Posts by Doug Mason

42

Providing salvation is not that important

by pixel in

the washtowel has a crazy obsession with diminishing the important of jesus' sacrifice for humankind.

i find this so antichristian.

i mean, how can you ignore scriptures like john 3:16?.

Doug Mason

The concept of "Original Sin" was developed after the NT was written. It found acceptance in order to justify Infant Baptism. Many Church Fathers saw sin having been introduced by Cain, not by Adam.

John 3:16 does not say that "God gave his son so that people could kill him". It demands "belief". That belief is not speaking of "mental assent". Rather, the concept is of "allegiance" (works).

The Hebrews thought of "salvation" corporately, nationally.

Explanations for the reason and efficacy of Jesus' (sacrificial) death have gone through several major iterations. Augustine's idea lasted almost 1000 years until Anselm brought in his ideas, which were based on medieval concepts. Others followed with their "explanations", including Abelard, Pelagius, Thomas Aquinas, and so forth. Why does God only love people because they killed his son? Who received the ransom payment-- some said it was paid to Satan because he was holding humanity captive.

As you spend the billions of years singing praises, while Andromeda collides with the Milky Way and the Sun dies, think of me. Who wants to live forever?

https://jwstudies.com/Revolutions_Part_4__Christian_Salvations.pdf

Doug

44

I.B.S.A. members were witnesses of Jesus Christ.-JW`s members are witnesses of Jehovah.

by smiddy3 in

is there a difference ?

i believe so ,and a very big difference.one that harmonises with the new testament in bearing witness to jesus and his kingdom and one that amounts to a new gospel bearing witness to jehovah and his kingdom something that is condemned in the bible.. c.t.russell started the magazine called "zions watchtower and herald of christs presence" and its emphasis was on bearing witness about jesus christ and his kingdom ,of course he got many things wrong ,but he was focused on jesus & his kingdom with what the new testament is all about.. j.f.rutherford in his wisdom decided to change the heading of the watchtower to " the watchtower announcing jehovah`s kingdom" a phrase / term / doctrine that is not in the new testament and takes away the importance and role that jesus christ has in bringing people to god.phil.2:9-11. nowhere in the christian greek scriptures / new testament are followers of jesus christ instructed to be witnesses of jehovah ,nowhere there is not one scripture that instructs them to do so.. however in the christian greek scriptures / new testament there are over twenty scriptures whereby christians are told to be witnesses of jesus.. and it was by divine providence that followers of christ were to be called christians .acts 11:26 , not jehovah`s witnesses.. do jw`s even know what it means " by divine providence " ?.

the jw`s use isaiah 43:10-12 an old testament scripture to justify calling themselves jehovah`s witnesses,however that was applied to the israelites back then ,did they adopt the name jehovah`s witnesses ?

Doug Mason

Smiddy3,

Research the origin of Yahweh.

Research how the Hebrews had monotheism imposed upon them by the minority that could write. (Isaiah 40ff was largely written by these monotheists. Deuteronomy was also a creation of that 7th to 6th century BCE period.).

Research Second Temple Judaism to see its direct impact on New Testament thinking.

As a thought: The name "Immanuel" invokes the "EL", the name of the main God that the Hebrews adopted from the Canaanites (along with his wife Asherah and their 70 sons, including Baal).

It's all mythology built on top of other mythologies.

Paul's ideas about Jesus are more reflective of the earlier views, and are some 50 years earlier than the ideas created by the writers of "John's" Gospel.

Doug

44

I.B.S.A. members were witnesses of Jesus Christ.-JW`s members are witnesses of Jehovah.

by smiddy3 in

is there a difference ?

i believe so ,and a very big difference.one that harmonises with the new testament in bearing witness to jesus and his kingdom and one that amounts to a new gospel bearing witness to jehovah and his kingdom something that is condemned in the bible.. c.t.russell started the magazine called "zions watchtower and herald of christs presence" and its emphasis was on bearing witness about jesus christ and his kingdom ,of course he got many things wrong ,but he was focused on jesus & his kingdom with what the new testament is all about.. j.f.rutherford in his wisdom decided to change the heading of the watchtower to " the watchtower announcing jehovah`s kingdom" a phrase / term / doctrine that is not in the new testament and takes away the importance and role that jesus christ has in bringing people to god.phil.2:9-11. nowhere in the christian greek scriptures / new testament are followers of jesus christ instructed to be witnesses of jehovah ,nowhere there is not one scripture that instructs them to do so.. however in the christian greek scriptures / new testament there are over twenty scriptures whereby christians are told to be witnesses of jesus.. and it was by divine providence that followers of christ were to be called christians .acts 11:26 , not jehovah`s witnesses.. do jw`s even know what it means " by divine providence " ?.

