Posts by Doug Mason

21

TIL - 537 BC is in the Bible - and more

by berrygerry in

from an apologist site:.

http://thirdwitness.com/607_bce/www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/607/realissue.html.

hence, counting back from 537 bce (the year the bible says the jews returned home) for a full seventy years, we arrive at the year 607 bce.. .

Doug Mason

The secular sources that provide the WTS with the 539 BCE date employ a system that commences with Absolute Dates, such as 568 BCE for the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, and then employing the secular accepted neo-Babylonian chronology to arrive at the intervening dates.

If the WTS tries to locate a precise and exact "70-year period", then it does not understand the mind of the ancient Hebrews or their historiography. Trying to do so imposes 21st century thinking into the minds and perceptions of an agrarian people living in a different culture some 2000 to 2500 years ago.

Today, we might think that the record of history is a tabulation on facts, records of diaries, and so on, but in those days the recording of history was something new and untried. These "historians" were religious scribes whose purpose was religious. For example, to think that the Gospel accounts are literal biographies is to completely misunderstand them. Each is a religious construct by a particular group written for its own group to suit its own religious ends. The earliest - Mark - was written 40 years after Jesus walked, talked, and was executed.

Doug

21

TIL - 537 BC is in the Bible - and more

by berrygerry in

from an apologist site:.

http://thirdwitness.com/607_bce/www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/607/realissue.html.

hence, counting back from 537 bce (the year the bible says the jews returned home) for a full seventy years, we arrive at the year 607 bce.. .

Doug Mason

berrygerry,

When you look at the first diagram at that site you referenced in your initial post, you will note very carefully that in accordance with the WTS's "explanation", that the apologist correctly identifies their start of the "70 years" as "when Judah went into exile from off its soil", dating this in the 7th month (October, Tishri).

The WTS has two reasons for focusing on the exile into Egypt in the 7th month: firstly, it ties in with their termination of the period in the 7th month. Equally significant is the fact that Jerusalem was devastated in the 5th month.

I have analysed the situation, and it is impossible for the "exile into Egypt" as taking place only two months after the destruction of Jerusalem. I suspect that at least 2 years passed and possibly 4 years.

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

In addition, the WTS is incapable of arriving at 537 BCE for the Returnees to assemble at the site of the destroyed temple, or that any Scripture says this marked the end of the period. 2 Chr 36:21-22 makes it clear that the period of Babylonian rule ended on the day it was defeated (539 BCE).

And the WTS gets its 539 BCE date from the secular sources who use processes that the WTS rejects.

And if it needed the land to be emptied before the "70 years" could commence, why does the WTS not apply that "principle" to its end? The Jews returned to the temple site long after each had been settled into theor own villages.

Doug

77

Interpret John 1:1 by John 1:1.

by towerwatchman in

interpret john 1:1 by john 1:1. .

the greek language has the definite article which has approximately thirty variations, is translated into english as “the”, and points to an identifiable personality, someone we have prior knowledge of.

but the greek language has no indefinite article corresponding to the english “a”, or “an”.

Doug Mason

The focus of the chiasm of John 1:1-18 shows not only the objective of that passage but, given its location in the Prologue, shows that it provides the dominant theme for the Johannine Community.

I have provided three ways of presenting the chiasm, and each shows the same focus.

http://www.jwstudies.com/Chiastic_structure_of_John_1__1_to_18.pdf

The earliest Gospel – Mark’s – was composed about 40 years after the time of Jesus’ ministry. Matthew’s Gospel was written about 55 years after the time of Jesus. John’s Gospel was composed over a period from about 50 to 70 years after Jesus, while Luke’s Gospel spanned a period from about 50 to 90 years after Jesus.

None was or is a literal biography of Jesus. Each account represents the views of each community; each account was written by, to and for that community. Mark's Gospel provided a model and often the words, provided material for subsequent Gospel writers, but each modified the story to account for its own needs, its own liturgy.

No NT writing is a theological treatise. Any quibbling must be taken from the view of the Jewish mind at that time, not according to any current Westernised perceptions.

In addition to providing the views of its community, John’s Gospel provides an insight into the community’s experiences and their opposition to the views of other communities, often the leadership of the synagogue, whom they called “the Jews”. In reality, the community members were Jews but their experiences at the hands of the synagogue leadership embittered the relationship. I have previously provided one account of that experience.

Doug

77

Interpret John 1:1 by John 1:1.

by towerwatchman in

interpret john 1:1 by john 1:1. .

the greek language has the definite article which has approximately thirty variations, is translated into english as “the”, and points to an identifiable personality, someone we have prior knowledge of.

but the greek language has no indefinite article corresponding to the english “a”, or “an”.

Doug Mason

smiddy,

I suggest that we are interested in seeing how others lived and thought in order that we might help ourselves. These scriptures need only be seen as literature and of showing us the human mind (not God's).

To me, they illustrate the power that mythology holds, and in that way they make me look at us and ask if we are any better at accepting facts, rationally.

We can pour scorn at the ancients believing their God(s) as being directly involved in their daily lives, of thinking that God was directly involved in the affairs of nations, yet in the next breath we hear our parliament opening with prayer, of politicians invoking their religious biases (same-sex marriage, abortion, etc.), and of US leaders saying "God bless America".

We have no idea what the original writers of "Scripture" wrote. There has been no God to protect it from corruption, distortion or deliberate manipulation. The WTS is only one of myriads who have done this.

I think the quotation from Epicurus is most apt, which starts with (check Google Images): "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? ...."

Doug

77

Interpret John 1:1 by John 1:1.

by towerwatchman in

interpret john 1:1 by john 1:1. .

the greek language has the definite article which has approximately thirty variations, is translated into english as “the”, and points to an identifiable personality, someone we have prior knowledge of.

but the greek language has no indefinite article corresponding to the english “a”, or “an”.

