Posts by Doug Mason

52

Bart Ehrman: Paul Viewed Jesus Christ as an Angel.

by Emery in

in his upcomming book, "how jesus became god" bart ehrman has a new view on how paul viewed jesus.

since i am a huge bart ehrman fan i am a member of his blog site, http://ehrmanblog.org link to direct blog entry: http://ehrmanblog.org/pauls-view-of-jesus-as-an-angel-for-members/.

there he made a recent blog entry where he argues that paul viewed jesus to be an angel according to galations 4:14. .

Doug Mason

ÁrbolesdeArabia,

Paul did not know the accounts traditionally attributed to Mark, Matthew, Luke or John. They were all written after his death. Luke was written some 60 to 90 years after Paul had died.

Secondly, Paul explicitly states that he did not receive any of his teachings from any human source. He got them directly from the Lord, presumably in the form of visions. Thus he did not get his ideas of baptism, Last Supper, substitutionary death, resurrection, Coming, and so on from any person. They are his ideas. His opponents were the Jerusalem party led by James, Jesus' biological brother. The Jerusalem party saw Jesus as being nothing more than a human, with human parents. The birth narratives are highly ingenious creations of imaginitive minds; unfortulately, they did not collaborate and their stories seriously contradict one another.

Thirdly, Mark and Luke were Paul's adherents, and thus followed his lead. The NT Canon was set by Paul's followers, not by James' followers (Ebionites).

Doug

14

New Light on 1914

by TowerWatch in

recently someone posted a link to the watchtower article explaining why jehovahs witnesses no longer believe that jesus returned in 1914. could someone help me by posting that link again please?

thank you!.

Doug Mason

As you know, I am no apologist for the WTS. You will also know that it is not possible to pin them down because over time they slip and slide around. This, however, is my understanding. (I have been known to be wrong before):

Although the kingdom of God was set up in 1914, this does not mean the kingdom did not exist before then. The kingdom of God is eternal. It is my understanding that they say the "parousia" was a change in its operation, or focus, towards earth. It could probably be considered as a different phase in its operation.

They do not see the "parousia" as the "coming". These are two separate events. The "coming" (erchomenon) lies in the future, associated with the future Great Tribulation and Armageddon. (See WT mag of July 15, 2013)

Doug

Note that I used the word "erchomenon"; I am not certain whether they have any application for the word "apokalupsis".

2

Spanish translation is now available

by Doug Mason in

a short while ago, i prepared a study on "the watchtower" for july 15, 2013.. .

since then, several people have willingly and freely worked to produce a spanish translation of my study.. it is available at:.

http://www.jwstudies.com/la_verdad_cambia__otra_vez___la_atalaya__15_de_julio_de_2013.pdf .

Doug Mason

suavojr,

I get your point, but you give me the opportunity to point out that the people who write the articles in the Watchtower magazine and write the books are not necessarily of the Anointed. I doubt that every member of the Writing Department is Anointed.

Doug

2

Spanish translation is now available

by Doug Mason in

a short while ago, i prepared a study on "the watchtower" for july 15, 2013.. .

since then, several people have willingly and freely worked to produce a spanish translation of my study.. it is available at:.

http://www.jwstudies.com/la_verdad_cambia__otra_vez___la_atalaya__15_de_julio_de_2013.pdf .

Doug Mason

A short while ago, I prepared a Study on "The Watchtower" for July 15, 2013.

Since then, several people have willingly and freely worked to produce a Spanish translation of my Study.

It is available at:

http://www.jwstudies.com/La_Verdad_Cambia__otra_vez___La_Atalaya__15_de_Julio_de_2013.pdf

Doug

(Apologies for the formatting problem.)

5

Need Help Finding Article

by turtleturtle in

i am looking for a questions from readers in the wt.

the question was along the lines of asking why the wt promoted the stake, rather than the cross, even though history shows the romans did use the cross in executions.. the answer from the wt was along the lines of admitting that the romans did use crosses for execution, but in the area where jesus' death took place, it was commonplace to use stakes, since lumber was not readily available.. can anyone find this for me?.

Doug Mason

What's the difference when a stake is worshiped?

Doug

18

"Further clarification..."

by Dagney in

a few minutes ago, a jw, (elder's wife who for some reason still calls me 1-2 times a day to tell me about her new purse/dr's appt/what she's making for dinner/etc.

) called to tell me she saw sherri sheppard on tv talking about her new diet book.

i say, "you know she was raised a jw.

Doug Mason

Dagney,

At page 8 of that WT magazine says that "it appears" the spirit-anointed (no longer part of the FDS by the way) will survive after the initial part of the Great Tribulation has started, but will depart before it develops further in Armagedon.

Maybe you could show it to her at page 26 of my analysis at:

http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Truth_Changes.pdf ( for the "Study" edition of the magazine)

or at page 26 of my analysis at:

http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Truth_Changes_in_the_simplified_Watchtower.pdf ( for the "Simplified" edition of the magazine).

Please give her a copy of my analysis.

Doug

12

"The Truth Changes" with the text from the "Simplified" Edition WT

by Doug Mason in

the text i used in my analysis, "the truth changes: watchtower july 15, 2013" comes from the "study" edition of that magazine.. it is still available at: http://www.jwstudies.com/the_truth_changes.pdf.

i have now used the text from the "simplified" edition, and it is available at:.

