Posts by Doug Mason

52

Changed: Head coverings for sisters, w15 2/15 QFR

by wifibandit in

does a female kingdom publisher need to wear a head covering if she conducts a bible study in the presence of a male publisher?.

in a questions from readers item published in the watchtower of july 15, 2002, it was stated that a sister should cover her head if she conducts a bible study in the presence of a male publisher, whether he is baptized or not.

further consideration of the matter suggests that a modification to this direction is appropriate.. if the male publisher who accompanies the sister while she conducts an established bible study is baptized, the sister would certainly want to wear a head covering.

Doug Mason

Civilised peoples are moving away from the mysoginist attitudes that pervade the Bible and are leaving them in the dustbin of history. Those attitudes belonged to cultures of the past and have no place in today's societies.

Doug

32

Books about early Christianity

by EdenOne in

i've just finished reading two (imo) great books:.

"a history of christianity - the first three thousand years", by diarmaid macculloch.

"misquoting jesus", by bart ehrman.

Doug Mason

Eden,

I agree that Paul invented Christianity. He said he owed nothing to the Jerusalem Church. His writings were first and the others copied ideas from him, such as Jesus' words at the institution of the eucharist; he was not there and neither was any of the Gospel writers.

However, I think that the Jerusalem Church is represented in the NT Canon by Mark (follower of Peter) and by Matthew (given its Jewish focus, character and culture). The Matthew Gospel does give priority to Peter (as against Paul) as having the "keys to the kingdom".

As an aside, it is interesting to see how much use the NT writers made of the Jewish writings that are now considered apocryphal. And 2 Peter, which was written by a Pauline about 150 CE, is a commentary on Jude, which you say is Jewish Christian.

Doug

30

The Mosaic Law (Is it still Valid)

by objectivetruth in

i'm interested to know of some of your view points out this.. is the mosaic law still valid, and should it be followed.

or as many claim was it done away with?.

from my examination of scripture, i feel that it is still valid, and christ did not do away with it.. briefly here are the primary reasons i feel this way :.

Doug Mason

Pterist,

Where does the Bible use the expession "ten commandments"?

Why do some people say that the words at Exodus 20 were engraved on tablets of stone?

Doug

30

The Mosaic Law (Is it still Valid)

by objectivetruth in

i'm interested to know of some of your view points out this.. is the mosaic law still valid, and should it be followed.

or as many claim was it done away with?.

from my examination of scripture, i feel that it is still valid, and christ did not do away with it.. briefly here are the primary reasons i feel this way :.

Doug Mason

As JWs are fully aware, the Babylonians took the elite and powerful of Judah into captivity. As they sat by the rivers of Babylon (Psalm 137) and they despaired at the destitute state of Jerusalem and its temple (Dan 9), they sought to understand how it could be that God's chosen people had come to the point of extinction. These were desparate times.

So whom did the priests and scribes blame? It was clear to them that God was punishing the nation because they had failed to heed the warnings of the prophets, the priests of Israel and of Judah. It was everyone else's fault, not the priests'.

To show that this was so, they wrote and rewrote their Scriptures, showing that these warnings had been given and what the people had to do in order for the nation to be restored - and for the priesthood to be restored to its rightful position of supreme authority (this time without the encumbrance of the royal household) - as is shown by the fundamentalist actions of Ezra and of the parties that resulted from the Captivity (Pharisees, etc.).

Scriptures they created/rewrote include Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings. These were all propaganda to suit their purposes. So demands to obedience, for the supremacy of Jerusalem, and so on need to be read in that light. The remainder of the populace, the People of the Land, were illiterate, so we do not know much of their views, although we can gain some idea from the condemnations by the OT writers and from archaeology - they were pluralists, not monotheists, who gave a wife to YHWH, named Asherah, and worshiped them equally.

To read any statement made by the priestly class requires understanding of the contemporary context. Only then can a decision be made on the relevance or otherwise of anything contained in their writings.

Doug

32

Books about early Christianity

by EdenOne in

i've just finished reading two (imo) great books:.

"a history of christianity - the first three thousand years", by diarmaid macculloch.

"misquoting jesus", by bart ehrman.

Doug Mason

Magnum,

I have no problem if a person needs to have a supernatural being to make sense of the world and to cope with it, or if they need to gain strength through physical association with like-minded people. Each person must make up their own mind for what genuinely helps them.