Doug Mason

towerwatchman,

I can provide the chiasm, but I would first like people to investigate for themselves because activity is the best way to learn and for things to stick. So let's just wait a while and see what people discover is the focus of the chiasm and hence its purpose. At the same time, it provides an understanding of what the Johannine Community intended with that opening as well as providing a mechanism for understanding the message of the remainder of their Gospel.

The Prologue was written well after that community had developed their High Christology, much later than other parts of the Gospel. The aporia are used by scholars (and I am most certainly not one!) to distinguish the individual elements of the Gospel and their likely location in the evolution of its writing.

In my understanding, the Johannine Community was directly addressing its own community members and referencing their experiences at the hand of the synagogue community. As for 1 John, rather than seeing it as addressing Gnosticism, I understand that it was addressing those who had been members of the Johannine Community but had formed their own breakaway schism.

I agree that these Johannine writings concern that Community's views on Christ (and hence on their soteriology). The writers (and I include Paul in this regard) were not writing theology. They were addressing their immediate and local concerns.

Doug

77

Interpret John 1:1 by John 1:1.

by towerwatchman in

interpret john 1:1 by john 1:1. .

the greek language has the definite article which has approximately thirty variations, is translated into english as “the”, and points to an identifiable personality, someone we have prior knowledge of.

but the greek language has no indefinite article corresponding to the english “a”, or “an”.

Doug Mason

After you have formed the chiasm to discover the focus of John 1:1-18, then research the experiences of the Johannine Community that created that Prologue. This passage was created late in their experience, when they had moved well into their High Christology.

Google for Johannine Community. Here is a starter:

http://archive.hsscol.org.hk/Archive/periodical/abstract/A012k.htm

Doug

77

Interpret John 1:1 by John 1:1.

by towerwatchman in

interpret john 1:1 by john 1:1. .

the greek language has the definite article which has approximately thirty variations, is translated into english as “the”, and points to an identifiable personality, someone we have prior knowledge of.

but the greek language has no indefinite article corresponding to the english “a”, or “an”.

Doug Mason

Create the chiasm for John 1:1-18 and you will then see what the passage is really all about.

The Hebrew writings are full of chiasms. The name comes from the Greek letter CHI (like a long X), which is formed when each related element is joined with a straight line.

If you need guidance, then Google.

Doug

6

Take a second look over my shoulder

by Doug Mason in

i am about halfway through the first draft of my study into the evolution of judaeo-christian soteriology.. while it is fashionable to disagree with the beliefs of "other" religions, be it the watchtower, mormons or islam, consistency requires the same position must be applied to any and all belief systems.

my study is not aimed specifically at the watchtower, although much of it will prove uncomfortable for jws.. i recommend that if a person's faith is weak, they should not read my study.

they should limit their reading to books and articles that support the beliefs they already hold.

Doug Mason

snowbird,

It is my understanding that the writings were produced by a community of Jews (nowadays known as the "Johannine Community") that was expelled from the synagogue because of their Christology.

Much of the Gospel and 1 John reflects and describes the Community's beliefs as well as its antipathey towards the synagogue (aka "Jews", even though they themselves were Jews) as well as their anitpathy to those who left the Johannine Community ("those who were once with us").

The "signs" may be read at the literal superifical level (Book of "Signs" runs from John ch 2 to 12) but there is a layer that conveys the history and beliefs of the Community.

Their focus lay with the revelation of God through Jesus, the "Light", the "Way", so their focus lay with the Incarnation, unlike Pauls, whose focus was the Resurrection.

I have yet to discover whether Lazarus was a member of that Community, so I am keen to see any information that you are able to provide me with.

Thanks,

Doug

6

Take a second look over my shoulder

by Doug Mason in

i am about halfway through the first draft of my study into the evolution of judaeo-christian soteriology.. while it is fashionable to disagree with the beliefs of "other" religions, be it the watchtower, mormons or islam, consistency requires the same position must be applied to any and all belief systems.

my study is not aimed specifically at the watchtower, although much of it will prove uncomfortable for jws.. i recommend that if a person's faith is weak, they should not read my study.

they should limit their reading to books and articles that support the beliefs they already hold.

Doug Mason

Thank you,

I have now shown you the overall structure and the areas where I wish to address -- and obviously learn. I think that in future I will show you each individual Chapter as I draft it.

My next focus will be on John's Gospel and 1 John. That will be for me a highlight and so different to Paul. After that, I think I should look at the Gospel of Thomas. Any information to inspire me will be greatly appreciated.

Doug

6

Take a second look over my shoulder

by Doug Mason in

i am about halfway through the first draft of my study into the evolution of judaeo-christian soteriology.. while it is fashionable to disagree with the beliefs of "other" religions, be it the watchtower, mormons or islam, consistency requires the same position must be applied to any and all belief systems.

my study is not aimed specifically at the watchtower, although much of it will prove uncomfortable for jws.. i recommend that if a person's faith is weak, they should not read my study.

they should limit their reading to books and articles that support the beliefs they already hold.

Doug Mason

Hi,

I am about halfway through the First Draft of my Study into the evolution of Judaeo-Christian soteriology.

While it is fashionable to disagree with the beliefs of "other" religions, be it the Watchtower, Mormons or Islam, consistency requires the same position must be applied to any and all belief systems. My Study is not aimed specifically at the Watchtower, although much of it will prove uncomfortable for JWs.

I recommend that if a person's faith is weak, they should not read my Study. They should limit their reading to books and articles that support the beliefs they already hold. My Study challenges - it often challenges me.

Primarily, I am making this available to obtain any feedback and suggestions. The 50% rough first draft is available at:

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

Regards,

Doug