george bernard shaw said: no man ever believes that the bible means what it says.
he is always convinced that it says what he means.. shaw must have had pesher in mind!
but, what is pesher?.
Jonathan D,
I would like to suggest a more realistic and fruitful approach to the Scriptures: Take full account of the complete context.
Not only does this include the structure and format but the understanding of the people originally being addressed - their concepts, idioms, the religious and secular politics, geography, and so on. The writers were writing to their immediate community with the purpose of influencing them.
The Bible is the Word of Man.
Doug
george bernard shaw said: no man ever believes that the bible means what it says.
he is always convinced that it says what he means.. shaw must have had pesher in mind!
but, what is pesher?.
Well done Terry,
I understand that the term "pesher" entered the scholarly lexicon following the discovery of the DSS, where the term carries the meaning of "solution" or "interpretation".
Richard Longenecker includes several examples from the Gospels of pesher treatment (Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period, pages 70-78).
Longenecker writes:
"But though it is often done, it is not sufficient to define "pesher" as midrashic exegesis, which displays a greater audacity in its handling of the text, coupled to an apocalyptic expectation. Such a characterization is true so far as it goes, but it does not touch upon the vital factor in Qumran hermeneutics. Central in the consciousness of the covenanters of Qumran was what might be called the raz (mystery)-pesher (interpretation) revelational motif, which is found explicitly in the commentary on Hab. 2:1-2. (Longenecker, page 41)
Critical to the Essene community, and where the WTS could be seen to replicate, were their extensive production of writings and in their "Teacher of Righteousness".
Doug
my study on the watchtower magazine for march 15, 2015 is available at:.
http://www.jwstudies.com/the_watchtower_and_the_contexts_of_jesus__stories.pdf.
this watchtower presents jesus stories at matthew 25: the ten virgins; the talents; and the final judgment (sheep and goats).
southwest,
I absolutely agree with you.
The prophecy at Daniel 4 was fulfilled in Nebuchadnezzar. It was a dream by a heathen king, not of a prophet from God.
The WTS reckons that the fulfillment was itself a prophecy! They say that this heathen king of Babylon was the symbol of God's kingdom and that his seven times experience was itself a prophecy. Pure speculation. And this is meant to pass as the foundation stone.
The GB knows that the parable of the FDS refers to it because they are the FDS. Well, at least they are the FDS since 2013, Prior to then all of the Spirit-Anointed were the FDS. They know this is all true because they know that they were appointed in 1919 (not that the year-day interpretation of prophecy is invoked with that fulfillment).
Doug
my study on the watchtower magazine for march 15, 2015 is available at:.
http://www.jwstudies.com/the_watchtower_and_the_contexts_of_jesus__stories.pdf.
this watchtower presents jesus stories at matthew 25: the ten virgins; the talents; and the final judgment (sheep and goats).
jwleaks,
OK, will do. Give me a few minutes.
Thanks,
Doug
my study on the watchtower magazine for march 15, 2015 is available at:.
http://www.jwstudies.com/the_watchtower_and_the_contexts_of_jesus__stories.pdf.
this watchtower presents jesus stories at matthew 25: the ten virgins; the talents; and the final judgment (sheep and goats).
My Study on The Watchtower magazine for March 15, 2015 is available at:
http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Watchtower_and_the_Contexts_of_Jesus__Stories.pdf
This Watchtower presents Jesus’ stories at Matthew 25: The Ten Virgins; The Talents; and The Final Judgment (“Sheep and Goats”). With each story, the magazine says that the context has to be understood. However, it does not give contexts in terms of Matthew’s Gospel but in terms of the Watchtower Society and its organisation. Its self-obsession and its self-importance suffocate and distort the Biblical message of each story. The truths are swamped by the wet blanket of the WTS’s soteriology and its eschatological framework.
Doug
runF,
Don't be too simplistic over the term "FDS", inasmuch as its meaning has been amended over their history. For example, even though he said he was not keen on the idea, people such as Maria Russell applied the term to her husband Charles Taze.
Of interest, is to determine when they shifted from its meaning as a particular individual to a group. I have personal doubts that Rutherford would be too keen to share his decision-making. A complete autocrat.
