Posts by Doug Mason

19

Qumran, meet Brooklyn

by Doug Mason in

loyal jws are required to obey the edicts of the gb because of whom it claims to be.. to interpret scripture, particularly eschatological passages, the gb does not use literal interpretation, since it promotes secondary applications, employs its own allegories, and so on.. by analyzing another apocalyptic, eschatological group that also anticipated the imminent appearance of the messiah, we gain an insight into the gbs approach.

this other group is the jews who lived at qumran during the 1st and 2nd centuries bce.. the following is a synopsis of the way those jews used scripture.

the gb does not consciously imitate the jews at qumran, since its approach is a legacy from rutherford in the 1930s.. the approach taken by the people at qumran:.

Doug Mason

I thought that I should describe the method I used to create the list of “Qumran features”.

Firstly, I “googled” these words: Qumran Pesher.

I then obtained the listed features from information from the following:

http://www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Instone-Brewer/TheolHermeneutics.htm

http://www.xenos.org/MINISTRIES/crossroads/OnlineJournal/issue3/mtmain.htm

“A Doctrinal Study of Acts 2:14” — Clifford Rapp Jr., Chafer Theological Seminary

I am certain other sites provide relevant information.

Doug

19

Qumran, meet Brooklyn

by Doug Mason in

loyal jws are required to obey the edicts of the gb because of whom it claims to be.. to interpret scripture, particularly eschatological passages, the gb does not use literal interpretation, since it promotes secondary applications, employs its own allegories, and so on.. by analyzing another apocalyptic, eschatological group that also anticipated the imminent appearance of the messiah, we gain an insight into the gbs approach.

this other group is the jews who lived at qumran during the 1st and 2nd centuries bce.. the following is a synopsis of the way those jews used scripture.

the gb does not consciously imitate the jews at qumran, since its approach is a legacy from rutherford in the 1930s.. the approach taken by the people at qumran:.

Doug Mason

Leolaia,

Thank you so much for your observation that the WTS's methods often resemble "pesher" interpretation. This is the point I had recently been trying to make in another thread.

I think that a particular example is their interpretation of the "FDS parable". The WTS does not follow accepted methods of interpreting a Parable, and their process is not allegorical. They quite baldly claim that the parable is a prophecy!

What exercises my mind is how to counter their approach. I am a literalist, interested in looking at the local context, writer's background, etc., etc. This means that I and the WTS are in different worlds. How then does one enter into a meaningful dialog with a JW?

Doug

19

Qumran, meet Brooklyn

by Doug Mason in

loyal jws are required to obey the edicts of the gb because of whom it claims to be.. to interpret scripture, particularly eschatological passages, the gb does not use literal interpretation, since it promotes secondary applications, employs its own allegories, and so on.. by analyzing another apocalyptic, eschatological group that also anticipated the imminent appearance of the messiah, we gain an insight into the gbs approach.

this other group is the jews who lived at qumran during the 1st and 2nd centuries bce.. the following is a synopsis of the way those jews used scripture.

the gb does not consciously imitate the jews at qumran, since its approach is a legacy from rutherford in the 1930s.. the approach taken by the people at qumran:.

Doug Mason

Loyal JWs are required to obey the edicts of the GB because of whom it claims to be.

To interpret Scripture, particularly eschatological passages, the GB does not use literal interpretation, since it promotes secondary applications, employs its own allegories, and so on.

By analyzing another apocalyptic, eschatological group that also anticipated the imminent appearance of the Messiah, we gain an insight into the GB’s approach. This other group is the Jews who lived at Qumran during the 1st and 2nd centuries BCE.

The following is a synopsis of the way those Jews used Scripture. The GB does not consciously imitate the Jews at Qumran, since its approach is a legacy from Rutherford in the 1930s.

