Posts by JCanon

11

here piggy piggy

by peacefulpete in

the fanciful tale in the nt about jeus expelling demons from a man by sending them into 2000 swine who subsequently leap into the sea and drown, has always perplexed me.

aside from the contradictions and other problems in the two versians of the story(eg.

number of possessed men, no "sea" for 30 some miles from place of setting etc.

JCanon

It is therefore possible that the story was written to attribute to Jesus the foreknowledge of what would happen to Jerusalem in detail, while at the same time offer hope of liberation. If this is so, the liberation never came. It was coincidences such as this that fed superstitious minds seeking signs of deliverance.

Very interesting!! Thanks for this post. I too felt there was something "more" to that story about the pigs. As far as their hope of being rescued at that time, the disciples had knowledge from Jesus that Jerusalem would be destroyed and the people taken into exile among the nations "until the appointed times of the nations were fulfilled"...and then they could expect liberation. Jerusalem was trampled upon and the Jews were in exile until 1947, which was the end of the appointed times of the nations. The Messiah would appear 45 years later....that's another issue. But the Bible doesn't provide for any liberation until after that "appointed time" was fulfilled, so their deliverance did finally come. The Jews did finally regain their homeland and now the State of Israel if the fulfillment of that promise.

But getting back to pigs. I have not yet figured out QUITE what that reference can be. In the Bible, as you know, "dogs" are a euphemism for bi-sexual men who sodomize other men. The euphemism came from the coital position generally assumed during the prostitution act which resembled dogs having intercourse, thus they became known as "dogs". Dogs appear in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. But "pigs" appear in the story of the "prodigal son" which is also a reference to this same individual. Lazarus and the prodigal son are the same reference.

So what do "pigs" represent in the Jewish culture? Another type of homosexual? or perhaps a gentile, being generally of european extraction and, therefore white. For sure pigs are pinkish. The reason why this "might" be a correct reference is because Isa 53 does say that the second coming Messiah would be buried among the "rich". The buring of the Messiah at the second coming relates to the prodigal son at the time he leaves his fathers house and is said to dwell with the pigs. So I'm wondering if the vague reference here to pigs being white gentiles?

I think it's pertinent, though I hope it's not offensive to anyone, but the "rich man" in the scriptures when not specifically a reference to the "evil slave" could be a general reference to a class of people generally considered to be rich which in our world is ultimately the Euopean gentile. The European is the ultimate "rich man" is he not?

So I'm wondering what, if any, secret reference is there in what happened? Is a "pig" a rich gentile?

I know the Jews looked down on gentiles and considered them "unclean". Did they casually represent a gentile as a "pig"?

When Jesus was speaking to a Samaritan woman regarding speaking to her he said he would not give the bread of the children to "little dogs"; thus he considered the Samaritans compared to the Jews as the pets around the table of the chosen ones. But she said even the crumbs they give to the dogs. Soo.....if the Samaritans, who were dark complected were in station generally called a "little dog", then is the general reference to a "pig" by a Jew their colliquial reference to a rich white man?

OR.....is it also a reference to a homosexual?

The reason is because pigs are considered to stay in "penned in places" and generally homosexuals psychologically could be culturally thought to be in that situation, penned in, as it were, by their desires, hemmed in by their psychological state.

At any rate, I'm tending to think it's another euphemism for a homosexual. Lazarus at the second coming was specifically to be impaled in "Sodom" thus the association with herding pigs is direct.

Oops! Maybe they are BOTH! Did the Jews bother to distinguish a gay white gentile from others? Or were gay white gentiles sort of their own distinct category in the Jewish world at that time that the Jews would have a euphemistic reference to them as "pigs"? You know, they are white, rolling around in filth? filth being considered what homosexuals do. Anal intercourse sometimes soils one's body, etc. thus the filth is a reference to having sex in the context of excretement, etc.

But...if so, let's say the above is correct. Then two things are implied. One is that a larger percentage of demonic influence would permeate among "pigs" (whatever the assignment) but also once the "sons of the kingdom" don't show up for the banquet of the Messiah on time, then among these "penned in ones" substitute saints would be sought at the last minute.

So....are white, homosexual males a target for the kingdom in the last stages? Or are homosexuals in general a target? Or are rich white men a target?

Hmmmm... What could "pigs" represent in the Jewish culture that we can learn something about?

If I come up with something more definitive, I'll let you know.

Thanks for this article though! I guess it's time to maybe figure this out or rule out some of the generalities!!!

JCanon (processing!)

4

Matthew 24: 36

by Noumenon in

for those interested in bible chronology here is an interesting website.

it also discusses jw chronology and un involvement.

this link is to an intriguing take on matthew 24: 36: .

