Posts by Doug Mason

7

AwakeI explains differences in Scripture quotations

by Doug Mason in

this article in the awake!

of november 22, 1968 discusses reasons for differences between quotations in the new testament (“christian scriptures”) and their hebrew or septuagint sources.. http://www.jwstudies.com/awake__nov_22__1968__was_the_writer_quoting.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

A relevant factor not revealed by the Awake! article is the wide use of Hebrew Apocrypha by NT writers.

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

Doug

7

AwakeI explains differences in Scripture quotations

by Doug Mason in

this article in the awake!

of november 22, 1968 discusses reasons for differences between quotations in the new testament (“christian scriptures”) and their hebrew or septuagint sources.. http://www.jwstudies.com/awake__nov_22__1968__was_the_writer_quoting.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

Employing elements of Higher Criticism and Textual (Lower) Criticism, the Awake! article correctly identifies:

1. New Testament writers preferred the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures;
2. There are differences between the Hebrew text and the Greek text of the “Hebrew Scriptures”;
3. The NT writers had access to earlier versions of the Greek Septuagint.

The available Greek Septuagint texts are about 1000 years older than the Hebrew manuscripts. All material has several times been deliberately and accidentally amended. Over the years and centuries, deliberate changes continued to be made to the Scriptures as ideas and teachings changed.

The Awake! article does not acknowledge that it relies on the Bible provided to it by the Protestant Church. Other Christians, such as the Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, and Coptic Churches use Bibles with different lists of books (canon). The canon of the Codex Sinaiticus is also not the same as the canon of the Protestant Bible. The Jews’ Tanakh is also different. Martin Luther wanted to get rid of four NT books.

After all this, quite illogically, the Awake! article concludes that the Bible it uses is “Jehovah’s Word”.

The following is from pages ix-xi of Crucible of Faith: The Ancient Revolution That Made Our Modern Religious World, by Philip Jenkins.

Doug

========================

The Jewish Bible—the “Hebrew Bible”—has three sections, the Torah (Law), Nevi’im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings), which gives us the acronym Tanakh. In the books that it treats as approved or canonical, that collection corresponds exactly to the Protestant Old Testament. However, the precise number of books differs somewhat in each version, because works that are treated as a unity in the Hebrew (such as Ezra and Nehemiah) are distinguished in the Protestant text.

In its attitude to the canon—that is, in its choice of approved works—the “Hebrew Bible” represents one approach, but it is not necessarily the only one. During the third century BCE, Jewish scholars translated biblical texts into the Greek version known as the Septuagint. Because it is a translation, one would assume that its readings are inferior to those of the Hebrew or Aramaic, but that is not always so. In many cases, the Septuagint preserved readings that are older and arguably more authentic. Also, the Septuagint reflects the choice of books prevailing in the ancient era and is thus considerably wider in scope than what is found in the Tanakh. The fact that certain books were accepted within the canon while others were rejected was based on critical and historical assumptions that were not always sound—for instance, deciding which books might be genuinely ancient.

In creating their own canon, most Christian churches from early times through the Reformation relied on the Septuagint and thus included in their Old Testaments several works absent from the Hebrew Bible. This meant 1 and 2 Maccabees, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Tobit, Baruch, Judith, and the Wisdom of Solomon; in addition, they knew more extended versions of books like Daniel and Esther. During the sixteenth-century Reformation, Protestants demoted these books to the inferior level of Apocrypha, “hidden things,” but that division was not observed by Roman Catholic or Orthodox Christians or by many other smaller churches around the world. For non-Protestants these Deuterocanonical books (literally, the “Second Canon”) are canonical rather than merely apocryphal, and they are unequivocally part of the Old Testament. Orthodox churches use the category anagignoskomena, “those which are to be read,” which includes the Deuterocanonicals, but also 1 Esdras, 3 Maccabees, and Psalm 151.

It is therefore difficult to know how to refer to texts that are canon for some but not for others. To illustrate the problem, how should I refer to the influential book of Sirach, which was originally written in Hebrew around 190 BCE, although historically it was mainly known in Greek? Portions of the Hebrew original survive among the Dead Sea Scrolls (together with the Book of Tobit), although that does not necessarily say anything about the canonical status of either work. In later times, Sirach did not form part of either the Hebrew Bible or the Protestant Old Testament, but it is canonical for Catholics, Orthodox, and other groups. It thus forms part of (some) Old Testaments, but not the Hebrew Bible.