The approach taken by the people at Qumran:

The authors of Scripture are said to be speaking to the contemporary audience. A word, text or OT allusion is related to a present person, place, or thing. Scripture is written especially for the present. The work of the inspired interpreter is to discover the meaning for the present.
They apply Scripture with little to no concern for the context of the passage applied. Interpretations are generally aloof from the source context and appear to lack any coherent methodology.
There is no attempt to explain what the Bible meant when it was originally written, but rather what it means in the day and age of the commentator, particularly for his own community.
The interpreter shows little inclination to justify his wholesale substitution of the author’s intent for that of his own community.
Interpretative techniques are fundamentally eisegetical. That is, their hermeneutical approaches are hostile to the notion of objective interpretation.
All the destructive activities described by a prophet are attributed to the ‘wicked priest’ while all the good things are attributed to the ‘righteous teacher’.
Current events interpret scripture, rather than scripture being quoted to explain a current event.
Scriptural prophecies are said to be incomprehensible mysteries that can only be interpreted by the ‘Teacher of Righteousness’.
They fragment the text and force each phrase to cause it to bare a contemporary meaning.
They rarely give reasons for their interpretations.
It is possible that they 'invent' variants of Scripture.
Although all the authors of Scripture were prophets (including Moses and David), God reveals things to the ‘Teacher of Righteousness’ which were not even known to the prophets, so that the ‘Teacher’s’ words come ‘from the mouth of God’.
They simply state that 'this means that'. For example, in the Song of the Well at Num. 21:18 'the well is the Torah', 'the diggers are the returned of Israel' and 'the nobles of the people are those who come to delve in the well'.

Qumran, meet Brooklyn.

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

The manner in which the Qumran community treated Scripture is completely at odds to the manner that is employed by the writers of the NT, even by its most Jewish writers, Matthew, Paul and Peter.

Doug

63

was there a 1975 "scare"

by Lotus65 in

ive heard through different research ive done along with people ive talked too that there was a 1975 "scare" in which the time was supposed and the end was at hand

is that true

Doug Mason

During the 1970s, my good friend Bruce Price produced a magazine aimed at helping Jehovah’s Witnesses.

With his permission I have provided a copy of his October 1975 issue (reissued in July 1976 with additional information provided on the last page). This provides some of the arguments we made at the time.

http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/Witness_Mag_Oct_1975.pdf

I have also provided the pages on 1975 from his “Our Friends” Manual, issued in 1997, since this includes the WTS’s “acknowledgment and apology”.

http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/Bruce_Price_on_1975__1997_edition_.pdf

Doug

9

"A thousand years as one day"

by Awakened07 in

the scripture saying: "...one day is with the lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

" (2. peter 3:8) is often used both by jehovah's witnesses and others, to show that a day can literally mean a thousand years in the eyes of god.

this is then used especially for the creation story, and for the fall of adam and eve.

Doug Mason

There is only one place where a "day" is one of our "days", only one place where a "month" is one of our "months" and only one place where a "year" is one of our "years". That place is the surface of planet Earth.

A day/month/year is a different length on say the Moon, Mars, or Mercury. And it is different on every other body in this universe and on other universes.

I don't know where these 144,000 guides to the WTS live, but they must get awfully confused trying to match their times to those on earth.

And how long does it take for their thought messages to travel from their committee room down to Brooklyn?

Doug

25

Beware Deceivers

by Doug Mason in

i know that you are all very familiar with the early verses of matthew 24/ mark 13/ luke 21.. i have prepared a study on these verses and am seeking constructive criticisms and advice.. the address is: http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/beware_deceivers.pdf.

thanks,.

doug.

Doug Mason

Joseph,

You wrote: “the parousia did not take place then (70 CE). Why? Was the prophecy flawed?”

The word “parousia” appears (only in Matthew) in the disciples’ question. This does not make it a prophecy. During Christ’s ministry, the disciples asked several questions that displayed their ignorance or misunderstandings. To them, the parousia was exactly as they had observed it many times during their lives – the momentous visit of a dignitary.

