Posts by Greenpalmtreestillmine

18

Jesus Married?

by sandy in

.

i am curious: any here believe that jesus could have been married to mary magdalene?

.

Greenpalmtreestillmine

Jesus has 12 male disciples and some accuse him of being gay.

He has female disciples and some accuse him of being married or a fornicator.

Neither is supported by the Bible.

Sabrina

31

The Cross and the Passover

by Greenpalmtreestillmine in

the cross and the passover have a connection not ususally noticed.

exodus 12:22, "and you shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood that is in the basin....".

the blood of the passover lamb was splashed upon the two doorposts and the lintel, it marked three places on the wooden doorway.. the blood of the christ also marked three places on the wooden cross.

Greenpalmtreestillmine

Narkissos,

Every generation among the Church Fathers and Doctors came up with OT-NT connections that the previous generations hadn't made. But all were using the same kind of approach.

That does not belie the fact that the Gospel writers, men who are by some accused of dishonestly using the OT to confirm their supposedly false accounts, did not inlude all the significant similarities or connections in their writings. They apparently did not do a good job of finding all the "false" similarities they could have. This from Jews, mind you, men who knew the OT backwards and forwards.

I respectfully submit: you are attempting to obfuscate the fact that they did not go willy-nilly haunting about the OT for false evidence. If they had they would have included the blood/doorpost/cross and other significant evidences to their supposed false story.

Sabrina

31

The Cross and the Passover

by Greenpalmtreestillmine in

the cross and the passover have a connection not ususally noticed.

exodus 12:22, "and you shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood that is in the basin....".

the blood of the passover lamb was splashed upon the two doorposts and the lintel, it marked three places on the wooden doorway.. the blood of the christ also marked three places on the wooden cross.

Greenpalmtreestillmine

Narkissos,

Actually the way you build up your own suggestion is quite similar to the Gospel pattern of writing: with the general Passover typology in mind, you naturally come to associate the lamb's blood on the wooden doorpost to Jesus' blood on the wooden cross. This leads you (1) to add the narrative detail explicitly ("the cross was stained on three spots") and (2) to make the Passover connection explicit ("as the blood of the lamb...").

You make it seem as if it's somehow not honest or wrong to look at things from a personal viewpoint and to come to natural conclusions based on that veiwpoint. The U.S. is politically divided because based on their personal viewpoints Americans came to different natural conclusions about whether or not President Bush should be the Commander and Chief for another 4 years. .

Our personal political views color our political conclusions, but that in itself does not make every conclusion we come to either right or wrong.

Our personal views on the Bible also color our conclusions about that book, but that also in itself does not make every conclusion we come to with regard to the Bible either right or wrong.

If there is some mention of the blood/doorposts/cross similarity in early Christian literature, I am not aware of it. But as you say there could very well be one somewhere. But the fact that it is not in the Bible reveals that the notion of the Gospel writers searching throughout the OT to retrieve any details they could use to support their writings, is to say the least, suspect.

Truth is rarely black and white.

Sabrina

1

Sleepless In Seattle

by Greenpalmtreestillmine in

jw
friends

i'm listening to the soundtrack of this movie.

sorry for posting a wasted post just so love this movie and its music!.

"pack up all my cares and woes and here i go!

Greenpalmtreestillmine

I'm listening to the soundtrack of this movie. So...................Good!

Sorry for posting a wasted post just so love this movie and its music!

"Pack up all my cares and woes and here I go! Where somebody waits for me. Bye, Bye blackbird."

Sabrina in love.

31

The Cross and the Passover

by Greenpalmtreestillmine in

the cross and the passover have a connection not ususally noticed.

exodus 12:22, "and you shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood that is in the basin....".

the blood of the passover lamb was splashed upon the two doorposts and the lintel, it marked three places on the wooden doorway.. the blood of the christ also marked three places on the wooden cross.

Greenpalmtreestillmine

Narkissos,

Another possible (and to me very likely) scenario:
(1) The passion narrative is essentially made up of OT material in the first place (as is obvious in Mark).
(2) The later rewritings of the story (Matthew or John) actually quote or directly refer to the underlying OT text as "prophecies fulfilled".
The material which was used to create the story will later be used again to confirm it...

Are you saying the NT records the similarity between the blood on the cross and the blood on the doorways of the Jews in Egypt during the Passover? Perhaps you could provide the quote for me. If you do not have a quote then you are mistaken in your assumptions with regard to my original post. Sabrina

71

HELP!! Trying to find right religion brough up as JW

by emmamess22 in

i was raised as an on again off again (when convenient for flighty mom) jw.

i have recently decided due to the birth of a daughter that it was time to get it together and decide what to do with myself spiritually as she was going to church with her baptisit dad and i felt awful.

so, i've been using the reasoning book and reading the bible and trying to decide what's right.. spent hours looking at christmas online....saw it was traced to pagan celebrations and decided not to do it.

