Posts by Doug Mason

17

So according to the bible, "believing" is enough to have everlasting life.

by NikL in

i am certain this has been brought up many times before.

according to john 6.... 44 no man can come to me unless the father, who sent me, draws him,+ and i will resurrect him on the last day.+ 45 it is written in the prophets: ‘they will all be taught by jehovah.+ everyone who has listened to the father and has learned comes to me.

46 not that any man has seen the father,+ except the one who is from god; this one has seen the father.+ 47 most truly i say to you, whoever believes has everlasting life.+.

Doug Mason

David_Jay,

I like your response that "belief" does not equate with "mental assent" but that it involves a total change in a person's life and outlook.

I would like to add that the community that wrote John's Gospel focused on the incarnation, the revealing of God's nature through the person Jesus. The Gospel starts off with a cosmic "bang", a revealing of God through his Word, personified in Jesus. In the Gospel all action related to salvation is driven by and originates with God. Man can accept or reject, and those who accept change their lives - they now respond ("believe") and they are now already in receipt of eternal life.

For this reason, the focus in John and the Epistles is with the life of Jesus, not with the death or resurrection. There is no ceremony related to Jesus' death in John (either baptism or "memorial meal") as it is with Paul. His focus lay with the death and resurrection, so he had the cultic ceremonies that related to Jesus' death and resurrection.

I sometimes wonder whether Paul HAD to vociferously state that there was no other Gospel than the one he was preaching because of communities such as the Johannines, who were not concerned with Jesus' death in terms of salvation.

My draft thoughts on John are at:

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

Doug

PS. I am in no way saying that I agree with either Paul or John. I am simply providng my analysis of what they were telling their local communities.

10

Writing a "Thesis on Doubting the Watchtower"

by Saethydd in

i'm currently writing what i've decided to call a "thesis on doubting the watchtower," and was wondering if you guys could help me out a bit with the research.

my plan is to use it as a sort of personal reference.

if any of you could help me find the publications i'm looking for i would appreciate it.. as things stand i need:.

Doug Mason

Hi,

I sent you an email a while ago with the files attached. If you have not yet found it, I suggest you look in your "Spam" filter. Feel free to email me again if my email to you disappeared into the ether.

Doug

10

Writing a "Thesis on Doubting the Watchtower"

by Saethydd in

i'm currently writing what i've decided to call a "thesis on doubting the watchtower," and was wondering if you guys could help me out a bit with the research.

my plan is to use it as a sort of personal reference.

if any of you could help me find the publications i'm looking for i would appreciate it.. as things stand i need:.

Doug Mason

Hi,

Send me an email and I can help you with your #1 request.

You will find my email at:

http://www.jwstudies.com/contact_me.html

Two of the versions I have cite the dates of the elders' letters.

Doug

1

Look over my shoulder at John

by Doug Mason in

as i work slowly through my proposed study on the evolution of soteriology, i once again open myself up to your corrections, advice, and suggestions.

this time i am providing my early rough draft on john's gospel and epistles (letters).

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

Doug Mason

Hi,

As I work slowly through my proposed Study on the evolution of soteriology, I once again open myself up to your corrections, advice, and suggestions. This time I am providing my early Rough Draft on John's Gospel and Epistles (letters).

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

Doug

77

Interpret John 1:1 by John 1:1.

by towerwatchman in

interpret john 1:1 by john 1:1. .

the greek language has the definite article which has approximately thirty variations, is translated into english as “the”, and points to an identifiable personality, someone we have prior knowledge of.

but the greek language has no indefinite article corresponding to the english “a”, or “an”.

Doug Mason

towerwatchman,

Thanks. The scriptures are full of chiasms, including Genesis 1. Sometimes a chiasm spans a whole document.

With Hebraic poetry, they were not interested with rhyming words at the end of each line, they were interested in paralleling ideas, either in agreement or as contrasts. (Look at the Psalms, for examples).

Thus when we consider a pairing, we need to see the commonality of an idea, whether in agreement or as a contrast.

The focus point of the chaism of John 1:1-18 lays the theme of the remainder of the Gospel, as for example with John 17:3.

Doug

21

TIL - 537 BC is in the Bible - and more

by berrygerry in

from an apologist site:.

http://thirdwitness.com/607_bce/www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/607/realissue.html.

hence, counting back from 537 bce (the year the bible says the jews returned home) for a full seventy years, we arrive at the year 607 bce.. .

Doug Mason

The secular sources that provide the WTS with the 539 BCE date employ a system that commences with Absolute Dates, such as 568 BCE for the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, and then employing the secular accepted neo-Babylonian chronology to arrive at the intervening dates.

If the WTS tries to locate a precise and exact "70-year period", then it does not understand the mind of the ancient Hebrews or their historiography. Trying to do so imposes 21st century thinking into the minds and perceptions of an agrarian people living in a different culture some 2000 to 2500 years ago.

Today, we might think that the record of history is a tabulation on facts, records of diaries, and so on, but in those days the recording of history was something new and untried. These "historians" were religious scribes whose purpose was religious. For example, to think that the Gospel accounts are literal biographies is to completely misunderstand them. Each is a religious construct by a particular group written for its own group to suit its own religious ends. The earliest - Mark - was written 40 years after Jesus walked, talked, and was executed.

Doug

21

TIL - 537 BC is in the Bible - and more

by berrygerry in

from an apologist site:.

http://thirdwitness.com/607_bce/www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/607/realissue.html.

hence, counting back from 537 bce (the year the bible says the jews returned home) for a full seventy years, we arrive at the year 607 bce.. .

