Posts by Doug Mason

16

Why does the WT insist that the first five books of the bible were written by Moses?

by marmot in

any biblical scholar worth his salt will tell you otherwise, and it's not as if this is a new concept.

as early as the 1700s people were noticing that the first books of the bible had numerous authors.

tell that to an elder, though, and you'll be booted for apostasy faster than you can say spanish inquisition.

Doug Mason

Read "Who Wrote the Bible?" by Richard Elliott Friedman.

As a sample from his book: http://www.jwstudies.com/Two_Flood_Stories.pdf

The exodus, Moses, Aaron, and Adam are fictitious creations by religious parties.

Doug

108

"Jehovah ALWAYS had/used an organization". How would you reply?

by EdenOne in

in a recent meeting with elders, an argument was used to the effect that jehovah has always [= throughout history] used, or operated through, an organization; therefore, the wts must be that organization today, since god must be using one.

naturally, i know what arguments i've used to counter that argument.

but i'm interested in hearing yours.

Doug Mason

The words that you read in the OT were produced by people desiring to establish and entrench their religious authority. These people they invented - Adam, Moses, Aaron, and so on were employed for religious purposes.

For example, one group of religionists held up Moses as their exemplar, whereas another group held up Aaron. Hence when each wrote their myth about the exodus, for example, they wrote it so that their hero had the upper hand. Only in the 5th century were these separate accounts woven into the composite form we see today.

While the stories started to be written about the 8th century BCE (some 400 years after the Moses event) but the majority was written and recreated during the 6th century BCE neo-Babylonian captivity. You can easily see the power play between the religious party and the royal household when the former passes jusgment on the latter.

Religion is always about power, about control, about manipulating minds. The WTS employs heavy-handed tactics; one could surmise the reasons, perhaps the current crop of leaders owe much to the influence of Rutherford. I suggest that the Elders act the way they do because they are fully aware of the consequences should they fail to toe the line in meting out sanctions and judgment.

Paranoia from top to bottom.

Doug

108

"Jehovah ALWAYS had/used an organization". How would you reply?

by EdenOne in

in a recent meeting with elders, an argument was used to the effect that jehovah has always [= throughout history] used, or operated through, an organization; therefore, the wts must be that organization today, since god must be using one.

naturally, i know what arguments i've used to counter that argument.

but i'm interested in hearing yours.

Doug Mason

Because Paul expected the "Coming" to occur almost immediately, he never wrote about structure or organisation. However, towards the end of the first century, people were trying to manage the situation and hence they wrote letters such as what are known as the Pastoral Epistles (for obvious reasons) - Timothy and Titus being prime examples. In these letters, fraudently stated as having been written by Paul, the anonymous writers set out instructions for positions within the hierarchy - Bishops, Elders, and such. Whereas Paul wrote that since the Parousia was imminent, it would be better if people did not marry, at the end of the century, decades after Paul's death, the Pastoral Epistle says that the Leader had to have a wife. Paul wrote that men and women were equal before God but a mysoginist organiser writing at the end of the first century contradicted Paul.

In the second century (about 180 CE), one of the problems confronting the early Church were people who said they were receiving communications directly from God - they did not need the Church hierarchy. These opponents of the descendants of Paul ("proto-orthodox") included people such as Marcion and Montanus. They posed an enormous problem for the Bishops and other Church leaders. Indeed, the Marcionites outnumbered these proto-orthodox. This threat to the Bishops started the move to decide which writings would be considered as sacred Scripture. In this way, they could resolve problems by referencing these documents. Naturally, the writings the Bishops chose were those writings that could be used to support them. Imagine what Christianity would look like if Paul's (genuine) writings were removed, along with those of his supporters.

After a few more centuries passed, this structured Church, authorised by the Roman Emperors, achieved an almost universal acceptance of their writings as the New Testament.

The writings of their opponents, including those of the Jerusalem Church described in Acts, are lost.

Wherever you look at the Christian Church through history and today, you will see structure, management, control. The decisions made by that early Christian sect and its Roman spopnsors shaped the destiny of Western Europe.

