Mostly Irish, then Welsh, German, English, Dutch and some Cherokee. Culturally I am Irish (Catholic at one time). I didn't realize how much until I lived in Ireland for a year back in the early 70's. Boy did I feel at home in a kind of crazy way.
Still crazy.
the definitions of partnerships are shifting.
indeed, they are different around the world.. the law doesn't always protect good partnerships that aren't on paper, and sometimes the law protects truly bad partnerships that are on paper.
the bible or church doesn't really have a definition of what a lawful "marriage" is.. i propose this..... if you set up home with a partner, you are "wed".
Interesting conversation,
An older couple I know who were just living together to defray costs (both were on SS) and enjoy fringe benefits kinda saw themselves as married without the paper. The guy asked where in the Bible it said you had to have a sheet of paper.
I saw them about a week later and they had had a row. He had called a former girlfriend and his not-quite-wife had thrown his bifocals out the door.He said he wasn't married to her and she told him to leave because the house was not his but hers. They kinda had things patched up when I read them the conversation from John 4 that the woman at the well had with Jesus.
When we got to the part where Jesus asked her to get her husband the samaritan woman answered: I don't have a husband. And Jesus said :You have answered truly "I don't have a husband ". for you have had 5 men and the one you have now is not your husband.
I asked my friend who was it in the story that said she didn't have a husband. She said : The woman said it to Jesus first.
Yes, the woman knew she didn't have a marriage. It was not because there was no paper signed or rabbi that officiated at a marriage. But there was this lacking---a public declaration of intention where the two let the community at large know that they were a couple. They had not dignified their union in such a customary way and the children would not have the protection and recognition that came with such a public statement.
My friend understood. She had held back from commitment because she didn't really want the responsibility of her male friend. She had had a bad marriage until her 1st husband died. So she understood that the Samaritan woman really wasn't married--not because she lacked a paper but because she didn't want or didn't have a committed relationship.
Just a true little story for what it's worth.
Cheers!
1 john 4:2 - whoever does not love does not know god, because god is love.. .
what does the statement "god is love" mean?
well quite simply that god = love.
Dear sab,
We Christians should be a lot more skeptical of translations and a lot more aware of the problems of understanding another language and culture. If we really want to understand what God is trying to say to us we should do our homework. God may have an idea but by the time it has filtered through and to humans it is a miracle that anyone "gets it"
Problem # 1 God has to use our words to write His thoughts. BIG PROBLEM.
Problem # 2 Translation depends on folks not being too creative with the original language.
Problem # 3 Some people have bias when they translate the Bible.
Problem # 4 " " " " " " read " " .
Problem # 5 People think that they will never be able to get past the first 4 problems and never try.
Problem # 6 People just don't care enough to take the time because it isn't so easy to understand God from the OT. Jesus' disciples had these problems pretty much the same in his day.
So I have only one word to say on this matter. It is not "love" and it is not "hate".
The word is: TESTICLES
Why "testicles"? This word in the Hebrew most clearly reveals the prickly problems (no pun intended) of translation and the delightful surprises in trying to understand Bible talk.
In a WT study years ago the proper fear of God was under discussion: "The fear of Jehovah is the beginning of wisdom Prov. 9:10" was prominently featured. But something was amiss. The material strained to distinguish between reverence vs. terror of Jehovah. I felt that if there really was a big difference in this fear or that, but it needed to come from several contexts and it must show up in the original language.
So I pulled out the Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.
There certainly were more than one kind of "fear" in the Hebrew text. There were plenty of listings for fear, afraid, terror, etc. The Hebrew "fear" in Prov. 9:10 was reverential fear/yirah.
But what caught my attention was another word that only a pastoral people would have used.The word was pachad pronounced pakh'-ad. It showed up in verses like Job 22:10 "Therefore snares are round about thee, and sudden fear troubleth thee." And pachad/fear was the same word as pachad/testicle.
I was thrilled. I myself lived on a rough-and-tumble farm. Intact male animals that fought or became agitated responded just as the scriptures implied: When fear struck, the family jewels ascended immediately. It was as though they had been gelded. Reverential fear if you were being a good boy probably didn't have this effect.
I shared this information at the appropriate moment in the study since the difference between reverential fear and ball-shrinking terror was an important distinction to me as it apparently was to the early Hebrews. Perhaps others didn't find it a necessary bit of information; you could have hear a pin drop as I gave a brief outline of Hebrew's terror-based fear.
