as contrasting the First and Second Adam—a contrast Paul explicitly draws in Rom 5:12-14, and in 1 Cor 15:21-23,45-50. The contrast between the First and Second Adam reflected in the "Christ Hymn" can be charted in this way:

First Adam

bearing the image of God

he regarded being like God

as something to use for his own advantage

with vain pretention he asserted himself

and rejected his lot as a servant

he exalted himself

his disobedience led to his death

he was condemned by God

and cast out of paradise

Second Adam

bearing the image of God

he did not regard being like God

as something to use for his own advantage

he rid himself of vain pretentions

and accepted his lot as a servant

he humbled himself

he was obedient to the death even death by crucifixion

he was exalted by God

and named lord of all

The meaning of this passage is also related to its structure. ... A more recent structural analysis sees the "hymn" as organized in four strophes. ... This analysis of the "hymn's" structure is consistent with the view that the hymn intends to contrast the First and Second Adams. The First Adam ... mishandled his status as a creature and blundered into self-exaltation that resulted in his self-destruction. The Second Adam rightly handled his status as a creature and was approved by God as a model of how a human being should conduct himself, and was exalted as the prototype and lord of a recreated human race. ... The structure of the passage together with its idiomatic, allusive, and celebrative (not literal) language indicate that its author did not intend to speak about the descent and ascent of a divine being, but about the exemplary earthly life of Jesus as a human being. God endorsed that exemplary life by raising Jesus on high as the Second Adam, who represents the remedy for the failure of the First Adam.

20

"Ancient Whale Bones Found Atacama Desert, Chile!" Creation or Evolution

by AvocadoJake in

how did those whale bones get into the atacama desert, if you have been there, it is a barren wasteland.

i belive it might have been caused by the flood, but again i am one who belives in god.

what do you think of this find, jesus or non-intelligence?

Doug Mason

I am absolutely amazed that there is someone who believes the Creation myths are literal. Do they think the stories were written by people who saw what was happening?

These two Creation stories were written about the time of the neo-Babylonian Captivity for the religious objectives of the writers. Genesis 2:4b - 25 was written first, and exhibits distinct inconsistencies with the later story, which ends at ch 2:4a.

Doug

4

The WT's starting date of the Seventy Years

by Doug Mason in

the wt starts its seventy years with the moment that jews entered egypt following the murder of governor gedaliah.

the wt guesses that the destruction and the murder of gedaliah took place in the same year.

however, the events listed in the bible as taking place from the time of the city's destruction until the entry in egypt require far more than two months.

Doug Mason

ScenicViewer,

Have a look at the Italian site; there is at least one English passage that is directly cited.

I touch on the subject (in English) at pages 22 to 24 of my study at:

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

The problem is for the WTS to PROVE that the Jews exited Judah in the same year when Jerusalem was destroyed. There is no agreement on the time from the destruction to the entry into Egypt. For example, the Jewish Encyclopedia acknowledges the range of views, from two months (tradition only) to 4 years:

"The rule of Gedaliah lasted, according to tradition, only two months, although Grätz argues that it continued more than four years." http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6548-gedallah

The WT cannot prove the year when the Jews entered Egypt and they cannot PROVE the year that the first exiles returned to the site of the destroyed temple at Jerusalem. They cannot prove that it happened in 537; because there is no positive evidence, there is a wide range of views, as can be seen by Googling:

jews return 538

jews return 536

jews return 535

Doug

4

The WT's starting date of the Seventy Years

by Doug Mason in

the wt starts its seventy years with the moment that jews entered egypt following the murder of governor gedaliah.

the wt guesses that the destruction and the murder of gedaliah took place in the same year.

however, the events listed in the bible as taking place from the time of the city's destruction until the entry in egypt require far more than two months.

Doug Mason

The WT starts its Seventy Years with the moment that Jews entered Egypt following the murder of Governor Gedaliah. The WT guesses that the destruction and the murder of Gedaliah took place in the same year. However, the events listed in the Bible as taking place from the time of the city's destruction until the entry in Egypt require far more than two months. The period from the destruction to the entry into Egypt was likely 2, 3 or even 4 years long.