Doug

32

Undeclared changes to the 2013 NWT

by Doug Mason in

in the following from the 2013 edition of the nwt, the watchtower society indicates that when it released its initial 1950 edition, it considered the greek text provided by westcott and hort as its master text.

as a result of these additional masters, the wts made some undeclared changes to the 2013 nwt.

it does not list these changes or give any explanations.. greek text: in the late 19th century, scholars b. f. westcott and f.j.a.

Doug Mason

Thanks for your comments and help.

I see no problem in bringing the English language into a more modern sense.

I might be a bit cynical and suggest that the purpose of this 2013 edition is more to do with the pages that precede Genesis. They are a "guide" to any JW who might be tempted to read the Bible outside the texts referenced by the WTS (its "canon within a Canon").

These verses that are listed as omitted do not appear in many other modern translations nor do they appear in the Westcott & Hort or in the Nestle-Aland. So the comments about the omitted verses at pages 1729-1730 are probably addressed to people familiar with the King James Version. There is a voice on the www which decries the WH, favouring the textus receptus.

Thus, when we ignore their comments about these omitted verses, all we are left with is the vague "some other wording has been adjusted". I am slightly under-impressed.

Doug

32

Undeclared changes to the 2013 NWT

by Doug Mason in

in the following from the 2013 edition of the nwt, the watchtower society indicates that when it released its initial 1950 edition, it considered the greek text provided by westcott and hort as its master text.

as a result of these additional masters, the wts made some undeclared changes to the 2013 nwt.

it does not list these changes or give any explanations.. greek text: in the late 19th century, scholars b. f. westcott and f.j.a.

Doug Mason

Oubliette,

Everything that the WTS accepts comes from Christendom's scholars, such as the list of books that make up the NT and the contents of the Greek text.

Doug

32

Undeclared changes to the 2013 NWT

by Doug Mason in

in the following from the 2013 edition of the nwt, the watchtower society indicates that when it released its initial 1950 edition, it considered the greek text provided by westcott and hort as its master text.

as a result of these additional masters, the wts made some undeclared changes to the 2013 nwt.

it does not list these changes or give any explanations.. greek text: in the late 19th century, scholars b. f. westcott and f.j.a.

Doug Mason

In the following from the 2013 edition of the NWT, the Watchtower Society indicates that when it released its initial 1950 edition, it considered the Greek text provided by Westcott and Hort as its “master” text. The WTS further states that “since then” it added the Greek texts by Nestle-Aland and by the United Bible Societies to its list of “master texts”. As a result of these additional “masters”, the WTS made some undeclared changes to the 2013 NWT. It does not list these changes or give any explanations.

“Greek Text: In the late 19th century, scholars B. F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort compared existing Bible manuscripts and fragments as they prepared the Greek master text that they felt most closely reﬂected the original writings. In the mid-20th century, the New World Bible Translation Committee used that master text as the basis for its translation. Other early papyri, thought to date back to the second and third centuries C.E., were also used. Since then, more papyri have become available. In addition, master texts such as those by Nestle and Aland and by the United Bible Societies reﬂect recent scholarly studies. Some of the ﬁndings of this research were incorporated into this present revision.” (NWT 2013, page 1729)

The article in the 2013 continues, explaining that “some verses” were later additions, and were hence omitted. The list of deleted verses in the 2013 NWT article is identical to the list that has appeared ever since the release of the 1950 edition. With each of these deleted verses, the 1969 Kingdom Interlinear Translation [KIT] explicitly states: “This verse is omitted in the Westcott and Hort Greek text”. So the more recent “masters” have had no effect on the deleted verses. In reality, the WTS is casting its lot with Westcott and Hort in opposition to the Textus Receptus, which is the Greek text used for the King James (Authorised) Version.

“Based on those master texts, it is evident that some verses of the Christian Greek Scriptures found in older translations, such as the King James Version, were actually additions made by later copyists and were never part of the inspired Scriptures. However, because the verse division generally accepted in Bible translations was already established in the 16th century, the omission of these verses now creates gaps in the verse numbering in most Bibles. The verses are Matthew 17:21; 18:11; 23:14; Mark 7:16; 9:44, 46; 11:26; 15:28; Luke 17:36; 23:17; John 5:4; Acts 8:37; 15:34; 24:7; 28:29; and Romans 16:24. In this revised edition, those omitted verses are indicated by a footnote at the location of the omission.” (NWT 2013, page 1729)

The 2013 article continues, commenting on the shortening of two passages. These are not new, either, as this has been its practice with the NWT ever since the 1950 edition.