Further, until 2013, the term included all Spirit-anointed; it is only since 2013 that the GB has drawn it exclusively to its own group.
There is a difference between data and information.
Doug
it was explained that the faithful slave is the governing body, while the domestics are all those who are fed spiritually, whether of the anointed or of the other sheep..
the july 15, 2013 study edition of the watchtower stated on page 22, paragraph 10: in keeping with jesus pattern of feeding many through the hands of a few, that slave is made up of a small group of anointed brothers who are directly involved in preparing and dispensing spiritual food during christs presence.
throughout the last days, the anointed brothers who make up the faithful and discreet slave have served together at headquarters.
As far as I had understood, the WTS has had two "arrivals" - one was the past secret "presence" (parousia) and the other is the future "coming" (erchomenon) associated with "Armageddon".
I have not unearthed that 2013 Watchtower magazine, but I think they are differentiating between the two Greek words.
A study into the NT usage would show that these two Greek words describe the same event.
Doug
my latest study, "the watchtower still depends on '1914'" is available at:.
http://www.jwstudies.com/the_watchtower_still_depends_on_1914.pdf .
please tell me of the corrections i need to make.
I found a couple of grammatical issues. I fixed them and I have given the update as Version 1.1
Doug
my latest study, "the watchtower still depends on '1914'" is available at:.
http://www.jwstudies.com/the_watchtower_still_depends_on_1914.pdf .
please tell me of the corrections i need to make.
My latest study, "The Watchtower Still Depends on '1914'" is available at:
http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Watchtower_still_depends_on_1914.pdf
Please tell me of the corrections I need to make. The Study is not exhaustive and I am fully aware that more could have been included.
The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society [WTS] is maintaining its focus on “1914”. In December 2014, the WTS released: What Does the Bible Really Teach? This
is a revision of the 2005 publication. Examination of the section under
review in this Study indicates that the revision incorporates the text
of the WTS’s Bible that was released in 2013. This is further suggested
through the revised colour of the book’s cover, which is similar to the
colour of the WTS’s 2013 Bible.
The dominant feature of WTS teaching is that God’s Kingdom, which for the WTS means “Government”,
was set up in heaven in 1914, and that it assigned the WTS’s Governing
Body [GB] to be its sole representative on Earth. The ingrained
dependence on 1914 is shown in the 2015 WTS publication Examining the Scriptures Daily, where “1914” is mentioned 25 times.
Doug
the wts says that the 70 years began when the last jews entered egypt (7th month, feast of gedaliah), and that this final exodus took place in 607 bce.. they then say that jerusalem was destroyed 2 months earlier (5th month) and that this event marked the end of the davidic kingdom, which commenced the 2520 years.
on that basis, if my reading is correct, their 2520 years ended on the 5th month of 1914, not in october.. further confusion reigns, since according to parker and dubberstein, in 607 bce the babylonians inserted an intercalary second elul before tishri.
from memory, thiele says that jeremiah used the babylonian calendar.. i know that their chronology and eisgeses are totally fanciful; i am simply addressing the logic in the thinking that they appear to present.. i have elsewhere shown that it is more likely that the time fom the destruction of jerusalem to the exodus into egypt is more likely to have been at least 2 years, perhaps as long as 4, so i am not canvassing that issue here either.. doug.
St George,
I know this is all unreal WTS thinking, but I am simply pointing out what they are saying, and its implications for them.
The WTS starts the "70 years" from the moment that the last Jews, including Jeremiah, went into Egypt. This took place in the 7th month. (See The Watchtower, October 1, 2011, pages 27-28
The WTS starts its 2520 years from the timing of Jerusalem's destruction. This took place in the 5th month. (Jer 52:12)
The WTS assumes that these events took place in the same year. It assumes, without any evidence, that the first returnees assembled at the site of the destroyed temple in 537 BCE. This took place in the 7th month.
They then count back 70 years to the exodus into Egypt; ergo 607 BCE. They then go back a further two months to date the destruction of Jerusalem in the same calendar year, thereby locating its start of the 2520 years. The have a two month link between the exodus and the destruction, which I say is inconceivable:
http://www.jwstudies.com/Did_Jews_exit_after_two_months.pdf
Ann, I take your point. Thanks.
Doug
