Posts by Doug Mason

17

God supported Neco instead of His faithful king

by opusdei1972 in

if you read the chapter 23 of the book of 1 kings, you will note that josiah was one of best kings of judah.

he did many good things in favor to yahweh-worshipping.

let's read:.

Doug Mason

opus,

Read the "books" from the outside. The books of Kings and Chronicles were written at different times by different people for different religio-political purposes.

Kings was compiled during the neo-Babylonian captivity by people "explaining" their parlous state. They rewrote their history to show that this destruction (of their authority) had all come about because the nation and the royal household had not heeded the prophets (and hence the voice of the priests - at Jerusalem). Kings is part of this created history that begins with Deuteronomy and includes Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings. This is known as the Deuteronomic History. Those Kings who disobeyed the whims of the Jerusalem priesthood were "bad" but those who succumbed to their will - such as Josiah - were "good". Jeremiah started his priestly calling under Josiah and hence held him in highest regard.

Chronicles, however was written much later, during the Persian era. While the writer(s) - likely Ezra - accepted much of Kings, some of it did not suit his religio-political views. So he made subtle changes; just consider the relative stories about Manasseh (spelling?). They portray him very differently.

These differences in allegiances affected other parts of the written record. For example, it is necessary to disentangle those parts in the writings of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers which were written by those having allegiance to Aaron (those of the Aaronic priesthood) from those having allegiance to Moses.

The Bible world is not flat.

Doug

29

"God-breathed Scriptures"

by Doug Mason in

my study responds to the articles inspiration and canon in the book, insight on the scriptures.

there can be few topics of more significance, regardless of ones attitude to the bible.. http://www.jwstudies.com/god-breathed_scriptures.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

Phizzy,

I like it! Thanks for your sharp eyes. I can see how that happened (two hernias). I blame the OCR conversion of the PDF scan, but in reality I simply missed it.

I have fixed it, so no one need have two hernias in their copy.

Doug

29

"God-breathed Scriptures"

by Doug Mason in

my study responds to the articles inspiration and canon in the book, insight on the scriptures.

there can be few topics of more significance, regardless of ones attitude to the bible.. http://www.jwstudies.com/god-breathed_scriptures.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

Emery,

Please make your own study of 2 Timothy and the associated aspects. I want my ideas to stimulate personal research. Make use of bits of my findings but do not rely only on what I have come to understand. Use it as a starter. The joy is in the search, the excitement is in the discovery. So you must make it your own.

This Study, as I wrote, is a direct response the those two online articles from the "Insight" book. I traverse similar territory in another Study:

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

but more extensively and with different reference sources. Read the books that I cite - and others ("St Paul versus St Peter" by Michael Goulder is essential reading).

I know for certain that no two people will take to same outcomes from my writings, that no one will see it as I have done. Unlike the WTS, which demands lock-step uniformity, my pleasure comes in seeing the diversity. I am enjoying the contributions to this Thread.

There are so many other features that this subject touches on. With the contents of the Christian Church's OT and NT, it is so important to try to get to grips with the dynamics of those first few hundred years. The Pauline sect ultimately dominated because of a vision - a dream - by a Roman Emperor. The Romans could not tolerate dissension, so Emperors such as Constantine and Theodosius became intimately involved, making decrees in order to ensure harmony.

Consider the person Paul: his are the earliest writings and he says he did not get his ideas from any man - and was totally opposed to Jerusalem - but they came to him in dreams/visions. So where did he get the words supposedly spoken at the "Last Supper"? Further, why did the later people who wrote the Gospel follow Paul's account? Was Paul a mystic steeped in Greek thinking? How did he reinvent the meanings in the Hebrew Scriptures? What would Christianity be like if we only had the Gospel stories of Jesus?

Thank you for your reference from Barnes.

Soldier on.

Doug

29

"God-breathed Scriptures"

by Doug Mason in

my study responds to the articles inspiration and canon in the book, insight on the scriptures.

there can be few topics of more significance, regardless of ones attitude to the bible.. http://www.jwstudies.com/god-breathed_scriptures.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

Eden,

You are absolutely correct. You will find discussions on whether the inserted "is" is valid and whether the rendering should be "every God-inspired Scripture is beneficial" Some also ask whether it should be "all" Scripture or "every" Scripture.

For me and my biases, I suggest that the theme of the passage and of the whole letter is a pastoral encouragement of Timothy to preach and teach, so this particular adjective needs to be read in that context. Thus "every God-inspired Scripture" would sit most happily. I think it is possible that some are caught up in the idea that "this happened because that is what God would have done", thereby presuming what they want to prove.