When the heavenly glory surrounded Christ at the time of his ascension, that glory caused the disciples to once more relate to the setting up of Jesus as king of Israel.
-------------------
In their question, the disciples related the destruction of the Temple with the “End”. I understand that they mean the end of the Jewish age. What other understanding could they have had? Remember, there was no Christian faith separate from Judaism at that time or for a long time after.

In hindsight, we might say that the end of the Jewish Age came when Jesus started his ministry, when the temple veil was torn, when the holy spirit descended, when Paul started preaching to the Gentiles, or some other event. But these were not in the disciples’ minds when they posed the question about the temple.
-------------------
When you write: “the answer was not intended for them”, to me this is Pesher interpretation.

I believe that the disciples asked Jesus a question and he gave his answer to them. That is what the primitive church would have understood.

It is my understanding that the most Jewish of NT writers – Matthew, Paul and Peter (at least) – did not employ Pesher interpretation. It is more than enlightening to compare the WTS with the Pesher characteristics of the eschatological Qumram society.
-------------------
You wrote: “a presence and a sign are part of this prophecy.”

Jesus actually warned AGAINST any sign (wars, earthquakes, etc.) and prophesied that these deceivers would try to make use of “signs”. Only an evil generation needs a sign, and the times are solely in God’s hand.
-------------------
You cited: “Ro 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth” in the context of the end of the Jewish Age.

As I showed, the total context of that verse is that righteousness comes through faith alone, not by any action on my part. The verse says no more and no less, and is not related to the timing of the end of the Jewish system.

As Romans 4 shows (in the direct context of Romans 3:20-31), “righteousness by faith” is taught in the Law (Hebrew Scriptures), with Paul citing from the Torah and from the Writings of the Law in support of that assertion.
-------------------
If you are correct that: “their hope was real this much was true and this earth would be the place for this Kingdom” then they did not understand what Christ meant by “the Kingdom”. It is something that the WTS does not understand either.
-------------------
I presented those points from “The Watchtower”, September 15, 1964 pp. 575-576, Questions From Readers, to show that the WTS has no reason for saying that Jesus’ answer demanded that the “parousia” be invisible. That is all I intended.

Doug

25

Beware Deceivers

by Doug Mason in

i know that you are all very familiar with the early verses of matthew 24/ mark 13/ luke 21.. i have prepared a study on these verses and am seeking constructive criticisms and advice.. the address is: http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/beware_deceivers.pdf.

thanks,.

doug.

Doug Mason

Joseph,

I am enjoying our chat.

I thought I should explain why I believe understanding the differences between Literal and Pesher interpretations is significant. It goes much further than the understanding of the Olivet Discourse, but extends to matters such as the interpretation of the "FDS" Parable. Whereas I use consistent exegesis in the interpretation of Parables, the WTS uses Pesher interpretation, seeing the Parable as a Prophecy, and one that is addressed specifically to it. That is, to my mind, Pesher.

When I wrote that I interpret these verses from Matt/Mark/Luke “literally”, whereas certain others were using “Pesher” interpretation, I was making an objective observation. I was not being critical, simply showing that we are on different tram routes.

Since I employ literal interpretation, I consider that Jesus’ words were specifically addressed to his immediate listeners. When interpreting Scripture, I therefore consider contemporary factors, such as the writer’s background (fisherman, doctor, priest or farmer), his immediate purpose in writing, the local historical, political, cultural and religious factors, and so on.

The people who employ Pesher interpretation believe that the passages were written exclusively for them. In this, they are in the same tradition as the Qumran community.

To better describe features of Pesher interpretation, I have provided a scan from a book that introduces the subject.

It can be found at http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/Pesher_intro.pdf

Doug

25

Beware Deceivers

by Doug Mason in

i know that you are all very familiar with the early verses of matthew 24/ mark 13/ luke 21.. i have prepared a study on these verses and am seeking constructive criticisms and advice.. the address is: http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/beware_deceivers.pdf.

thanks,.

doug.