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

Doug Mason

I spent the day thinking about my long and convoluted title that I gave to this Study and how I could simplify it yet achieve my objectives. The following was and is my thought process. I am very open to correction.

I had earlier released my Study that related the text of the Study edition of that particular Watchtower magazine. I wanted the title of my Study to include the name and date of the magazine; I did this so that the web crawlers would pick it up and hence bring it up when someone searched the www for that specific magazine. I also wanted to show what I was looking at: so I included the name "The Truth Changes".

When I released the version that made use of selected texts from the "Simplified" edition (WTS description, not mine), I wanted to show that it related to the previously released Study yet at the same time I needed to indicate the reason there are two versions. So I maintained "The Truth Changes" and the date of the magazine in the title. I then added "Simplified" to show that the text came from the "Simplified" edition of that WT. The contents of each now have cross-references to one another, along with the URL where the other version can be obtained.

If the long title is bothersome, I do not mind if people make it available on their own web site using a shorter file name. However, I am the only one who may amend the contents of the file.

In the process of creating these two versions of my study, I created a file that puts the corresponding page of each edition on the same page. Quite interesting, but of course legal and ethical constraints prevent my releasing that study to the broad community.

BTW. When you compare para 6 on page 21 of each Edition ("Study" WT and "Simplified" WT) you will see that the "Study WT" writes "we may conclude", while the "Simplified WT" writes "it is clear". While one Edition is cautious ("may"), the other is not cautious ("it is clear").

Doug

12

"The Truth Changes" with the text from the "Simplified" Edition WT

by Doug Mason in

the text i used in my analysis, "the truth changes: watchtower july 15, 2013" comes from the "study" edition of that magazine.. it is still available at: http://www.jwstudies.com/the_truth_changes.pdf.

i have now used the text from the "simplified" edition, and it is available at:.

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

Doug Mason

Hi,

The text I used in my analysis, "The Truth Changes: Watchtower July 15, 2013" comes from the "Study" Edition of that magazine.

It is still available at: http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Truth_Changes.pdf

I have now used the text from the "Simplified" Edition, and it is available at:

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

------------

I am still trying to get my head around the direction being taken by the GB. I do think they wanted to amass all power and glory in the fishpond, but in the process their pronouncements have eroded my understanding of their positions.

It had been my understanding that the GB saw itself as the sole voice speaking out on behalf of an operating "Kingdom government in heaven". I thought they saw this government composed of 144,001 spirit-anointed persons and that the total entity was in some way the FDS, with the GB being its voice.

The GB has sacked all spirit-anointed from the FDS, so does that mean there is no longer an operating "Kingdom government"? Also, the GB says that they do not get appointed over all things until some time in the future. How does this line up with their thoughts of a currently operating Kingdom Goverment?

It's beyond me how anyone could accept their fairy tales, but maybe someone could tell me what they think are the intended and unintended consquences of their latest actions. Where has my understanding gone awry?

Doug

55

Signs - Jesus - Has the Scripture Been Misread ?

by *lost* in

meletivivlon.com - interesting and enlightening theory on jesus and the signs.. wars, earthquakes, food shortages.. what if jesus meant the very opposite ?

jesus said - look out that nobody misleads you.

( jesus warning us as a safegaurd for us not to be mislead about exactly when the time would come ) .

Doug Mason

Matt 24 does indeed warn the disciples against seeing wars, etc., as signs. They are not told to beware of wars but to beware of deceivers. Matt 24 does not say "huge wars", "large loss of life", "lots of nations", "long wars", "many earthquakes with large loss of life". Also, wars, earthquakes (no volcanoes?) and such have always existed. Wars and earthquakes are not portents of good tidings.

Later in the Matthew discourse they are again warned against listening to deceivers saying he has come in the secret place or in the desert, and later still parables are given that again say things will carry on as normal (unaware in Noah's time) and it will happen when no one expects (midnight, long after the day had ended at sunset).

The people who wrote Matt 24 had heard Paul say he was expectiing the Coming would take place in his own lifetime; the people who wrote Matthew (aafter Paul's death) tried to dampen the expectation (they were allied to Peter, not to Paul). And later the guy who wrote Revelation aimed it specifically to people of his own time, saying it was going to happen "soon". Even Jesus is supposed to have said it would happen within the time of his own generation.

At every age since then people have warned of an imminent divine intervention. The score - a Big Fat Zero.

Doug

35

Bad chronology - Samuel, Saul and David

by Jeffro in

according to 1 samuel 13:1, in the oldest hebrew manuscripts, saul ruled for two years (assuming saul actually existed at all, for which there is no hard evidence).

however, various [christian] translators assume this 'must' be an error because acts 13:21 says saul reigned for forty years.

saul's age at 1 samuel 13:1 is conveniently missing from the oldest manuscripts.

Doug Mason

Acts (of the Apostles) is recognised as providing stories that cannot be relied on. Which is of itself interesting, inasmuch as the WTS relies on Acts 15 for its authority.

I have no knowledge of the matters you raise, so I wonder why you rely on the Hebrew text when the Greek is so much older. Is the Greek different to the MT?

Doug