Posts by Doug Mason

272

A Video Series about 607 BC vs 587 BC

by Londo111 in

this is the main series playlist:.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=plynx0om_bmgbfmnapjr_v5fe9_pf8sqa1.

this is the accompanying video appendix:.

Doug Mason

Dating of the destruction of Jerusalem is a red herring (maybe a red whale!). The WTS does not start their 70 years with that event.

Doug

272

A Video Series about 607 BC vs 587 BC

by Londo111 in

this is the main series playlist:.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=plynx0om_bmgbfmnapjr_v5fe9_pf8sqa1.

this is the accompanying video appendix:.

Have you made any effort to verify that the person who calls himself "Scholar JW" in these exchanges with you is really Neil or an imposter? The nature of these posts by this "JW Scholar" do not match my knowledge of the genuine N Mc.

Doug

27

Beside reading Thucydides the author of Daniel read Herodotus

by kepler in

over a year ago, i engaged in a discussion on a similar topic.

it was titled, "has anyone read thucydides beside the author of daniel?".

since my annotated new jerusalem bible mentions a number of reasons why the text was probably written largely in the 2nd century bce to address events happening in that period ( the seleucid occupation and desecration of the temple), i was aware of a number of arguments for the case.

Doug Mason

I doubt that we should be looking for literal history in any of these ancient records. They are religious histories, written for propaganda purposes at the time of its composition. In other words, study is required into the history of the writing of the history (historiography).

I have no doubt that Daniel was written in the 2nd century as a means of providing comfort and messages to the persecuted without their overlords being aware of the intent. In other words, the overlords were looking at the stories literally rather than as literature. We should not fall into the same trap.

It helps, as with any other part of Hebrew and NT writings, to search for the chiasms. These are important; they had helped the illiterate to remember stories and it facilitated the stories being told, orally. At any time until quite recently, less than 10% of a population could read and probably less than 2% could write (a very different discipline). So the poetic structure of chiasms was important to the Hebrews (and the NT) and it might be that when you work out the chiasms, that might clarify apparently strange transitions. (I am aware of: "The Literary Structure of the Old Testament" by Dorsey.)

Other issues with Daniel include the difference between the LXX and MT (see, for example, mention in "Aramaic Daniel and Greek Daniel: A Literary Comparison", by Meadowcroft) and recognising the issues raised in "The Cultic Motif in the Bok of Daniel", by Vogel.

I am sure I do not need to labour the point that we have to read any ancient (such as Late Iron Age) writing through the lives of the community as it was when a piece was written, not through our ways of thinking.

Dou

41

My Study: "Did a 'Governing Body' govern Paul?"

by Doug Mason in

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><![endif].

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-au</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:6.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"times new roman","serif"; mso-fareast-language:en-us;} </style> <![endif].

Doug Mason

My Study: “Did a ‘Governing Body’ govern Paul?” is available in two parts at:

http://www.jwstudies.com/Did_a__Governing_Body__govern_Paul__Part_1_-_The_Study_.pdf

and at:

http://www.jwstudies.com/Did_a__Governing_Body__govern_Paul__Part_2_-_Readings_.pdf

The Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses [GB] says it is modelled on first century Christianity, in which a Governing Body located at Jerusalem controlled a united, structured, organised community.

Is the GB’s depiction correct? Were James and Peter part of that “Governing Body”? Was Paul part of that “Governing Body”? Did a “Governing Body” govern Paul?

Make certain that the contents of this Study are fully understood before making it available.

Since I do not have a proof reader, I will appreciate grammatical corrections also.

Doug

52

Bart Ehrman: Paul Viewed Jesus Christ as an Angel.

by Emery in

in his upcomming book, "how jesus became god" bart ehrman has a new view on how paul viewed jesus.

since i am a huge bart ehrman fan i am a member of his blog site, http://ehrmanblog.org link to direct blog entry: http://ehrmanblog.org/pauls-view-of-jesus-as-an-angel-for-members/.

there he made a recent blog entry where he argues that paul viewed jesus to be an angel according to galations 4:14. .

Doug Mason

ÁrbolesdeArabia,

I did read your post and I provided a few reasons for my disagreement.

Paul claimed that he did not receive any of his instructions from any human. He claimed that he spoke with no one for 3 years after his conviction regarding Jesus Christ, that he spent 14 years without making any contact with Jerusalem, and when he gave them his gospel message, they added nothing. He speaks quite contemptuously of them (James, Cephas, and John). When the 4th century Church at Rome decided which writings they would canonise (currently our NT), they wrote James out of the picture, even though he was Jesus' full brother and leader of the Jerusalem community.