Doug Mason

In the NIV, Romans 10:4 is translated thus:
“Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.”

As any interlinear NT shows, the word for “law” (nomou) in Romans 10:4 does not have an article (“the” or “a”). This strongly suggests that Paul is using the word qualitatively, which might thus allow it to be rendered as something like “legalism”.

The direct context of the word supports this view, giving us the thought that Christ ends legalism as the means for obtaining righteousness, for anyone who believes.

The larger immediate context (10:1 to 10:11) confirms this understanding. Addressing his Jewish brethren in Rome, Paul writes that righteousness comes from God, not through obedience (“law”) but through faith.

Ro 10:1 Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved.
Ro 10:2 For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge.
Ro 10:3 Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness.
Ro 10:4 Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.
Ro 10:5 Moses describes in this way the righteousness that is by the law: “The man who does these things will live by them.”
Ro 10:6 But the righteousness that is by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ ’” (that is, to bring Christ down)
Ro 10:7 “or ‘Who will descend into the deep?’ ’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).
Ro 10:8 But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming:
Ro 10:9 That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
Ro 10:10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
Ro 10:11 As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.”

There is no article with “law” at all in this passage.

The even larger context (9:30 –33, and 10:12 – 13) confirms this understanding of Romans 10:4.

Jesus ends legalism as the means for obtaining righteousness from God, whether a Jew or a Gentile. Being in a right standing with God emanates from him and is by faith in him. Openly confess the belief in your heart that Jesus was raised from the dead, and you are saved.

This is the Gospel, the only gospel. It is simply wonderful and wonderfully simple.

That is the message of Romans 10:4.

Doug

25

Beware Deceivers

by Doug Mason in

i know that you are all very familiar with the early verses of matthew 24/ mark 13/ luke 21.. i have prepared a study on these verses and am seeking constructive criticisms and advice.. the address is: http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/beware_deceivers.pdf.

thanks,.

doug.

Doug Mason

In my recent post, I provided the following itemized list. What would you now say if I told you that the words come from The Watchtower, September 15, 1964 pp. 575-576, “Questions From Readers”?

1. Later events show that the disciples did not at that time understand that it would be an invisible presence.

2. They looked for the Messiah to deliver the Jewish nation from bondage to Rome and to display glorious power in doing so. In other words, they looked for him to do at his first presence things he was actually to do at his second presence.

3. They did not appreciate that he would not sit on an earthly throne.

4. They had no idea that Jesus would rule as a glorious spirit from the heavens.

5. They therefore did not know that his second presence would be invisible.

6. They knew the prophecy of Daniel 7:13, 14 would be fulfilled somehow, but wondered how.

7. So the disciples in effect asked: ‘What are we to look for, so as not to miss out, so as not to be blind, as the Pharisees are to your presence now, even though you are bodily present and still not recognized as the Messiah to them?’

8. Jesus did not answer in so many words that he would be invisibly present.

9. Jesus outlined evidences that would make his presence recognizable, whether visible or invisible.

Doug

25

Beware Deceivers

by Doug Mason in

i know that you are all very familiar with the early verses of matthew 24/ mark 13/ luke 21.. i have prepared a study on these verses and am seeking constructive criticisms and advice.. the address is: http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/beware_deceivers.pdf.

thanks,.

doug.

Doug Mason

Joseph and JCanon,

Thank you for you responses, as they have crystalized some thoughts for me.

I presented a literal exegesis of these early verses in Matt 24/ Mark 13/ Luke 21, and have applied them to their initial intent -- the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans.

Any eschatological scenario requires different exegetical principles. I reason you are employing pesher exegesis, since an allegory would not work (Whom does the destroyed Jerusalem symbolize? Where are the true believers? etc.)

Since I am applying a literal exegesis and you appear to be using pesher, we are singing from different song sheets. Thank you for showing me.

I have touched up my presentation accordingly, and clarified what "parousia" meant to the disciples.

Doug