“Regarding the long conclusion for Mark 16 (verses 9-20), the short conclusion for Mark 16, and the wording found at John 7:53–8:11, it is evident that none of these verses were included in the original manuscripts. Therefore, those spurious texts have not been included in this revision. (Footnote: Further details on why these verses are viewed as spurious can be found in the footnotes of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures—With References, published in 1984.)” (NWT 2013, pages 1729-1730)

These undeclared changes are said to be “minor”, and if the example with Matthew 7:13 is any guide, it is surprising that the WTS bothered to release a 2013 edition. Unless something of significance has been slipped in unannounced?

“Some other wording has been adjusted to incorporate what scholars generally accept as the most authentic reﬂection of the original writings. For instance, according to some manuscripts, Matthew 7:13 reads: “Go in through the narrow gate because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading oﬀ into destruction.” In previous editions of the New World Translation, “is the gate” was not included in the text. However, further study of the manuscript evidence led to the conclusion that “is the gate” was in the original text. So it was included in this present edition. There are a number of similar reﬁnements. However, these adjustments are minor, and none of them change the basic message of God’s Word. (NWT 2013, page 1730)

If the works of Nestle-Aland and the United Bible Societies were used to amend the text provided by Westcott and Hort, what are the resulting changes that were made to the text of the NWT?

(Underlining added for emphasis).

Doug

1

Any charts on active jw's by year in relation to world or USA population?

by EndofMysteries in

the wt only uses charts of it's own personal numbers year by year.

it would be interesting to see for example, the numbers year by year in the usa in relation to the population of the usa for each year.

i think in that type of chart, the ratio would show a decrease instead of an increase.

Doug Mason

jwfacts.com provides statistical analyses. They might help:

http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/statistics.php

Doug

23

Can a JW be accused of apostasy for just quoting scriptures?

by Island Man in

for example, let's say an awake jw wanted to share ttatt about the true meaning of john 10:16, so he just posts on his facebook wall a couple passages of scripture with no commentary whatsoever - like this:.

"in answer he said: i was not sent forth to any but to the lost sheep of the house of israel.

- matthew 15:24.

Doug Mason

The problem for the WTS with quoting the Christian Scriptures is that it was provided by Christendom.

Doug

12

I just noticed this little change in the NEW New World Translation

by stillin in

it always made me think when i corinthians 11 was read at the memorial, when jesus said "as often as you keep doing this..." i would think"hmmm, once a year isn't really very often, the other churches are a lot more often than us.".

great to see that they fixed that to "keep doing this.

" wouldn't want any doubts, now, would we?.

Doug Mason

Paul was the earliest writer of the books in the NT. In Galatians he writes that he learned nothing from the Jerusalem Church (James, Peter, and John) but that everything he got came to him directly from Jesus. (Presumably he had "visions".)

Paul is thus the creator of this "Last Supper" Eucharist, with its mystical "blood" and "flesh". The later Gospel writers, who had no personal experience of Jesus either, copied Paul's story, word-for-word in one case. The exception is the John Gospel, who place this "blood" and "flesh" into a totally different context; nothing to do with any "Last Supper in an upper room".

Doug

18

Glaring Mistake In RNWT And Todays WT

by piztjw in

todays' wt had this sentence in one of the paragraphs....we know this because each of their individual names are indelibly written upon the 12 foundation stones of the heavenly new jerusalem.rev.

21:14.. the cross reference lists judas iscariot as one of the twelve.

so with one breath they have said judas was cursed as jesus betrayer, and yet in their rnwt they still cross reference him in the list of the twelve named foundation stones of nj.

Doug Mason

When in 367 CE, Athanasius included Revelation in his Canon of Scriptures, he did so because Emperor Constantine liked the book. But despite this, its rocky road of rejection and acceptance continued for further centuries.

Should it be included today in the NT? In practical usage, it would not matter to 99.9% of Christians if the book was dropped. It is not part of their practical Canon.

Doug