Paul indicated that his teachings came directly to him from the Lord, without any human involvement. Either he is deluded, telling a lie, or he is honest.

Paul could not have read the Gospels since they were written after his death and re-edited during subsequent centuries. He created the ideas and others followed, some of which I mentioned in my previous response.

Did Paul invent Christianity?

Doug

52

Bart Ehrman: Paul Viewed Jesus Christ as an Angel.

by Emery in

in his upcomming book, "how jesus became god" bart ehrman has a new view on how paul viewed jesus.

since i am a huge bart ehrman fan i am a member of his blog site, http://ehrmanblog.org link to direct blog entry: http://ehrmanblog.org/pauls-view-of-jesus-as-an-angel-for-members/.

there he made a recent blog entry where he argues that paul viewed jesus to be an angel according to galations 4:14. .

Doug Mason

Regarding Gal 4:14, has anyone produced the chiastic structure of that passage?

Doug

52

Bart Ehrman: Paul Viewed Jesus Christ as an Angel.

by Emery in

in his upcomming book, "how jesus became god" bart ehrman has a new view on how paul viewed jesus.

since i am a huge bart ehrman fan i am a member of his blog site, http://ehrmanblog.org link to direct blog entry: http://ehrmanblog.org/pauls-view-of-jesus-as-an-angel-for-members/.

there he made a recent blog entry where he argues that paul viewed jesus to be an angel according to galations 4:14. .

Doug Mason

ÁrbolesdeArabia,

Paul did not know the accounts traditionally attributed to Mark, Matthew, Luke or John. They were all written after his death. Luke was written some 60 to 90 years after Paul had died.

Secondly, Paul explicitly states that he did not receive any of his teachings from any human source. He got them directly from the Lord, presumably in the form of visions. Thus he did not get his ideas of baptism, Last Supper, substitutionary death, resurrection, Coming, and so on from any person. They are his ideas. His opponents were the Jerusalem party led by James, Jesus' biological brother. The Jerusalem party saw Jesus as being nothing more than a human, with human parents. The birth narratives are highly ingenious creations of imaginitive minds; unfortulately, they did not collaborate and their stories seriously contradict one another.

Thirdly, Mark and Luke were Paul's adherents, and thus followed his lead. The NT Canon was set by Paul's followers, not by James' followers (Ebionites).

Doug

14

New Light on 1914

by TowerWatch in

recently someone posted a link to the watchtower article explaining why jehovahs witnesses no longer believe that jesus returned in 1914. could someone help me by posting that link again please?

thank you!.

Doug Mason

As you know, I am no apologist for the WTS. You will also know that it is not possible to pin them down because over time they slip and slide around. This, however, is my understanding. (I have been known to be wrong before):

Although the kingdom of God was set up in 1914, this does not mean the kingdom did not exist before then. The kingdom of God is eternal. It is my understanding that they say the "parousia" was a change in its operation, or focus, towards earth. It could probably be considered as a different phase in its operation.

They do not see the "parousia" as the "coming". These are two separate events. The "coming" (erchomenon) lies in the future, associated with the future Great Tribulation and Armageddon. (See WT mag of July 15, 2013)

Doug

Note that I used the word "erchomenon"; I am not certain whether they have any application for the word "apokalupsis".

2

Spanish translation is now available

by Doug Mason in

a short while ago, i prepared a study on "the watchtower" for july 15, 2013.. .

since then, several people have willingly and freely worked to produce a spanish translation of my study.. it is available at:.

http://www.jwstudies.com/la_verdad_cambia__otra_vez___la_atalaya__15_de_julio_de_2013.pdf .

Doug Mason

suavojr,

I get your point, but you give me the opportunity to point out that the people who write the articles in the Watchtower magazine and write the books are not necessarily of the Anointed. I doubt that every member of the Writing Department is Anointed.

Doug

2

Spanish translation is now available

by Doug Mason in

a short while ago, i prepared a study on "the watchtower" for july 15, 2013.. .

since then, several people have willingly and freely worked to produce a spanish translation of my study.. it is available at:.

http://www.jwstudies.com/la_verdad_cambia__otra_vez___la_atalaya__15_de_julio_de_2013.pdf .

Doug Mason

A short while ago, I prepared a Study on "The Watchtower" for July 15, 2013.

Since then, several people have willingly and freely worked to produce a Spanish translation of my Study.

It is available at:

http://www.jwstudies.com/La_Verdad_Cambia__otra_vez___La_Atalaya__15_de_Julio_de_2013.pdf

Doug

(Apologies for the formatting problem.)