Having done this, problems with "inspiration" referring to the corrupted texts that Timothy (Paul and Jesus) heard means that a new term had to be invented for the original words: "inscripturation", as well as expressions such as "verbal plenary". Layer upon layer, when the original text at 2 Timothy provides no explanation of a process. And we have such things as "adjectival verbals", and so on, without my knowing whether these were used at that time or whether the anonymous writer intended such a grammatical structure.

The variety of explanations shows the weakness of the original statement. Let me go out on a limb and suggest something even more way out: "all Scripture-inspired-of-God" or "all Scripture is inspired-of-God". Not being a scholar of Greek nor a grammarian, I am quite likely to be shot down in verbal flames.

Yes, which of the Jewish writings were available to Timothy?

Most commentators say that the word was invented at 2 Timothy, although I did locate the statement: "theopneustos (inspired by God) is rare, not being used before the Hel[lenic] period and then only with reference to divination", which I noted at page 5 of my Study. Paul (although likely not the writer of 2 Timothy) invented many ideas that are crucial to Christian mythology. Always remember that he was the earliest writer and that others copied ideas from him. (Hint: eucharist, and significance of baptism.)

As I wrote - read widely from the range of views, argue with yourself, make decisions, be prepared to keep learning and adjusting. The joy is in the hunt, in the mental gymnastics. The Bible is a very human book.

Doug

29

"God-breathed Scriptures"

by Doug Mason in

my study responds to the articles inspiration and canon in the book, insight on the scriptures.

there can be few topics of more significance, regardless of ones attitude to the bible.. http://www.jwstudies.com/god-breathed_scriptures.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

Eden,

I understand there would be a few, but I do not have any information at hand on them. I had a very quick look at the www, without being able to locate a list of these words.

We are continually making up new words ("selfie", etc.) and the practice is not new. Even the word "atone" was an invented word:

http://hccl.byu.edu/classes/Rel212eh/Unit%202/15b-WordAtonement.pdf

At issue with theopneustos is that it is foolishness to build a theology on a new word that appears only once in the Scriptures, and that the context does not explain nor define. The later sparse use of the word applied it to non-Scripture, such as a tomb inscription.

The word is an adjective. It is not a verb. It does not describe an action taken by God. It describes the quality of the Hebrew writings that Timothy was exposed to when he was a child. The Bible did not exist when that verse was written.

The other matter of concern is the serious doubt that 2 Timothy was written by Paul, but was actually written by one of his adherents. Therefore, if a relevance could have been found in Paul's writings, it did not come from him.

Likewise with the only other reference raised in this matter - 2 Peter 1:20-21 - serious doubt has existed from the beginning of the Church Fathers that Peter wrote that epistle. Rather, it is dated to about 150 CE and was not written by one of Peter's adherents but by one of Paul's. (Jerusalem and Antioch were at loggerheads - a real tale of two cities). 2 Peter was written by someone familiar with Greek and with Greek thinking, not by an illiterate poor fisherman. Most agree that it is a commentary on the book of Jude and was hence produced much later.

So please accept my inability to help you find that list of "new and invented words". But if you do succeed, I would really love to knw.

Doug

29

"God-breathed Scriptures"

by Doug Mason in

my study responds to the articles inspiration and canon in the book, insight on the scriptures.

there can be few topics of more significance, regardless of ones attitude to the bible.. http://www.jwstudies.com/god-breathed_scriptures.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

Quendi,

I had my eureka moment while reading a very Christian book, "Old Testament Survey: The Messages, Form, and Background of the Old Testament", edited by Lasor, Hubbard, and Bush, published by Eerdmans, 1996. Its date show you how late in my life I came to this moment.

While I was studying the book, I wondered why the articles were so focused on events contemporary with the writers. The thoughts flooded in but I struggled against them: Why should anyone take any interest in the circumstances when this is God's book? But I could not stem the flow and I remember the moment when I could not fight the thought that I should be looking at the Bible from the outside. I discovered that it was critical to learn about the people of this Late Iron Age period and their subsequent editors, their idioms, understandings, politics (priests versus the royal household, between various groups of priests, etc.), the illiteracy (and polytheism) of the populace, that I was reading the views of only one side (propaganda), and so on. I then extended this to my reading of the New Testament documents, and the history of their writing and compilation.

Regarding the writing of the OT, the most significant event was the neo-Babylonian period, and regarding the editing the most important period is the Perian era. Regarding interpretation: include an understanding of Pesher. The term comes mainly from the Dead Sea community, who saw Scriptures being fulfilled in them. This is familiar to those who know the teachings of the Watchtower Society, who see Scripture fulfilled in them. Jesus did the same. Basically it means "this is that", ignoring the circumstance of the original context and applying the words as relating to contemporary events.