the jw`s use isaiah 43:10-12 an old testament scripture to justify calling themselves jehovah`s witnesses,however that was applied to the israelites back then ,did they adopt the name jehovah`s witnesses ?

Doug Mason

Cofty,

I fully agree that one has to recognise the evolution of thought, especially within the communities of the Jesus-followers (the first century followers were not Christians; Jesus was not a Christian).

The genuine writings of Paul predate any of the Gospels, and his material reflects earlier mythologies. And where did he get his views from? Where did he spend those years following his experience on the Damascus road?

Further, there was no uniformity of ideas; there was not one set of agreed beliefs -- just look at the problems Paul encountered.

Doug

44

I.B.S.A. members were witnesses of Jesus Christ.-JW`s members are witnesses of Jehovah.

by smiddy3 in

is there a difference ?

i believe so ,and a very big difference.one that harmonises with the new testament in bearing witness to jesus and his kingdom and one that amounts to a new gospel bearing witness to jehovah and his kingdom something that is condemned in the bible.. c.t.russell started the magazine called "zions watchtower and herald of christs presence" and its emphasis was on bearing witness about jesus christ and his kingdom ,of course he got many things wrong ,but he was focused on jesus & his kingdom with what the new testament is all about.. j.f.rutherford in his wisdom decided to change the heading of the watchtower to " the watchtower announcing jehovah`s kingdom" a phrase / term / doctrine that is not in the new testament and takes away the importance and role that jesus christ has in bringing people to god.phil.2:9-11. nowhere in the christian greek scriptures / new testament are followers of jesus christ instructed to be witnesses of jehovah ,nowhere there is not one scripture that instructs them to do so.. however in the christian greek scriptures / new testament there are over twenty scriptures whereby christians are told to be witnesses of jesus.. and it was by divine providence that followers of christ were to be called christians .acts 11:26 , not jehovah`s witnesses.. do jw`s even know what it means " by divine providence " ?.

the jw`s use isaiah 43:10-12 an old testament scripture to justify calling themselves jehovah`s witnesses,however that was applied to the israelites back then ,did they adopt the name jehovah`s witnesses ?

Doug Mason

At Isaiah 43, the people were chastised because they had witnessed YHWH yet they had remained defiant. Hence they were being punished. So the "witness" referred to their having seen (witnessed) YHWH's goodness, but they were condemned because they had failed to respond accordingly. At least, that was the story being put out by the scribes who wished to create a benefit for their (monotheistic) cause.

Secondly, the concept of "name" went far beyond a sound or a written text. To them, a "name" was a person's very being. Hence the need at times for a person's name to be changed (Simon=>Peter, etc., etc.)

Thirdly, the name "Jesus" is a Latin distortion of "Yeshua", which in English would be rendered as "Joshua". A study of the Hebrew person named Joshua should be instructive.

As I have previously stated, I find the concept of a spirit being crawling into Mary's egg and emerging as a "human" beyond belief. I suggest that prior stories in their mythology of angels having sex with women is relevant.

Doug

13

Did you understand the individual books of the bible ?

by Steel in

the last couple years i have been really getting into watching these videos called the bible protect.

there is no real dogmatic axe to grind.

just simple 10 -15 min videos on the individual books of the bible and kind of how it’s all connected together.

Doug Mason

"A text without a context is the pretext for a proof text"

13

Did you understand the individual books of the bible ?

by Steel in

the last couple years i have been really getting into watching these videos called the bible protect.

there is no real dogmatic axe to grind.

just simple 10 -15 min videos on the individual books of the bible and kind of how it’s all connected together.