JCanon

Thanks for the post.

I'd just note that few people realize how SPECIFIC the scriptures are when stating nobody has seen or knows the "day nor hour", since the Bible does provide through chronology the month and year of the second coming. Further, the "Lord's Day" which I equate with Armageddon is not the same event as the "second coming" which is the context in which "nobody knows the day nor hour" is stated.

Further, Acts refers to some times that are "within the jurisdiction of the Father", but that is also quite specific in regard, not to the second coming, but when the kingdom would be set up in the earth, that is, immediately after Armageddon. Some people blurr it all together or imagine that we would not be able to pinpoint scripturally the precise year at least of the second coming, though the "Lord's Day" and Armageddon are times to expect but have no specific chronology provided in scripture.

JCanon

22

A Bone for You Creationists!

by metatron in

there are repeated claims being made that some radioactive materials decay rate could be modulated by .

strong electromagnetic fields - near heresy to some people.

the above site includes a publication list of some.

JCanon

Okay, maybe you could ask your dad why the Mosaic Law contradicts human sexual biology? Whilst you are at it, maybe he can clue you in on why the spread of languages from Babel fails to fit into any possible theory of how languages spread? Why there is no evidence for a global flood? Why the Creation account is just as fanciful and contrived as all the other fictional creation accounts ancient people came up with.
God help us if you are Jesus!

Why should God help you if I'm Jesus when I'm the one he sent to you?

But look, there are a LOT of curves going on. God seems to have gone to a LOT of trouble to keep certain types out of the kingdom and I think I was chosen particularly because my outer appearance and history would tend to freak some people out if I were the Messiah, or "stumble" them....but that's the point. The wrong kind of person would not be listening to the "message" but trying to see how stylishly dressed and articulate the messenger was. They figure if the messenger fits their standards then they don't need to listen to the message or check it out. But it's the other way around. The messenger is qualified by his message. The true "wheat" will first examine the message then they might look up and see the messenger who will simply be glorious to them and they won't care what he's wearing or how he looks. Sort of how you would treat a smelly homeless person of whom you were just told was a billionaire developer who was pretending to be homeless to see who was worthy of getting the million dollars he was giving out to someone on a daily basis.

So....are you looking at the message first? Or the messenger first?

Le superficiales may look good in their own eyes but are not kingdom material, sorry.

JC

11

Dead Sea Scrolls In Dallas

by Valis in

i thought some of our bible scholar peeps might be interested in this.. biblical arts center, dallas to exhibit 'dead sea scrolls'.

dr. william noah, left, curator of dead sea scrolls to the forbidden book, displays a fragment of the dead sea scrolls as edward g. white, lovers lane umc, dallas, holds one of the rare bibles to be exhibited at the biblical arts center, dallas, from sept. 5 through nov. 16.. biblical arts center, dallas, has scheduled the exhibit of dead sea scrolls to the forbidden book, sept. 5 through nov. 16, a one-of-a-kind exhibit of rare ancient biblical manuscripts and fragments.. .

a special preview of the unique exhibit was presented by dr. william noah on june 29 to the combined sunday school classes of lovers lane umc, dallas.. .

JCanon

Interesting....

Seems though that the one book that had no fragments found for was the "Book of Esther". Now that seems particularly strange since the original version of the book found in the Septuagint shows Esther married to "Artaxerxes", but the revised "Hebrew version" shows her married to Ahasuerus. It would have thus been interesting to see which version the Dead Sea Scrolls contained. It would prove that Esther was revised and thus uninspired and used to cover up for the conspiracy that Xerxes and Artaxerxes was the same king! But of course, that critical book is missing.......

Thanks for the reference!

JCanon

133

Troublesome Trinity Verses Part 1

by hooberus in

in this series i hope to discuss some common verses used by the watchtower to "disprove" the trinity and deity of the lord jesus christ.

the first one is 1 corinthians 8:6: .

"but to us there is but one god, the father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one lord jesus christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

JCanon

But in Issaih 44:24 "I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who stretched out the earth by myself."

Language is always understood in context. Thus if one verse says all things were made "for him, by him and through him" and this one says he made all things "himself" then you have to combine them in the context of both verses. It would be similar to:

If you were in an architect partnership who built skyscrapers and designed great buildings, you would say "we built this and we built that". But perhaps there was a personal project you wanted to do yourself that your partners decided they didn't want to participate in. Thus you built a special center for Karaoke Music that seated 20,000. Then you could say: "I built that myself". That works in the context of you not having a "partner", that is, a collaborative partner. But would you understand that the architect actually did the actual building himself? No.

So we shouldn't take things expressed out of context of what they mean, nor presume two statements that could have a conflict if taken one way and not another means the author is in conflict.