Doug Mason

berrygerry,

When you look at the first diagram at that site you referenced in your initial post, you will note very carefully that in accordance with the WTS's "explanation", that the apologist correctly identifies their start of the "70 years" as "when Judah went into exile from off its soil", dating this in the 7th month (October, Tishri).

The WTS has two reasons for focusing on the exile into Egypt in the 7th month: firstly, it ties in with their termination of the period in the 7th month. Equally significant is the fact that Jerusalem was devastated in the 5th month.

I have analysed the situation, and it is impossible for the "exile into Egypt" as taking place only two months after the destruction of Jerusalem. I suspect that at least 2 years passed and possibly 4 years.

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

In addition, the WTS is incapable of arriving at 537 BCE for the Returnees to assemble at the site of the destroyed temple, or that any Scripture says this marked the end of the period. 2 Chr 36:21-22 makes it clear that the period of Babylonian rule ended on the day it was defeated (539 BCE).

And the WTS gets its 539 BCE date from the secular sources who use processes that the WTS rejects.

And if it needed the land to be emptied before the "70 years" could commence, why does the WTS not apply that "principle" to its end? The Jews returned to the temple site long after each had been settled into theor own villages.

Doug

77

Interpret John 1:1 by John 1:1.

by towerwatchman in

interpret john 1:1 by john 1:1. .

the greek language has the definite article which has approximately thirty variations, is translated into english as “the”, and points to an identifiable personality, someone we have prior knowledge of.

but the greek language has no indefinite article corresponding to the english “a”, or “an”.

Doug Mason

The focus of the chiasm of John 1:1-18 shows not only the objective of that passage but, given its location in the Prologue, shows that it provides the dominant theme for the Johannine Community.

I have provided three ways of presenting the chiasm, and each shows the same focus.

http://www.jwstudies.com/Chiastic_structure_of_John_1__1_to_18.pdf

The earliest Gospel – Mark’s – was composed about 40 years after the time of Jesus’ ministry. Matthew’s Gospel was written about 55 years after the time of Jesus. John’s Gospel was composed over a period from about 50 to 70 years after Jesus, while Luke’s Gospel spanned a period from about 50 to 90 years after Jesus.

None was or is a literal biography of Jesus. Each account represents the views of each community; each account was written by, to and for that community. Mark's Gospel provided a model and often the words, provided material for subsequent Gospel writers, but each modified the story to account for its own needs, its own liturgy.

No NT writing is a theological treatise. Any quibbling must be taken from the view of the Jewish mind at that time, not according to any current Westernised perceptions.

In addition to providing the views of its community, John’s Gospel provides an insight into the community’s experiences and their opposition to the views of other communities, often the leadership of the synagogue, whom they called “the Jews”. In reality, the community members were Jews but their experiences at the hands of the synagogue leadership embittered the relationship. I have previously provided one account of that experience.

Doug

77

Interpret John 1:1 by John 1:1.

by towerwatchman in

interpret john 1:1 by john 1:1. .

the greek language has the definite article which has approximately thirty variations, is translated into english as “the”, and points to an identifiable personality, someone we have prior knowledge of.

but the greek language has no indefinite article corresponding to the english “a”, or “an”.

Doug Mason

smiddy,

I suggest that we are interested in seeing how others lived and thought in order that we might help ourselves. These scriptures need only be seen as literature and of showing us the human mind (not God's).

To me, they illustrate the power that mythology holds, and in that way they make me look at us and ask if we are any better at accepting facts, rationally.

We can pour scorn at the ancients believing their God(s) as being directly involved in their daily lives, of thinking that God was directly involved in the affairs of nations, yet in the next breath we hear our parliament opening with prayer, of politicians invoking their religious biases (same-sex marriage, abortion, etc.), and of US leaders saying "God bless America".

We have no idea what the original writers of "Scripture" wrote. There has been no God to protect it from corruption, distortion or deliberate manipulation. The WTS is only one of myriads who have done this.

I think the quotation from Epicurus is most apt, which starts with (check Google Images): "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? ...."

Doug

77

Interpret John 1:1 by John 1:1.

by towerwatchman in

interpret john 1:1 by john 1:1. .

the greek language has the definite article which has approximately thirty variations, is translated into english as “the”, and points to an identifiable personality, someone we have prior knowledge of.

but the greek language has no indefinite article corresponding to the english “a”, or “an”.

Doug Mason

towerwatchman,

I can provide the chiasm, but I would first like people to investigate for themselves because activity is the best way to learn and for things to stick. So let's just wait a while and see what people discover is the focus of the chiasm and hence its purpose. At the same time, it provides an understanding of what the Johannine Community intended with that opening as well as providing a mechanism for understanding the message of the remainder of their Gospel.

The Prologue was written well after that community had developed their High Christology, much later than other parts of the Gospel. The aporia are used by scholars (and I am most certainly not one!) to distinguish the individual elements of the Gospel and their likely location in the evolution of its writing.

In my understanding, the Johannine Community was directly addressing its own community members and referencing their experiences at the hand of the synagogue community. As for 1 John, rather than seeing it as addressing Gnosticism, I understand that it was addressing those who had been members of the Johannine Community but had formed their own breakaway schism.

I agree that these Johannine writings concern that Community's views on Christ (and hence on their soteriology). The writers (and I include Paul in this regard) were not writing theology. They were addressing their immediate and local concerns.

Doug