Posts by Billen76

54

Stop making the BINARY error of Jehovah's Witness theology

by Terry in

true or false.. black or white.. life or death.. .

the above are binary.

this or that.. computing is based on binary choices.

Billen76

Terry wrote: " Our strongest emotions follow our strongest values. When we say we "love" we are following what we value as the highest possible."

I write: Our strongest values follow our strongest emotions. Either you love or you don't. Otherwise it is a pretend, founded in other motives.

JW's pretend to uphold love as the highest "value". I find this to be complete nonsens. Love is a emotion not a value. Upholding LIFE is a value, a value one can love. If one doesn't love this value, it will fall short when tested. Unless a primal core are connected to the make-belief value.

Survival is a primal instinct. Eating is a primal instinct. Sex is a primal instinct. Breathing is a primal instinct. Motherhood is a primal instinct.

Loyality facing death, fasting, celibacy, breath control and child sacrifice are all attempts to control the primate within us.

Religion most often deals with this. By supressing one primal instinct, another is strengthened. Push one button down, another goes up. And the "victims" base personality are seemingly altered. All this religion seeks to control through theory. An imaginary world in which one needs to adapt. The "build" from here is all pretence and behaviour. If enough joins this imagery, a sense of reality is strenghtened. It can drive people crazy if the religion is into high control.

JW connects love with survival. Hope to see your loved ones again? Then survive. If you obey, you might survive. If you are loyal even when facing death, you might survive. If your child dies while being loyal, it might survive (motherhood+survival, not child sacrifice!).

So when being "loyal facing death", a JW is not surpressing an instinct. It is succumbing to it. It is thrown into a state of instinctal panic where it will grasp the solution it knows to seek safety. When ignorant only few options are readily availible in the moment. The doctors recommendation vs the Org.'s pre-instructed "solutions". Some elders will then come and "help save the life" by "siding" with the parents against the "threat" from the doctors solution.

Yes, it is a "binary" choice (illusion), but it is only possible to maintain this illusion by linking it to a strong instinctal fear (through theory). The parents (and the child) are in a state of instinctal panic while in the fase of choice. If they weren't, they would dismiss those crazy elders and see them for the dangerous frauds they obviously (to all else) are.

If the parents openly rejects the elders "help", they would reject the imaginary world or rather; have liberated themselves from the imaginary threat and started to relate to the real one. That will make them "dangerous" having in the congo, as a part of the "formula" is to maintain the sense of reality to the imagery by isolating the social network to people who accept the imagery.

Again, there MUST be some primal instinct connected to get the followers to accept the controlled instruction. Else they will soon reject it.

I find it highly immoral to toy with people in this way, but it is unfortunately not that uncommon.

NB: We are "social animals". Some claim this is primal instinct also.

54

Stop making the BINARY error of Jehovah's Witness theology

by Terry in

true or false.. black or white.. life or death.. .

the above are binary.

this or that.. computing is based on binary choices.

Billen76

Hi AllTimeJeff

" I would argue that anyone who masters how to win an argument would then need only an argument to win."

I would argue, that this is merely an illusion. Most do not accept an argument, because of the master of arguments. One usually accepts the argument, because the master of argument are able to phrase a line of argumentation that justify what we "want" to hear. (In most JW cases, what is "safe" to hear) The rest is just a pretend.

In the eternal war between instinct and theory, we usually find a resting place where the noice seems the lowest.

Not all religions deals with the same theories. All the theories thoughl deals with our survival instinct. Most seek to calm the instinctal fear of death in order to make room for another focus. A buddhist for pure intellectualism, a christian for practical life and community. These are community building religions.

What Jehovahs Witnesses does is the exact opposite. As Terry describes, JW's are kept on their toes by constant remindal of them "living on the edge". One step wrong and it might cost your life. A constant feed of images and "parallels" that tells about the grim fortune bestoved on those rejecting "the Truth" and failing in obediance. It is all survival, all the time. Thats what our loved ones fear. It's instinct, not theory, after a prolonged period of exposure.

That is why I accept the label "death cult" to be placed on JW. They do not calm the fear of death. They empowers it, lives in it, "thrives" in it. Some even get high on it! Like free climbers hanging on a cliff wall, they get high on the adrenaline it gives, when they sneak in to their grannies 90 years birthday. :) The sheer danger of it while risking their lifes handing over the gift, conquering yet another wallside of theoretical danger.

It is NOT the same as mainstream christianity. Both are of the dreamworld, yes, but one calms the survival instinct, the other heavily exploits the survival instinct and keeps its members on the edge.

54

Stop making the BINARY error of Jehovah's Witness theology

by Terry in

true or false.. black or white.. life or death.. .

the above are binary.

this or that.. computing is based on binary choices.

Billen76

@alltimejeff

True, but you are dealing with the method of indoctrination. Terry is dealing with "the energycore", the very source that enfuels the doctrinal power over the witnesses.