Complicating the matter further, some sizable churches have long operated in isolation from other Christian communities and they are still more expansive in their definitions. The most significant is the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, which counts an impressive forty million members. Besides the familiar books of the Protestant Bible plus the Deuterocanonical works, they also use and canonize other significant writings that once circulated widely but have since been forgotten in most of the Christian world. These include 1 Enoch and the book of Jubilees. Various churches worldwide also accept additional books under the general name of “Maccabees.”

7

AwakeI explains differences in Scripture quotations

by Doug Mason in

this article in the awake!

of november 22, 1968 discusses reasons for differences between quotations in the new testament (“christian scriptures”) and their hebrew or septuagint sources.. http://www.jwstudies.com/awake__nov_22__1968__was_the_writer_quoting.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

This Article in the Awake! of November 22, 1968 discusses reasons for differences between quotations in the New Testament (“Christian Scriptures”) and their Hebrew or Septuagint sources.

http://www.jwstudies.com/Awake__Nov_22__1968__Was_the_Writer_Quoting.pdf

Doug

5

Daniel 10:13 and 20 speak of demons governing their respective nations?

by I_love_Jeff in

territorial spirits-.

daniel 10:13,20 prince of persia.

deut: 32:9 “when the most high divided the nations, when he separated the sons of adam, he set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of god.

Doug Mason

Without going into details, a very broad picture:

At the time that the Hebrew text of Deuteronomy was initially assembled, during the 7th century rule of Josiah, the nation was largely monolatrist. This means that their dominant God was Yahweh but they recognized that other gods did exist. Therefore the Hebrew text says that God (namely EL) assigned a god to each nation.

By the 3rd century BCE, the Monotheists held sway, so when the Greek-speaking Jews translated the text (now known as the Septuagint), they amended it to say that "angels" were assigned to each nation.

The book of Daniel as we now have it was assembled in the 2nd century (164 BCE) and it speaks of angels fighting on behalf of the Jews. Daniel also speaks of the Watchers, who were spirit beings that originated in the Book of Enoch.

This apocalyptic fervor of that era created books such as Enoch, Daniel, Jubilees, Life of Adam and Eve, and others.

Doug

1

Update coming for my "Satan" Study

by Doug Mason in

the temple stood from about 520 bce to its destruction in 70 ce.

it was renovated and extended during that period.

the second half of its life also witnessed expansions and innovations in the jews’ beliefs.

Doug Mason

The Temple stood from about 520 BCE to its destruction in 70 CE. It was renovated and extended during that period. The second half of its life also witnessed expansions and innovations in the Jews’ beliefs. In addition to the entrenchment of Monotheism, this latter period saw the rise of Messianic and Apocalyptic fervor.

Perhaps as a factor of these developments, Satan the public servant changed into Devil, the diabolic personification of evil.

After releasing my Study, “Satan. Lucifer. Devil”, I was informed of a book that deals with the period. It provides valuable information, including on the formation of Devil. This means I will incorporate some of this material into my Study. This should not take long to complete, but in the meantime a passage from that book is available at:

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

Doug

7

Does Jehovah need any protection?

by I_love_Jeff in

does jehovah need to be protected by a zealous scribe***** (masoretic text) or anyone else?

deuteronomy 32:8 is a textbook example of how later scribes sometimes changed the biblical text in a misguided attempt to “protect” god’s reputation.

deut 32:8, eliminates references to other divine beings (32:8, “sons of god”; 32:43, “heavenly ones” and “gods”).

Doug Mason

The Scriptural texts have over time been subjected to many deliberate amendments, including efforts to make them align with contemporary thinking. (No different from the intentions of the Watchtower Society.)

Thus when the dominant writers were at least monolatrists (recognizing that there were gods apart from Yahweh -- "you must not have other Gods before me") the original passage was acceptable.

I need to add that Deuteronomy as we have it comes from the 6th century BCE, when Monotheism was trying to become the dominant force. Contemporary familiarity would have limited the extent of change the Deuteronomists could invoke at the time.

However, Monotheism had succeeded, by the time the Scriptures were translation into Greek, so the text was amended.

The Book of Jubilees was written about that time (possibly by the Sadducees) and the following from "Crucible of Faith" pages 159-160 shows how they amended the text to suit their teachings.