Read and dig. It dug me out of Jehovah's Witnesses and it made me appreciate why Jesus was called the Logos--because words so often fail us.
You have really good questions, sab
what is a true christian?.
of course it had to be the twelve apostles, didn't it?
" {john 13:34,35 nwt}.
Dear jonathan dough and PSacramento,
Without addressing the first question of wannabe I can't help but observe that we didn't need a World War to stop Hitler. We just needed all who claimed to be Christians in Germany to obey God as ruler rather than man. We would not have had any of the wicked things done to Jews, gypsies, homosexuals or even Jehovah's Witnesses. When Christians follow the command to love instead of the command to kill it can stop a lot of bad things from happening. It can't change everything in the world but Hitler would not have had an army.
Maybe I did address wannabe's question after all?
i was inspired to write this based on a post in another thread.. as a jw you are told to read and let the bible speak to you.. that would mean that you could reach a different conclusion on a certain scripture or account.
but that may not coincide with what the fds has as an explanation or conclusion.
this in turn, according to the standard makes you wrong if you "want" to be humble and wait for "new light.".
Why read the Bible and meditate on it? Precisely the question I asked a CO a few years ago. Because we were given over and over again a truly horrible version of Genesis 22 to teach in our literature that runs contrary to everything else I read or knew about God. He immediately asked if the reasons for my dissent had come from any other source or persons other than my own reading and research in our literature. No, I told him truthfully. Except for a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, Bible reading and meditation alone had led me to this conviction.
He asked me if I was aware of how our literature was produced. I was. But I told him that this did not mean that it is/was infallible.The Society admits as much in the Proclaimers book. He disscussed the matter with me in the presece of course of another elder. There was no wayback for me because the Bible was in full accord with itself and not with the account in the literature. There was no way I could unbelieve what the Bible taught and told him so. So he didn't trouble me about it any more. I am grateful to that CO. After that it took a few more years and further reading before I knew I could not teach this myself nor could I fail to express the Bible's words as the more beautiful option to the slanderous account that the literature perpetuated.
The line eventually was drawn in the sand: Say it the way the Society says it and never speak of it to any other of Jehovah's Witnesses.
That was the beginning of the end. And a new beginning.
the watchtower has been known for over 130 years as a great scriptural cherry-picker.
they pick out disparate unrelated verses and combine them to support the wackiest of wacky doctrines.. on the other hand there are many scriptures they almost never address, whether because they contradict wt doctrine or because they simply don't have a clue what they mean or how to spin them to the wt advantage.. one of these is revelation 19:1 that mentions a "great crowd" "in heaven.
" the only time it is ever brought up it is dismissed.
Thank you designs and TTWSYF. We do need to examine the larger problem of letting others--not only the WTS-- demand a formula for faith as though only certain of us can know God and the others of us must tag-along or burn.
In a non-denominational international Bible study group I've gone to lately these very teachings permeate the conversation AND the written material the group leaders distribute. It is sooooo demoralizing to try to fellowship with these dear people. I nearly weep writing this because just as I was forced out of the Witnesses they will force me out with the same tactics. Those who claim to champion the cause of reconciliation with God will repress each person's efforts to do just that. What is everlasting life? Isn't it actually KNOWING God and his Son and not by "taking in knowledge"about them--knowledge provided in pill form by religion despensers ?
In the Biblr instruction a woman delivers a 30 min lecture at the end of every group "discussion" (they do it in the same way as the WT study is conducted with printed material and very, very tight control of comments). She is at liberty to say things that are spun off of the obnoxious and non-sensical riffs from tdoctrines that are as enshrined in sacred regard as any Catholic dogma ever was. I heard last week that God planned, predestined the sin of Adam--Planned the failure of his creation--to highlight his mercy and to set the stage for Jesus. And there is a woman in my group who is one of the "elect" of God who humbly struggles not to be prideful just because she is Chosen-of-God unlike the others who are damned. She knows that she did nothing to deserve it (She held a lucky number?)