What Terry now deals with is the hot fire, that most of us try to eliminate from our analyzis of the JW faith. It lies deep within us, even after we have left JW and will never truly disapear. It is why we feared the elders and shunned knowledge, indulging ourselves into the safer art of analysis rather than "knowing" ourselves. If love is connected to and countered by survival instinct which is the strongest? What will this do to our lovelife? If all that we are, are connected to and countered by survival instinct, how would we ever feel safe about ourselves? If every time we try to rest in our feelings we encounter a highly unpleasant all dominating nauseating fear, how can we enjoy?

It is what kept us in check. It is what we really had to fight, each in our own way.

The rest is just method and the consequenses of the nature of this death-cult like religion.

54

Stop making the BINARY error of Jehovah's Witness theology

by Terry in

true or false.. black or white.. life or death.. .

the above are binary.

this or that.. computing is based on binary choices.

Billen76

Terry wrote: It is a difficult argument to make, in my view, that JW's who put themselves in harm's way are merely obstinate. Even more so when parents allow blood issues to threaten the life of their own beloved children. is that really stubborness? I can't imagine so, personally. It is more closely akin to TRUST that what they are doing is the ONLY TRULY GOD-APPROVED course of action. I see it as a helplessness which renders obedience as the only default behavior.

True, but I think we should stick to to basis here, which is survival instinct. In this case it is not surpressed, rather it is directed to oppose the reality of the situation. If one instinctly feels, that if one fails to demonstrate his loyalty through obeying the command even when facing death he would risk his life permanently, he does not retract from the action that would actually endanger his life in a reaction based on survival instinct. He would retract from the choice that have been programmed into his instinct to be life-endangering.

A mother would instinctly try to save her child from danger. If she instinctly feels that if the child had a blood transfusion its life would be endangered, she would fight against it.

In reality most JW's exists in a highly tense field between the "dreamworld" reality and the "real world" reality. In the above example both are a choice of survival, but with two directly opposite "right" choices. Most JW parents will seek a secret compromise, that would lie in the least tense part of the field, which means that they let the doctors do what they must unspoken and without any mention of it in the journal.

115

Frederick Franz, "Bible Scholar"

by Quendi in

as some of you know by now, i spent sunday, 7 august, renewing ties with a dear friend.

we're both disfellowshipped, the difference between us being he is seeking reinstatement and i am not.

we got into some very spirited discussions on different bible topics and one of them was the value of the new world translation itself.

Billen76

Because Jesus is Greek, Joshua is hebrew. Since NT is written in koiné (greek), the christian world use the greek form Jesus.

115

Frederick Franz, "Bible Scholar"

by Quendi in

as some of you know by now, i spent sunday, 7 august, renewing ties with a dear friend.

we're both disfellowshipped, the difference between us being he is seeking reinstatement and i am not.

we got into some very spirited discussions on different bible topics and one of them was the value of the new world translation itself.

Billen76

@Wonderment

A wrong does not justify another wrong.

If other translators have or might have changed wording in order to support their own beliefs doctrine, it does not justify others to do the same.

A language can never be completely translated to another language. Some of the meaning will be lost in translation. This is where translators have to make a decision: Which part of the meaning in a sentence on the original language do they wish to emphasize in their translation to the new language.

John 1:1c is a perfect good example in this discipline:

koiné: a en Arche en ho logos, b kai ho logos en pros ton theon, c kai theos en ho logos

English: a In (the) beginning was the Word, b and the Word was with (before, toward) God, c and God was the Word

Now neither the NASB nor NWT have John 1:1c absolutely correct. (I actually like the word for word translation above the best)

It is neither "and the Word was God" nor "and the Word was a god". Or rather, they are both correct. The use of "theos" in John 1:1c is giving the subject (the Word) a qualitative-like identity. Some have attempted to use the phrase: "the Word was as God was".

Problem with the JW translation (NWT) is the semantical use of the phrase. The sentence does not say, that the Word was a lesser god then THE God, which the use of "the Word was a god" in the NWT would imply, but rather that the Word was as God was.

The translator have to make a choice within the boundaries of the meaning of the sentences he is to work with, why any translation also always will be a sort of a interpretation of the original writers meaning. The translator must remain true to the meaning of the sentences in the original writings though, why he will not be free to invent a new semantic that crosses the boundaries of the original meaning of the sentences. This is the boundary that TTC of the NWT have crossed way too many times, clearly in order to change the original meaning of the text to suit own doctrine.

54

Stop making the BINARY error of Jehovah's Witness theology

by Terry in

true or false.. black or white.. life or death.. .

the above are binary.

this or that.. computing is based on binary choices.

Billen76

Which is the nature of the fear in JW that are so strong whenever they move out of the percieved "safezone". Sense of being in a life-or-death situation. Often irrational and beyond awareness, but nonetheless there.

A very fine post worthy of not sinking into the oblivion as a part of the mass of posts created here.

115

Frederick Franz, "Bible Scholar"

by Quendi in

as some of you know by now, i spent sunday, 7 august, renewing ties with a dear friend.

we're both disfellowshipped, the difference between us being he is seeking reinstatement and i am not.

we got into some very spirited discussions on different bible topics and one of them was the value of the new world translation itself.