Thus in the case of the heavens and earth, God is taking credit for HIS creative work and design, though Christ was there to execute the details. Because God was the original conceptualist, he can properly claim the work as his own and solely his own.

JC

22

A Bone for You Creationists!

by metatron in

there are repeated claims being made that some radioactive materials decay rate could be modulated by .

strong electromagnetic fields - near heresy to some people.

the above site includes a publication list of some.

JCanon

Well, since you asked, I'll use your own words...
you're too dumb, as your last two posts clearly demonstrate.
Craig

It was a trick question. You fell for it....

Anyway, no matter what the "scientists" come up with, as far as having the critical "answers" they will only provide us black-and-white outlines, no color, no moving pictures, no sound. Science is limited, therefore,and must be utilized in that capacity.

Perhaps an oversimplication, but take for instance, ART. Art is something "science" can never appreciate. Take a painting: The Mona Lisa. You can send it off to the lab and they can probably tell us how many hues were used to make the painting, what the temperature of the canvas is, where the canvas came from, where the various paints came from, even the chemical components of the painting. But can it appreciate the artwork? No. It's a sharp too for detail but that's it.

In the meantime we as humans are aware of the "beyond", the conceptual things, the artistic things, emotions, morality, etc. Are those not real because science cannot perceive them?

This profound limitation of science is empirically what STAR TREK is often about. Spock, the scientist, the unfeeling logistician. Is limited. He's like a machine that only knows numbers and logic. In the first Star Trek movie an earth-launched satelitte (Voyager) had fallen into a black hole and somehow, after falling into a planet of superintelligence gained "intelligence" itself, yet was still limited since it had no human feelings. The ideal thing was to combine that machine with a human to give it the ability to (as Kirk said:...) "Leap beyond logic." To access the abstract.

Coming back down to earth, therefore, it is not in the design of the atoms and natural laws that govern planetary movement or photosenthesis that we necessarily perceive "God", but in his ART. The combination of all things into a cohesive and beautiful WHOLE. Thus it is that perception given to us that we perceive there's a God, not through the microscope, though some aspect of him is there as well.

The problem is, some are so impressed with "science" that they think it's the complete end-all and final picture, when it is not.

I suppose we can learn something about God by analyzing the various gases imitting radioactively from the surface of the sun...but probably not as much as observing its light and affect on life here and basking in its warmth.

So if you're looking for God, look at the complete picture. Science can't see god because it might be looking too closely through too small of a lens, thus the adage could aptly apply: "Can't see the forest for the trees"?

If you asked science what a human was, it would print out a list of our various chemical components: mostly water, iron and some other elements. But, is that what we are? Would that list of chemicals help us to fully appreciate what the Creator is? Can the sum of your chemical parts reveal your personality? your passions? WHO you really are?

I can perceive there is a god and what he must be like to some extent just by observing nature around me. The fact that science needs to ignore the obivous is not my fault. It's not just a matter of counting the dots; you have to connect them and then fill in the spaces with bountiful colors....

JC

25

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 8-31-03 WT Study

by blondie in

8/15/97 wt p 14

6/1/52 wt p. 340

2/1/96 wt p. 19

JCanon

I felt much the same way, Bluesbrother. But no longer. Yes, imagine that God said he would not kill everyone because of 10. But why kill anyone? When had any "preaching" been done? What about the women and children? Why them and not Hitler who was responsible for the deaths of millions?

It's a little complex, but basically, some things are done on a small scale first and then it will spread out to affect everyone. Just as the nation of Israel produced the first Messiah, but it had to be eventually through one tribe, Judah. They would be the first preached to, then the nations. For those who respond they get an opportunity for getting into the "Bride Class", that's the basic main focus. But even that God has made it so that he can select whom he wants to. The preaching among Christendom, therefore, is primarily as a "witness" in a small setting. All but the "wicked" will get life, and all things on Judgment Day will be evened out. Hitler will come back and know there is a God, etc. Judgment Day is the great equilizer day.

JCanon

22

A Bone for You Creationists!

by metatron in

there are repeated claims being made that some radioactive materials decay rate could be modulated by .

strong electromagnetic fields - near heresy to some people.

the above site includes a publication list of some.

JCanon

Good grief. Get a hold of yourselves and read something scientific. Go to the national geographic web site and check out that article from last year about types of dating archeological materials.

Hello? "Scientific"? True science is on the side of the Bible. And one thing that pseudo-science certainly is known for is "advancement" which usually means today's doctrines are tomorrow's outdated error.