I perceive religion as a means for a small group of people to control the minds and lives of many. Of those who control, one can ascribe motives such as the sense of power or yet again the sense of helping. Institutions need to ensure obedience by the masses, to protect the organisation, to make sure that the boat is not rocked, regardless of what is truth. The leaders need to protect their position of authority. Read the OT in this light.

For me, whether there is a God or not is God's probem, not mine. It is up to the gods to be concerned whether they exist. If you want to pigeon-hole me, call me an agnostic who does not trust the "God told me" assertions that people hide behind.

What is up to me is to live each day, having made a contribution, making life better for someone, regardless of their creed or colour; to behave towards them in the way I would like to be treated.

Doug

32

Books about early Christianity

by EdenOne in

i've just finished reading two (imo) great books:.

"a history of christianity - the first three thousand years", by diarmaid macculloch.

"misquoting jesus", by bart ehrman.

Doug Mason

EdenOne,

Geza Vermes was one of the great modern scholars, who died only recently. If you want recommendations from the list I provided, I suggest the books by Allert (start at page 37), Gamble, Goulder, Freeman and Jenkins.

Of course, it is impossible to overestate the significance of Kurt Aland, as any "Google" search shows, and of Geza Vermes.

Doug

30

The Mosaic Law (Is it still Valid)

by objectivetruth in

i'm interested to know of some of your view points out this.. is the mosaic law still valid, and should it be followed.

or as many claim was it done away with?.

from my examination of scripture, i feel that it is still valid, and christ did not do away with it.. briefly here are the primary reasons i feel this way :.

Doug Mason

The Matthew Gospel, which you refer to at point#1, was written by Jewish Christians. These were aligned with Jerusalem (James, Peter, John). They were very much in support of imposing the Jewish laws on to the Gentile Christians.

Paul, however, who was based at Antioch and had very little to do with Jerusalem, said that his Gentile converts had no need to obey the Jewish laws. Consider Galatians chapters 1 and 2 as well as 1 Corinthians, where they were told not to ask where the meat came from. The Jewish Christians did not know Paul by face, only by reputation.

The book of Acts, written by a person/group aligned with Peter (and hence Jerusalem) wished to make it appear that harmony existed between the two camps, papering over the chasm between Antioch and Jerusalem. The Book of Acts is religious reconstructed history and is not relied on by Bible scholars as being a reliable account.

FYI: 1 Peter and 2 Peter are accepted as having been written by an adherent of Paul's; the latter having been written about 150 CE, about 90 years after the deaths of Paul and Peter.

"A text without a context is a pretext for a proof text", and the context is not only grammatical but also that of contemporary culture, idioms, politics (religious and secular) and so on. The other matter is to understand how the bible came to be assembled, by whom, and when.

I suggest that at Matthew 22:29, the writers were putting words into Jesus' mouth against their Gentile brethren.

Doug

32

Books about early Christianity

by EdenOne in

i've just finished reading two (imo) great books:.

"a history of christianity - the first three thousand years", by diarmaid macculloch.

"misquoting jesus", by bart ehrman.

Doug Mason

While the cover of the book is given as "The New Testament Apocrypha" and as being edited and introduced by M.R. James, the internal title page states: "The Apocryphal New Testament: being the apocryphal gospels, acts, epistles and apocalypses, with other narratives and fragments translated by Montague Rhodes James". It was first published in 1924 by Clarendon Press; the Acrophyle Press Edition was published in 2004. It runs for almost 600 pages.

Doug

14

This should be an interesting book to read

by Doug Mason in

i have not yet read this book, but it should be interesting:.

"the better angels of our nature: why violence has declined", steven pinker.. the publicity blurb states:.

"believe it or not, today we may be living in the most peaceful moment in our species' existence.

Doug Mason

I have not yet read this book, but it should be interesting:

"The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined", Steven Pinker.

The publicity blurb states:

"Believe it or not, today we may be living in the most peaceful moment in our species' existence. In his gripping and controversial new work, New York Times bestselling author Steven Pinker shows that despite the ceaseless news about war, crime, and terrorism, violence has actually been in decline over long stretches of history. Exploding myths about humankind's inherent violence and the curse of modernity, this ambitious book continues Pinker's exploration of the essence of human nature, mixing psychology and history to provide a remarkable picture of an increasingly enlightened world."

Doug

32

Books about early Christianity

by EdenOne in

i've just finished reading two (imo) great books:.

"a history of christianity - the first three thousand years", by diarmaid macculloch.

"misquoting jesus", by bart ehrman.

Doug Mason

jehovahsheep,

Are you yet able to extend your conclusion to all religion?

Doug