Yes, the Bible does give comfort to many. Likewise, religion helps many cope with the vagaries and pressures of life. If that helps, they should continue. Similarly, when the Bible raises stress and concern (Armageddon), family breakdowns, control of mind and living, then reliance on it should be reassessed. When religion fails to help people reconcile with current events near and far, they rationalise this by saying "God works in mysterious ways". When you look at the history of humanity, do you see religion bringing peace, or conflict and war?

All the very best with your study and growth,

Doug

29

"God-breathed Scriptures"

by Doug Mason in

my study responds to the articles inspiration and canon in the book, insight on the scriptures.

there can be few topics of more significance, regardless of ones attitude to the bible.. http://www.jwstudies.com/god-breathed_scriptures.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

Hi,

My Study responds to the articles “Inspiration” and “Canon” in the book, Insight on the Scriptures. There can be few topics of more significance, regardless of one’s attitude to the Bible.

http://www.jwstudies.com/God-breathed_Scriptures.pdf

Doug

21

WT Study, Sunday 6th July 2014.

by skin in

it might be the way i think and see, but the first time i looked at the image on pg 27 of the april 15th watchtower i was trying to figure out how it applied to this study.

this is a darkened black and white image that appears in my edition of this magazine, (its colour online).

anyway, para 9 talks about a brother that had an issue with looking at online porn.

Doug Mason

I realise this is a bit off-topic, but the SDAs in the 19th century were sex-obsessed. Their Doctor Kellogg, who said he was a sex-therapist, invented a breakfast cereal -- without sugar of course -- as a treatment for masturbation. Its name is Corn Flakes.

Doug

51

Elders answer questions about the changes of the blood ban

by opusdei1972 in

some days ago two elders visited my sister because she has not been attending the meetings more than one year.

this time she prepared notes containing watchtower past teachings about the blood ban so as to ask them for those changes, and it seems that the elders were also prepared for her past questions.

for instance she showed them that "albumin" was considered "under scriptural ban" in 1956 (read the page 20 of awake, september 8).

Doug Mason

I have an amount of material on the subject at: http://www.jwstudies.com/blood.html

In particular, I would like to emphasise: http://www.jwstudies.com/Handling_Medical_Evidence.pdf

But you might find this handy, too: http://www.jwstudies.com/Loyalty_Test.pdf

Doug

23

Jw's dont really care about doctrine do they?

by marriedtoajw in

it seems to me that jw's really don't care about doctrine.

ephesians chapter 4 verse 11 "and he gave some as apostles others as prophets, others as evangelists, others as pastors and teachers to equip the holy ones for the work of ministry for the building up of the body of christ until we attain the unity of faith and knowledge of the son of god to mature manhood to the extent of the full stature of christ so that we may no longer be in infants tost by waves and swept along by every wind of teaching arising from human trickery from their cunning in the interest of deceitful scheming".

is it just me or does this verse totally annihilate the doctrine or belief in new light.

Doug Mason

From The Watchtower, June 1, 1967, page 331, para 7:

Some have called Jehovah’s witnesses “false prophets” because, in times past, they have viewed things a certain way and, later, have made a change through their official publications. Or, there may have been practices by some members in the organization that have been permitted to continue for a time for lack of knowledge as to how to handle these things, but later they have learned from God’s Word what his will is and have gone ahead and made the necessary corrections. False prophets do not correct themselves. God’s people do.

-----------

The following is a comment on these words by Alan Rogerson in his book: “Millions Now Living Will Never Die: A Study of Jehovah’s Witnesses”, pages 82-83 (Constable, 1969):

The above explanations are clearly preferable to the previous Society line that they had always been right. Nevertheless the Society is still not telling the whole truth. They do not say that up to now they have not admitted their mistakes, no wonder they were called 'false prophets'. They are also very coy about how much they confess; my impression is that they only admit to errors that are blatant and liable to cause individual Witnesses to fall away; if possible they sweep most of their past errors under the carpet of soothing historical generalisations. It is typical of the Society to use even their errors as evidence that they are right: 'False prophets do not correct themselves'. They are making a virtue out of their repentance, forgetting about the fact that they were wrong! Of course it is better to repent of error than not to repent, but I should have thought it was more typical of God's·organisation not to make errors at all. The Witnesses' reply to this is that human beings are fallible and even those in God's organisation are not immune from error. It seems to me, however, that this makes it difficult to decide which is God's organisation if that too is prone to error, and the New World Society has made so many errors in the past that they do not appear to be the likely candidates.