Science isn't perfected yet and they don't know all the secrets of nature so as to be that authoritative about that much. But the Bible IS reliable and therefore, if science comes up with something that contradicts the scripture, it is a sure test that they don't know what in the hell they are doing, which is COMMON!

Now some people genuflect when someone says the word "scientific"....but I remain unimpressed. Call me when they get the chronology corrected and I'll start believing in "science".

Now I'll admit that I'm Biblically arrogant, but I couldn't be that way if "science" really had their act together. The reason why I can be Biblically arrogant is because they don't! Like trying to tell us man was here for millions of years hobbing on all fours as hunters and gathers and then all of a sudden started reading and writing for the last 5000 years? Just about the time when the Bible claims mankind was created in God's image? Yeah....right!

Don't you think if there were MILLIONS of years of subhumanity that there would be a vast abundance of some of those men in the fossile record? We have lots and lots of fossils of dynasaurs, where are the fossiles of prehistoric men to go with them?

Where are they? I'll tell you where. They are NO WHERE! And that's because they never were there in the first place.

So do I believe in science? No.

Because I need to believe the Bible?

No. Because science doesn't cut it.

Guess what the irony is? You need more FAITH to believe the fantasies of science than you ever do to believe the Bible.

Oh well...I'm either too dumb or too intelligent to believe in science (I'll let you decide which...)

JC

22

A Bone for You Creationists!

by metatron in

there are repeated claims being made that some radioactive materials decay rate could be modulated by .

strong electromagnetic fields - near heresy to some people.

the above site includes a publication list of some.

JCanon

Thanks for thowing us that bone!!!

It does matter. And even as AF pointed out, while the application looks limited, we don't know everything about what impacts the natural laws. Will something decay twice as fast in a warm climate than in cold? What about exposure to other elements, radioactive elements, magnetic elements?

Uncertainties in ever-changing science like these makes it sensible not to fully trust anything they have to say that would directly contradict what the Bible says, even if you don't consider the Bible as being "inspired" but simply a reliable record of a people who might be reporting on thing accurately as far as mankind's true ancient history,

But it is interesting. Perhaps something does exaggerate the C-14 rate of decay at some point and it becomes fantasically exaggerated at some point, explaining why we get these huge numbers into the millions of years, something that would not be noticed in the early stages; maybe the decay is on a curve, slow at first then rapid acceleration at some point, but something we don't know enough about?

But SOMETHING is missing since obviously they have the wrong numbers if you believe the Bible, right? We're just waiting until they figure it out.

But definitely thanks for this "bone". You have no idea how I'm going to throw up MAGNETIC INFLUENCE in all my pseudo-science arguments now. It's worth it just as an addition to the list of reasons WHY NOT TO BELIEVE in science when it contradicts the Bible.

Thanks!!!!!!

JCanon

22

A Bone for You Creationists!

by metatron in

there are repeated claims being made that some radioactive materials decay rate could be modulated by .

strong electromagnetic fields - near heresy to some people.

the above site includes a publication list of some.

JCanon

There are numerous clean an effective power sources at our disposal now, yet the world is addicted to oil.

That's right. This is the modern world and people who have the money and business are more interested in maintaining that business than any advanced scientific cheaper or cleaner way to save mankind lots of money. The people with the money have the power to buy up any technology they wish and suppress it, just so they can stay in business.

So while the science is very interesting, in my mind I'm imaginging once the oil runs out, we'll be amazed at what science suddenly comes up with in the way of alternative fuel!

If you came up with a fertilizer that could increase the productivity of one acre by ten times, do you think a non-hungry world would embrace it? Or would the food producers simply pay you off for your idea so they can keep their good incomes?

Affirmative Action is sort of like that. It's not about finding the BEST medical brains around but sharing the social status and income of doctors with those outside the natural system of advancement existing in the modern world.

So you see, the world is beautiful....if you're rich...on the surface, but ultimately corrupt. Some people look at the pyramids and marvel at the ingenuity of a few architects hired by the Pharoah to build them; while others realize only a massive, oppressed labor force could have accomplished these things.

I think that is what is going to be the "contest" at the end of the millennium. Christ's reign, which will equalize as much as possible all things for all men, will be more communistic in nature, or perhaps I should say communal, than we know in the capitalistic world, where the smart and aggressive can achieve great things. This is primarily a European emotion/instinct. But fact is, some of those things can't happen on a personal level without wealth and a lower class providing those services. Perhaps some will be convinced that great achievements in the field of science or other areas we are so used to would be hampered in a monarchy rule by Christ and they will rebel. The desire and chance to be rich or exceptional is quite addictive. "Gog of Magog" is associated with western culture but particularly Nazi Germany and thus white supremacy at the most extreme and Eurocentrism at the lesser extreme.

JCanon