Greenpalmtreestillmine

Emma,

Many exJWs have searched as you have and while maybe they have not found the perfect religion they have found a place to gather with folks who love God and who are attempting to do good as Jesus taught. Some have gone into the mainstream Christian churches but others have found small non-denominational churches in their community which welcomed them with open arms. Surprisingly enough some exJWs have become Bible Students. No trinity, hellfire, immortality of soul there. But they do celebrate birthdays.

There is no perfect Christian religion, but there are loving people who though their ways may be a little strange to us, or their doctrine different from what we are used to, they do try to follow the Christ and they do try to do good.

Some exJWs have home study groups and in this way they associate with people of like faith. Others, like myself, are not members of a church and do not attend home study groups. I would not recommend that though for mothers who have small children like yourself.

My advice: Take it slow. Put away the Reasoning book and read the Bible alone. Start out with the Gospels. Read them not so much to understand prophecy or doctrine but to get to know God's Son. Read, read, read, what he taught and let it sink into your heart and mind. (Bible tapes are great for this too.) Get to know the Christ. Imagine yourself walking along the road with him as he is teaching. Imagine yourself sitting down with Martha and Mary and listening to Jesus speak.

Lastly, never ever give up praying! Pray every morning and every night. Pray with your little girl.

You and your family will be in my prayers. Good spiritual health to you, Emma!

Sabrina

28

what do you read at Matthew 27:52,53 ?

by evergreen in

reading my bible daily ,i am enjoying what i read, especially not having to constantly refer to wt literature all the time .but simply reading what is in black and white in the holy scriptures.. i came across this portion of scripture at matthew 27:52,53 .

and the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up,(and persons,coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up,entered into the holy city,)and they became visible to many people.. two things that come to my mind from this portion of scripture.

1/ dead people are raised ie holy ones.. the society says that these were bodies that became visible that fell out from the tombs because of the earthquake ??.

Greenpalmtreestillmine

Hi Evergreen,

I believe there is a connection here with the resurrection of Lazarus, John 11:23-25:

"Jesus said to her, 'Your brother will rise again.' Martha said to him, 'I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day." Jesus said to her, 'I am the resurrection and the life. Those who believe in me, even though they die, will live, and everyone who lives and believes in me will never die."

I believe the ones raised were those who during Jesus life had put faith in him but who had died. Their resurrection would not be like the resurrection to eternal life because the time for that had not yet come. But the Christ at his own resurrection made good on his promises to "those who believe in me, even though they die, will live."

Many of the events in Jesus life are not mentioned in the Epistles so the fact that this event is not either does not make it any less believable. It must be remembered that Jesus had already raised several people during his ministry so while it may seem strange to us that so little is recorded about this, to the disciples, the greatest event of all time was the raising of the one who had the power to raise us all.

Faith and love for God and fellow was all that Jesus asked of them and they loved him to the full.

These are my beliefs concerning Matthew 27:52,53.

Sabrina

31

The Cross and the Passover

by Greenpalmtreestillmine in

the cross and the passover have a connection not ususally noticed.

exodus 12:22, "and you shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood that is in the basin....".

the blood of the passover lamb was splashed upon the two doorposts and the lintel, it marked three places on the wooden doorway.. the blood of the christ also marked three places on the wooden cross.

Greenpalmtreestillmine

The Cross and the Passover have a connection not ususally noticed.

Exodus 12:22, "And you shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood that is in the basin...."

The blood of the Passover Lamb was splashed upon the two doorposts and the lintel, it marked three places on the wooden doorway.

The blood of the Christ also marked three places on the wooden cross. Two where his hands or wrists were pierced through, and one where his feet were pinned.

An interesting parallel to say the least. But for those who believe, evidence of the surety of their faith.

Sabrina

20

Da cross....hee hee

by emmamess22 in

by show of hands?

who thinks it was a cross?

who thinks it was a "stake" ?

Greenpalmtreestillmine

I believe Jesus died on a cross.

251

Is Jesus Christ and Michael the ArchAngel one and the same person?

by booker-t in

i must admit that as a jw i never really swallowed this belief maybe because i was so young when i was really a staunch jw.

i would have born-again christians tell me that it was impossible for jesus and michael to be the same person and that jw's invented this doctrine.

fast forward to 2004 while i was reading a book on jesus i noticed that some of the early church fathers thought michael was jesus christ i almost fell out of my chair.