Billen76

@Wonderment

It is one of the founding principles to the critical approach, that both the material AND the source are evaluated. If the source can be said to be biased, the reader should bear in mind, that the authors choices would be highly affected by this. In Furulis case in particular I have by studying his books concluded that the man is purposely deceptive. Meaning, he allready know the conclusion he intends to reach and select arguments that support the pre-destined conclusion. Perhaps one need to be a JW or former JW in order to be able to spot why he made the choices he have made. In any way, this is not the scholary way and his work is highly influenced by his relationship with JW. Perhaps that is why he have started to work with non-biblical documents in the later years. To avoid the conflict.

"The truth" you say. :) Dear dear Wonderment. You are not trying to pull our legs here, are you? We are talking translation, not religious messages in themselves. In order to have a religious message, one need not to be a scholar. In order to be able to translate an ancient language into modern language, one need to be highly trained in both languages. A proper formal training is highly needed here to be able to do a proper work.

Several oppinions are always welcome in the scholary circles (or should be). The base term though is, that the arguments must be properly weighted by the author and are used with a scientific approach. (do you know what this mean?). Therefore one cannot just say a JW version would be equal to a catholic or presbyterian version, nor that either of the parts automaticly have justifications to make the choices in translation they see fit. Argument must also be scientifically sound.

What is seen done in the NWT, that are not seen done in the mainstream translations is, that the translation commitee of the NWT have made "choices", that are neither grammatical or semantical sound. ex. In Genesis 1:2 the NWT directly translates the hebrew word "ruwach" to the english "active force". This translation have no basis in hebrew, where the correct translation would be "spirit". The translation here must have been SOLELY based on JW theology, but fails to be scientifically sound, why the NWT translation of this passage must be discarded. http://www.studylight.org/isb/view.cgi?number=07307

If one makes the research into the actual cases of mistranslations in the NWT, one will be better equipped to do a proper evaluation. I believe there are plenty of analysis to be found, that you could start out with. Get some concrete examples and learn to understand WHY the "choices" are faulty. Untill now, the only thing you have done is making "appeal to authority" arguments, using quotes taken out of context. I also doubt you understand why a scholar would say "a translation is an interpretation" and why this does not mean that serious translators have free hands to do whatever they feel like.

115

Frederick Franz, "Bible Scholar"

by Quendi in

as some of you know by now, i spent sunday, 7 august, renewing ties with a dear friend.

we're both disfellowshipped, the difference between us being he is seeking reinstatement and i am not.

we got into some very spirited discussions on different bible topics and one of them was the value of the new world translation itself.

Billen76

@Wonderment

No, there is no circumstancial evidence, that F. Franz had sufficient knowledge of koiné to produce a proper translation. You cite some scholars without even examining the background for their statement. ex. Rolf Furuli is Magister in semitic languages (not koiné) at Oslo Uni. He is also a practizing Jehovahs Witness! (biased). Maxmillian also wrote that F. Franz was a scholar. Now where did he get that piece of misinformation from? Have you examined Jason BeDuhn's belief and educational path to etablish WHY he seems to like some passages in NWT/KIT? aso

To evaluate the NWT we must both be able to establish the translators credentials. This is needed in order to get replies to critical questioning to the choices made in the translations. If the scholars do not know who to ask, a critical dialoque can not be properly initiated and scholars questions after a critical examinination cannot be answered.

ex. the koiné word "charis" is in NWT translated to "undeserved kindness" instead of the normal translation to the word "grace". Since there may be some justification in doing this, there are numerous questions to be raised to the translators on why they made that choice. One of the problems is, that "charis" is a quality that marks the giver, whereas "undeserved kindness" adresses the reciever's viewpoint. Thus "grace" would be the proper word to use.

I do not doubt that the WTS did put much effort into producing the NWT. Is suspect though, that NT is a patchwork of numerous of "worldly" scholars work and that "The Translation Commitee" would not be able to answer critical questions. By being anonimuos they avoided this.

Let me also remark, that OT and NT was produced seperately; a fact that seems to have avoided your attention. The OT of NWT was an earlier work done by hired scholars from outside Jehovahs Witnesses. They left in protest due to demanded revisions by the WTS. There were no scholars involved in the translation of the NT in NWT. It is the latter that is most in question as the OT in NWT is somewhat a decent translation done by scholars (early edition only. Later revisions destroyed this)

26

Lurking JW's & Newbies - WT Society's Definition of "Generation" is False

by flipper in

jw
friends

of course this comes as no surprise to those of us on this board- naturally, as we've informed ourselves.

however i felt it important to reveal the real dictionary definition of the word " generation " for newly exiting jehovah's witnesses so they can see for themselves how the wt society is twisting the real definition of this word to extend their faulty predictions of jesus prophecy about " this generation will by no means pass away.

so here is the actual definition of the word " generation " according to webster's newworld dictionary - .

Billen76

Probably why Russel originally predicted Harmageddon to come 30 years from 1874, the date which he originally declared Christs (invisible) presence.