Doug

==========

On earth, angels served as the leaders or rulers of particular nations or territories, and in this capacity they closely resembled the pagan gods of old. In fact, one passage in Deuteronomy shows a direct continuity in those ideas. In the original text, God assigned nations according to the number of “the sons of God,” presumably an acknowledgment of the reality of rival deities. That nod to polytheism embarrassed later readers, and in the Septuagint translation God sets nations and boundaries “according to the number of the angels of God.” Once upon a time there were gods, who were transformed into tutelary angels or spirits, who in turn became thoroughly godlike. This idea of national guardians is well developed in Daniel (10:13, 10:21, 12:1). …

Given its pervasive hostility toward Gentiles, it is [the Book of] Jubilees that presents these figures in the most sinister and exclusive terms. Yes, says the author, “there are many nations and many peoples, and all are His, and over all hath He placed spirits in authority to lead them astray from Him. But over Israel He did not appoint any angel or spirit, for He alone is their ruler, and He will preserve them and require them at the hand of His angels and His spirits.

That ran against the common assumption that Israel did indeed have a tutelary figure, namely, Michael. But whatever the exact identity of such figures, the idea of territorial spirits lent itself to visions of earthly conflicts being mirrored in the heavens, to clashes of angelic and demonic beings.

[And He sanctified it, and gathered it from amongst all the children of men; for there are many nations and many peoples, and all are His, and over all hath He placed spirits in authority to lead them astray from Him. But over Israel He did not appoint any angel or spirit, for He alone is their ruler, and He will preserve them and require them at the hand of His angels and His spirits, and at the hand of all His powers in order that He may preserve them and bless them, and that they may be His and He may be theirs from henceforth for ever.

Jubilees 15:31-32, at: http://www.pseudepigrapha.com/jubilees/15.htm ]

[Doug's note: Daniel as we have it was written in the 2nd century BCE. The RC version is a bit different.]

3

Crucible of Faith

by Doug Mason in

i have accumulated many books.

i like my latest acquisition so much that i want to share it with you.

it's available in hard cover and in digital format.. i will not describe it here as there is any number of online reviews as well as summaries at book sellers:.

Doug Mason

I have accumulated many books. I like my latest acquisition so much that I want to share it with you. It's available in hard cover and in digital format.

I will not describe it here as there is any number of online reviews as well as summaries at book sellers:

"Crucible of Faith: The ancient revolution that made our modern religious World", Philip Jenkins, Basic Books, New York, USA, September 2017.

Doug

5

Satan. Lucifer. Devil

by Doug Mason in

searchable.. full contents listing at the rear.. http://www.jwstudies.com/revolutions_part_5__satan__lucifer__devil.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

Kepler,

Thank you for these references, which I will save. These by Calvin are particularly good.

"Satan" was one of the "sons of God" carrying out actions sanctioned by God and controlled by God. Satan acted as the Prosecutor in God's court. Around 300 BCE, the idea of "Devil" evolved. Later the two entities were merged.

"Lucifer" on the other hand, as your sources confirm, refers to "light", to Venus, which is the name of the Morning Star. It is not evil, as 2 Peter and the Book of Revelation show, with Jesus saying he is the "morning star" (Rev. 22:16. Compare 2 Peter 1:19; Rev. 2:28).

My view is that humanity will discover the source of all evil by looking in the mirror. Until then, all "Others" will be cast as evil and satanic, giving people the excuse to exterminate anyone who does not agree with them. An explanation for religion being the source of conflict, whether in the home, nationally, or internationally ("the Axis of Evil").

Doug

5

Satan. Lucifer. Devil

by Doug Mason in

searchable.. full contents listing at the rear.. http://www.jwstudies.com/revolutions_part_5__satan__lucifer__devil.pdf .

doug.

Doug Mason

Searchable.

Full Contents listing at the rear.

http://www.jwstudies.com/Revolutions_Part_5__Satan__Lucifer__Devil.pdf

Doug

15

What does the WTS say about Satan?

by Doug Mason in

over the past several months, i have been assembling a study dealing with the life and times of satan, the devil.

it is my intention to release the first draft in a few weeks.. i have provided the draft of the last chapter at:.

http://www.jwstudies.com/pages_174-200.pdf .

Doug Mason

Finkelstein,

I agree. Satan sees his genesis at the time monotheism became dominant and entrenched. This took place in association with the Babylonian Captivity and Exile (6th century BCE).

Now that they had only one God, the Jews had to wrestle with the problem that "Badness" existed. The technical term is: Theodicy - Since there is a perfect God, how is it possible for Badness to exist? Previously, the Israelites and Judahites recognised the existence of several gods.

That issue was addressed through the creation of a being who is today known as Satan, Devil, and so on. Initially, Satan was the individual employed by God to do his "not so nice things". At his beginning, Satan was not the evil individual that he became much later.

Doug