Greenpalmtreestillmine

Leolaia,

Sabrina....The problem is that your interpretation of Revelation 12 is not grounded in actually attested motifs and allusions but in stipulative suppositions ("this may be"..."at Christ's crucifixion possibly"..."could very well be"...etc.), just the same manner as the Society interprets Revelation arbitrarily in the Revelation Climax book.

I was merely trying to show that Revelation 12 did not disallow the possibility that Jesus is Michael as you asserted. The "stipulative suppositions" as you call them were an attempt to allow for the beliefs or thoughts of others who also believe that Jesus is Michael. The only purpose of the post was to refute your assertion with regard to Revelation 12 not to necessarily express my own beliefs on every scripture. On this board a Christian is at times between a rock and hard place. If s/he expresses definite and finite thought on a scripture they risk being called dogmatic. If they speak in more open minded terms with "stipulative suppositions" they can then be regarded as hedging their bets or worse Watchtower-like.

A more faithful interpretation would be one that considers what the tropes and motifs meant at the time by their attestation and use in prophetic and apocalyptic literature; thus, the allusion to the "male child who is to rule the nations with an iron sceptre" is a very specific reference to the Messiah, as it was widely attested with this meaning.

You say "a more faithful interpretation....." yet, I did say the child was Jesus. I may not have expressed it as you would but then we are approaching this from different viewpoints. We do agree on the child being the Messiah.

You are correct about the "woman" signifying either Israel or spiritual Israel, as this is also a commonplace of OT and apocalyptic literature (as well as the twelve stars being an allusion to the twelve tribes, as the same motif has this application in a dream vision in Genesis), and the persecution of the woman recalls the persecution of the Jews or Christians in the respective eras.

I agree with you, though for me the need to look outside the Bible for spiritual interpretation of the scriptures is not necessary. I believe the Bible sufficiently explains itself.

The problem that I was pointing out, which is being overlooked, is that Michael and the Messiah child are being distinguished because in the same scene one is defending the other against the dragon. The logic of the scene does not work by conflating one with the other.

Okay! Now we get to the heart of the problem!

Revelation 12:5-7

"She bore a male Child who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron. And her Child was caught up to God and His throne. Then the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, that they should feed her there one thousand two hundred and sixty days. And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for them in heaven an longer."

May I ask, where does it say in those scriptures that Michael is defending the Child? It does not say that at all. What it says is that after the child was caught up to God and his throne, war broke out. When the Messiah was resurrected to heaven was he really a small child in need of defending? By no means. So the idea that Michael was defending the Child is neither supported by the scripture nor by the reality of the situation.

One must also not insist that Michael is conceived as being Jesus because only Jesus can fight and defeat the dragon and his angels; in Daniel, Michael defeats the kingdoms ruled by the other angelic princes, in 1 Enoch, Michael binds the leading rebel angel under the rocks of the earth until Judgment Day, and finally in the War Scroll Michael has just this role of fighting against the forces of darkness. Rather, Michael fights on the behalf of the Messiah, protecting him and his people (the woman) at a time when they are most vulnerable.

The prophecies and teachings of the Bible are and must be supported and explained by the Bible itself. To use other religious books as keys to unlock the secrets of the Bible is not supported by the Bible.

And while Revelation 12 is somewhat ambiguous because of the language of the apoacyptic genre, there is no equivocation in Hebrews 1 which is specifically designed to deny any angel christology for Jesus.

I have attempted to partially answer this question in my post to Kenneson on this thread. You said Hebrews 1 was"...specifically designed to deny any angel christology for Jesus." I would like to quote verse 4 of that chapter from a few translations: First though....

Verse 3 - He is the reflection of God's glory and bears the impress of God's own being, sustaining all thing by his powerful command; and now that he has purged sins away, he has taken his seat at the right hand of the divine Majesty on high.

Verse 4 in various Bibles

NJB - "So he is now as far above the angels as the title which he has inherited is higher than their own name."

NKJV - "having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they"

NRSV - "having become as much superior to angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent than theirs"

NASB - "having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they."

##############

Paul was obviously trying to make the point that Jesus' ransom sacrifice had made his name and position in the heavens rise even higher than it had been.

The Firstborn Son of God always had a special and holy position, he was the Word. Through him the angels themselves were created. But is it really so hard to believe that if the Son of God, the Word, can come to earth and be born between the legs of a woman, regard himself a friend and be called teacher by some lowly men and women who did not always know their right from their left, that he could not also be called Chief Angel by the very angels he had lived with, worked with and fought side by side with?

Jesus was certainly above the angels, that does not preclude him from being called the Archangel and Hebrews 1 does not preclude that either.

Sabrina

Every generation among the Church Fathers and Doctors came up with OT-NT connections that the previous generations hadn't made. But all were using the same kind of approach.