Doug Mason

Many key NT concepts were created during the latter part of the Second Temple period, namely the 3rd and 2nd centuries BCE. This includes the creation of a spirit world, the invention of evil spirit beings, a war in heaven, invention of demons, and such. So read books such as 1 Enoch and Jubilees at the very least. Remember that the Book of Daniel was written in the 2nd century in the wake of this eschatological phenomenon.

Do not try to blur the Bible books into a homogeneous entity, Each writing was created within its own cultural context for its own immediate community's needs. For example, the Book of Job was written to explain why God's chosen nation was always being punished. In other words, climb into the Jewish mind of each period. Judaism experienced several metamorphoses.

Doug

51

Help please

by jhine in

hi , would someone help me please with some info about the nwt .

during my study time l have been reading john 1:1-14 and colossians 1:15-17 .

both these passages indicate that jesus was not created as the wt asserts .

Doug Mason

The people who wrote Colossians were using words and expressions in terms of their idioms in use at their time. We must not interpret their ideas through definitions written in our day in terms of our idioms.

The vast majority at that time were illiterate and they received the messages orally through a literate person, at times the person who travelled with the written scroll. It was meant to be heard, not read. Theirs was not a time of books in common use as exists today. The printing press changed communication even more than has the www.

It is unwise to hang onto the meaning of a single word, or to think that what we have is precisely what was initially written. The initial went through several drafts, just as happens today, each scroll was individually hand written and was subjected to deliberate and accidental changes.

The NWT makes changes to suit its preferred outcome. In doing so, it sits comfortable with history, starting at least 2600 years ago with the Hebrew text. When the Pentateuch was compiled in the 4th century BCE it was an amalgum of several different sources.

All of the texts were fluid and in a constant state of flux. Even 2 Corinthians is a compilation of at least two letters.

When the material was defined in the 4th century CE as sacred text, there was no universal agreement on which writings to accept or reject -- and that lack of agreement persists today.

The words were not written in stone, like archaeological tablets or carvings. Even the text of the Ten Commandments, supposedly written on stone tablets, comes to us in at least three different versions.

Doug

51

Help please

by jhine in

hi , would someone help me please with some info about the nwt .

during my study time l have been reading john 1:1-14 and colossians 1:15-17 .

both these passages indicate that jesus was not created as the wt asserts .

Doug Mason

jhine,

What makes you think that the writers of Colossians were correct or that they knew what they were talking about?

Nobody knows what was originally written in any Biblical document. No one. And it is possible there was no single original. given their procedures.

Doug

51

Help please

by jhine in

hi , would someone help me please with some info about the nwt .

during my study time l have been reading john 1:1-14 and colossians 1:15-17 .

both these passages indicate that jesus was not created as the wt asserts .

Doug Mason

Was Jesus a human?

Did a spirit being enter Mary's egg and take over?

Does the Watchtower have its own "Trinity" of Spirit Being => Human => Spirit Being, with continuity but no continuity?

What was resurrected?

51

Help please

by jhine in

hi , would someone help me please with some info about the nwt .

during my study time l have been reading john 1:1-14 and colossians 1:15-17 .

both these passages indicate that jesus was not created as the wt asserts .

Doug Mason

Absolutely, the context is paramount.

You need to identify the groups that wrote each of these passages. In the case of John's Gospel, the anonymous writers were from a community of Jews who had a high Christology; hence they were ostracised from the conservative group.

In the case of Colossians, they were a very spiritualising community, with strong ideas about a spirit world. BTW Ephesians is an expansion of Colossians. (Paul did not write either Colossians or the subsequent Ephesians.)

Thirdly, I recommend that you identify the chiasms of each passage. These will reveal the key message.

Finally, Michael was an invention of the latter Second Temple period, when they created a spirit world and gave names to these beings (Mastema, Michael, Gabriel, Azazel, Satan, etc.). Diabolos (Devil) was introduced from the Greek when they translated the LXX.

The Book of Daniel was composed during that latter Second Temple period. In common with other writings of the 3rd and 2nd century BCE, they assigned the writings to past heroes (Enoch, Daniel, etc.)

Yes, context, both in terms of grammatical structure (chiasms, particularly), the creating community's is vital -- not hanging onto a single word in isolation and ignoring their idiomatic meaning that they gave to concepts at their time (not in ours).

Doug