I see in the study material that we had last week that I am not considered part of the Body of Christ unless I "believe in" the Trinity. I have discussed this with my study conductor. I have put before her that I do not understand why I must say the formula that has been forced down the throats of so many since the 4th century. I DO believe and affirm every Bible text that Jesus and the apostles taught. I pointed out that this road of theology forces further divisive points upon which to create foolish demands of conscience via religious formulas: St. Augustine declared that a true Trinitarian Christian must say that the Holy Spirit procedes from the Father AND the Son not from the Father and THROUGH the Son. No kidding. It split the early church in the time of the Nicene "Fathers". But I also have noted over time that the disputed scriptures and their translations have ever been subject to the politics of religion and the secular governors of each age. Foxe's Book of Martyrs shows the variety of sufferings and deaths Christians have perpetrated on one another--and for every sort of "orhodoxy".
How often do we ourselves look at the scriptures? THe original language? Hardly ever look? We need to or else just leave each other alone and prayfor each other--which we should do anyway.
The last time I was shepherded by my elders I took a picture of an potsherd from the period of David's dynasty that was found about a year and a half ago in the Elah valley around Bethlehem. The text was in ancient Hebrew. Five lines of it far older than the more recent Biblical Hebrew. It described how the poor were to be cared for and it warned to worship God alone. I hope any reading this post will bother to google it. Because the very primitive means to express thought was astonishing. I told the brothers that it is outrageous for one person to presume that they understand the nuance of meaning in scripture so crude as these so as to hand out theological must-do-must-believe to others. Granted, the text would not allow a believer to rape the widows and say that was okay, they could not abuse the orphans and say that was a matter of personal conscience. But the range of individual and responsible choice to listen and comply was wonderful to think of. At the time I was pleading for my conscience. But there is no way to receive this needful mercy in any religious structure, especially not Jehovah's Witnesses.
Written communication has become more sophisticated since then but ideas are still hard to convey from one human mind to another, much less from God's mind to our own--and we are forced to rely on the uninspired translators! Too many of us continue to perpetrate the same crime of demanding a certain orthodoxy in others without allowing the (H)holy (S)spirit to do that work. We can and should discuss profitably; forums like this are wonderful for meeting in Jesus' name. But the bible study that I have gone to? Without a respectful discussion of the scriptures and only a "top down" propaganda style this and all organizations that think they are dispensing the Truth can only end up beating their fellow slaves, veritably burning a "heretic" at the stake.
What is the work of Abraham? to listen and obey God without a committee telling you what and how to do it.
We have only one Leader, the Christ.
the watchtower has been known for over 130 years as a great scriptural cherry-picker.
they pick out disparate unrelated verses and combine them to support the wackiest of wacky doctrines.. on the other hand there are many scriptures they almost never address, whether because they contradict wt doctrine or because they simply don't have a clue what they mean or how to spin them to the wt advantage.. one of these is revelation 19:1 that mentions a "great crowd" "in heaven.
" the only time it is ever brought up it is dismissed.
Three passages of scripture quickly come to mind:
1) The WTS literature quotes Matt. 23:9 but it does not like to discuss the verse before or after it. They like verse 9 as it is negatively applied to priests: "Call no one on the earth "father", for you have one Father and he is in heaven." But Matt. 8&10 are not useful for a group that strictly administers the "Truth" and insists that only a small subset of the Anointed are authorized to declare what is True and what is not: "But you are not to be called 'Rabbi', for you have only one Master and you are all brothers." "Nor are you to be called 'teacher',for you have one Teacher, the Christ."
"Teacher" in verse 10 is good to look up in the Greek because it is not the word commonly used for "teacher". It isn't used elsewhere in the NT. Also translated "leader", the concordance expresses its meaning as that of an official or authoritative guide. In other words Jesus seems to say none of his followers gets to mediate the truth for others as an ultimate authority."You have one Leader or Guide, the Christ." The rest of Mat. 23 completely emphasizes this warning that EVEN AN APOSTLE IS NOT TO ASSUME THE TITLE OF OFFICIAL LEADER. O, Blind Guides!
2) The idea that faithful anointed CHRISTIANS ARE NOT TO FOLLOW THE FDS OR ANY OTHER RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION is powerfully conveyed in Rev.14:4,5."These are those that did not defile themselves with women, for they kept themselves pure. They follow the Lamb where ever he goes. They were purchased from among men and offered from among men and offered as firstfruits to God and the lamb. No lie was found in their mouths; they are blameless."