A discussion in Italian on the subject can be seen at:

http://www.infotdgeova.it/storia/quando70.php

The PDF file is available at:

http://www.infotdgeova.it/downloads/70anni.pdf

Doug

1

"Hebrew Lexicon" (Davidson/Gesenius) and "Greek Lexicon" (Bagster/Thayer)

by possible-san in

http://www.babelbible.net/davidson/davidson.cgi .

http://www.babelbible.net/bagster/bagster.cgi.

http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvstrongs/index.htm.

Doug Mason

It is one thing to be able to translate a word from one language into another but it is far more difficult, and critically far more significant, to understand the culture of the community that produced (and edited) each document.

This means understanding matters such as the religious politics, secular politics, idiomatic use of language, contemporary comprehension and understandings, purpose of the original message, the nature of the intended immediate audience, and so on.

Each writer was addressing their own immediate community, with the purpose of effecting change in that specific community. With regard to the existing texts, we are able to read only the viewpoint of one group -- the people who used writing as a means of communication. While we are aware of these other elements of the community, such as the royal household and the People of the Land, we are not provided with direct information from them. All we read is the propaganda of a group seeking power through the use of religious pressures.

A dictionary does not capture these significant elements.

Doug

2

October 1 and November 1 "Jerusalem destroyed" refuted, in Italian

by Doug Mason in

an italian refutation of the october 1 and november 1 articles "when was ancient jersusalem destroyed" is provided at:.

http://www.infotdgeova.it/storia/587.php.

http://www.infotdgeova.it/storia/587b.php.

Doug Mason

In addition, Carl advises me that his Critique of the October Watchtower article is also available in Italian:

http://kristenfrihet.se/italian/itpage.htm

Doug

2

October 1 and November 1 "Jerusalem destroyed" refuted, in Italian

by Doug Mason in

an italian refutation of the october 1 and november 1 articles "when was ancient jersusalem destroyed" is provided at:.

http://www.infotdgeova.it/storia/587.php.

http://www.infotdgeova.it/storia/587b.php.

Doug Mason

An Italian refutation of the October 1 and November 1 articles "When Was Ancient Jersusalem Destroyed" is provided at:

http://www.infotdgeova.it/storia/587.php

http://www.infotdgeova.it/storia/587b.php

Each URL provides the option of dowloading the relevant PDF and Word files.

Although some of my diagrams have been incorporated, these articles are completely the work of the Italian author.

While you are there, have a good look around the site.

Doug

11

Both the October 1 & November 1 Watchtowers avoid discussing the 2,520 years!!!

by Alfred in

did anyone else notice this?.

the "when was jerusalem destroyed?

" articles in the october 2011 and november 2011 public edition watchtowers were supposed to explain why it was so important to know when jerusalem was destroyed... but none of the two articles makes any mention about how the wt arrived at the 2,520 year calculation (to get to 1914)... did they think no one would notice???

Doug Mason

The WTS's "2520-year" theory relates to their ideas on the "Seventy years". However, they do NOT start the "Seventy Years" with the destruction of Jerusalem, which is the subject of their article.

If the WTS were to actually write an article on their derivation of 1914, their article (book?) would discuss

Daniel 4 (the prophecy being Neb's madness, not the dream);
Ezkiel (year-day, including their inconsistent application of Revelation, and ignoring what the Bible says ended the 70 Years);
how the WTS calculate the year when the first Returnees assembled at the temple site (impossible to prove);
the year they start the 70 Years (they need to ignore the destruction of Jerusalem); and so on.

This of course would make the destruction some years earlier than 607 BCE.

Doug

42

Onscreen Critique, NOVEMBER 1 Watchtower, "When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?"

by Doug Mason in

i have produced a critique of the november 1, 2011 watchtower article, when was ancient jerusalem destroyed?

part 2: what the clay documents really show.. .

this critique is designed to be read on a computer screen.. .

Doug Mason

I have produced a Critique of the November 1, 2011 Watchtower article, “When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed? Part 2: What the clay documents really show”.

This Critique is designed to be read on a computer screen.

The file is available at:

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

Doug