The Greek for "women" in this instance means "wife" not "whore" not "harlot". It seems the Lamb's followers do not involve themselves with even a legitimate "true" religion--even such as the Organization. The anointed are not betrothed to any but the Lamb. Yet the FDS requires that the rest of the anointed( who are not making the rulings at the Top) be obliged to follow their instructions. Doesn't that mean that only a handful actually get to follow the Lamb--contrary to the scripture's description?
3) Matthew 24:28 "Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather." The reference book Insight on the Scriptures does not have an explanation for this verse. This expression of Jesus contrasts the immediately preceding verses describing the Body of Christ being gathered in from the four winds rather than a certain locale. It seems clear that the carcass is a religious Dead Body that finds congregants who embrace a mediated experience of God--- not mediated by the Christ but mediated by men--therefore a dead body with gathering of carrion eaters on board.
These scriptures tell me that the only true religion is no religion at all.
Forgive me if I seem to be "pontificating". These scriptures bolstered my spirit when my conscience wouldn't let me participate in group indoctrination anymore. I just submit these ideas in the spirit of Christian sharing and respect.
i was just wondering how a jehovah's witness would answer this.. in john 5:22, the nwt states:.
"the father judges no one, but has committed all the judging to the son".
in rev 18:8, the nwt states:.
Something that may seem too common place in this is the complexity of the Trinitarian particulars. When I read the Bible I find the timetable for Gentile conversion just doesn't fit the tutorials given by early church Fathers of the fourth century. They give the story of Jesus coming ,sent by his Father and dying to reconcile us to God. Believers got baptized without a Trinity indoctrination ever written in the accounts throughout the entire NT.
I read the gospel for the first time ias an adult the winter of 1979. I didn't live near any churches, preachers, telephones, radios, TV sets. I prayed to God and in the name of the Jesus that I came to know in an old KJ bible became a Christian as far as I knew. That summer I got baptized in the river at the foot of our mountain.
Though I had been a baptized Catholic from infancy I never had grappled with the Trinity. At a little unafiliated vacation Bible school down the road a woman looked at me incredulously when she heard me tell a tiny girl that Jesus was God. "No he's not" she said. And I realized that I had nothing I could say to defend my Catholic indoctrination. I was unconnected to my reading of the Bible as it apparently was unconnected to this woman.
So I am not satisfied with the terms of this discussion so far. I launched my own examination of the matter independent of the Witness's take on it. For myself it seems interesting that God made sure that the gospel was written in a Greek that had NO CAPITAL LETTERS. Using a capital letter now in the modern translations are an unnecessy interjection, an almost arbitrary designation. I have to trust the translators too much. I note that the same theologians who created the Trinity Dogma also began the formulation for the "Just War" theory (one being Augustine of Hippo). This does not recommend their reasoning nor suggest Holy Spirit hovered very close to their hearts and minds.
And this matter has very much to do with the judging at least in this regard: whether or not it is Jehovah or Jesus that wears the judge's robe for me it is ever so much more important to be found obedient to the good news regardless.
How can we say we love God whom we cannot see if we hate our brother whom we can see. This doctrine is very simple. I get it.
i was just wondering how a jehovah's witness would answer this.. in john 5:22, the nwt states:.
"the father judges no one, but has committed all the judging to the son".
in rev 18:8, the nwt states:.
Why be forced to say "I believe in the Trinity"? If it ain't broke, don't fix it is the way I feel about it. So God is one, and Jesus being of the same nature as God was sent -and willingly came to earth--provided the ransom for us all. We have the Spirit of God operating among or in us as believers. But there is not one human who knows what went on in heaven , Jesus said. What is the point of twisting anyone's arm to say "Trinity"?
As for judging-I have wondered too and think that Jesus as the glorified son of man has become the gold standard of excellence by which we are measured if we opt to stand on our own instead of under the propitiatory covering of his blood. "No falsehood was found in his mouth, being rreviled he did not go on reviling." I would never be able to stand up next to him but am everlastingly grateful for his gift of covering my sins and giving me a path to follow.
great post!
lately, i've come to find out that a more than a few people in the area had killed themselves.
most of the people i know of were in their early twenties or forties.
for those loved ones surviving them, it was mostly a shock!
One of our elders killed himself about 10 years ago. We loved him.
