Posts by Jonathan Drake

67

Exactly what is the HISTORIC view of the DIVINE or of what being GOD meant long ago?

by TerryWalstrom in

the purpose of this topic is twofold.. first, any who are endlessly fascinated by scholarship, practised by genuine bible scholars, are urged by me to do what i did, subscribe to bart ehrman's blog.

the subscription money (as little as $3.95) goes entirely to charity.. secondarily, by broadening our view of the new testament era on up through two millennia to the present day, our knowledge of all things 'christian' is deepened to include actual knowledge (as opposed to watchtower fabrication.

by this i don't mean to imply you'll fall to your knees and get saved, but rather, you'll simply have facts to inform your present transitional mindset toward whatever end you finally choose.. now .

Jonathan Drake

@Viv

i think you're missing my point, I wasn't saying you're right. You're very wrong. by which I mean no offense.

You are correct that the English phrase "son of man" is found in many places in the bible. You are incorrect however to assume these phrases are all the same just because they translate to the same English words. In the New Testament, and in the language it was written, the phrase used by Christ translated as Son of Man was new, not found anywhere else in the bible except where Christ used it to refer to himself. It is not the same as the phrases found elsewhere.

Also addressing your pseudo knowledge of ancient times, you are incorrect to assert that the expectation of the Hebrews to worship the one God originated as a novel idea in the Ten Commandments. In the Old Testament, you may remember (or not), the accout where Jacob leaves without labans knowledge in Gensis 31. Rachel takes labans idol gods with her. Laban overtakes them and throughout the entire chapter Jacob refers to these as, "your gods" not 'the gods' or 'our gods.' So he didn't claim any of these gods as his own. Further in vers 53 Jacob swears "by the one God" whom his father feared. So you are wrong, scripturally. The bible records the line through which the Israelites came was emphatically monotheistc. This goes as far back as Abraham, who in the book of jubilees (if you consider it anything) is credited with destroying the temple and all the idols therin of his hometown before leaving. He's also credited with arguing with his father over how wrong it is to worship them. And then there is Melchizadek, the king priest of Salem who blessed Abraham. The bible records that "the lesser is blessed by the greater" and that Melchizadek was the priest of the Most High God. That clearly is also the one God whom Abraham worshipped, since Christ was recorded to be "after the manner of Melchizadek" later in the bible, something that wouldn't happen if he (Melchizadek) was a priest of a god other than yahweh.

So no, you're wrong about that. You're not wrong that there were many gods, or that some Hebrews got swept up in the worship of them - but the God of the Hebrews is recorded as far back as Abraham as being yahweh and no other. The first commandment of the ten was not a novel idea, only a confirmation for a people who had just spent hundreds of years in slavery and didn't know their God like their forefathers did.

17

How do the JW's get around this scripture??

by Crazyguy in

hebrews 9:27new international version (niv).

27 just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, .

.

Jonathan Drake

@prologos

because neither Christ as he is depicted or God wants people to put faith out of fear. They want people to have faith in them of their own initiative, not because of them showing themselves in some miraculous way and making it obvious. Also because, according to the bible, they are eager to reconcile creation. If Christ was on earth for 1000 years before his ascent to glory that would force the appointed time of the end much farther into the future.

So, in perspective of the scriotures, the way things happened would have been the most loving. It allows for the end of sin and suffering to come much sooner in the grand scheme of things.

Too, as far as the statement of, "if he is special prove it" I would argue it has been proven. Even if you don't believe in all the miracles that took place, you'd have to concede the fact that human history after Christ's death was shaped by his life. Western culture has been at the mercy of Christianity for a VERY long time. So to suggest that Christ wasnt a special person, even if you don't accept the existence of God or christs messianic status, is to ignore history itself.

17

How do the JW's get around this scripture??

by Crazyguy in

hebrews 9:27new international version (niv).

27 just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, .

.

Jonathan Drake

I agree with island mans thoughts.

If if you look this up with the NASB bible it becomes much more clear what is happening. In the context leading up to this verse he's talking about the procedure prior to Christ put in place by the Mosaic Law. The Israelites never achieved real forgiveness because they had to continuously make offerings. Then he COMPARES the way men die once for all time to the way Christ died once for all men, showing that this was a perfect atonement and demonstrating that Christ doesn't have to die over and over again.

But this doesn't mean there won't be some who survive the end and never have to die. Pull up an NASB and read the whole chapter a couple times and this will appear much more clear.

if you doubt this is the case though, I'd take the thought you're getting from this and compare it to the expressions found elsewhere in the scriptures. check how it harmonizes with the entire bible as the context. Paul expresses this same sentiment elsewhere, which is why I feel comfortable asserting the meaning. But I'll definitely be looking into this myself and if I find anything suggesting I'm wrong I'll be sure to post it.

16

What will JW.org / Watchtower be like in 15 years?

by jw07 in

over the past few days i've been reading and watching bill and melinda gates speak about their plans for a better world by 2030. they bet that due to technology and the compassion of people the world should improve more in the next 15 years than it has in all of history.

specifically lower child mortality rate, eradication of polio and guinea worm among other diseases, improvement of standards of living, greater access to education etc.. i'm a realist, so i'm not looking for miracles, but i believe most of these things are possible given the level of success they have reaped in other endeavors, and naturally emerging tech being used to make some of these projections possible.. you can see that the world is actually improving in many areas if you seek out the good news stories and statistics and look beyond the watchtower friendly fear porn about terrorism, and potential dangers from culturally diverse nations around the globe.

for instance 2014 had the lowest fatal airline accident rate in history despite the hyping of the ill fated malaysian airlines crashes.

Jonathan Drake

... and denounce gays.

This is is precisely the reason I don't think they'll be around at all. You're absolutely right, they will denounce homosexuality. But the public won't stand for it any more. The Jws will be gone, as will any other organization against homosexuals. That is the future, and I firmly believe it will end religions that refuse to adapt.

16

What will JW.org / Watchtower be like in 15 years?

by jw07 in

over the past few days i've been reading and watching bill and melinda gates speak about their plans for a better world by 2030. they bet that due to technology and the compassion of people the world should improve more in the next 15 years than it has in all of history.

specifically lower child mortality rate, eradication of polio and guinea worm among other diseases, improvement of standards of living, greater access to education etc.. i'm a realist, so i'm not looking for miracles, but i believe most of these things are possible given the level of success they have reaped in other endeavors, and naturally emerging tech being used to make some of these projections possible.. you can see that the world is actually improving in many areas if you seek out the good news stories and statistics and look beyond the watchtower friendly fear porn about terrorism, and potential dangers from culturally diverse nations around the globe.

for instance 2014 had the lowest fatal airline accident rate in history despite the hyping of the ill fated malaysian airlines crashes.

Jonathan Drake

Honestly I think the religion will be gone in ten years or less.

69

Science still doesn't have the answers on how life first appeared

by EndofMysteries in

since so many athiests in this thread, and since i'm going to college, i was curious if what i would learn in biology would change my thoughts and show that life clearly and easily spontaneously happened.

just looking up the origins of dna or rna there is nothing conclusive.

for example, scientists today are able to manipulate life.

Jonathan Drake

@island man

this doesnt really have a baring on the thread but I wanted to thank you for taking the time to type your posts. Having been raised a witness I'm very ignorant on the subject of evolution and I found your posts very informative, I appreciate them very much.

67

Exactly what is the HISTORIC view of the DIVINE or of what being GOD meant long ago?

by TerryWalstrom in

the purpose of this topic is twofold.. first, any who are endlessly fascinated by scholarship, practised by genuine bible scholars, are urged by me to do what i did, subscribe to bart ehrman's blog.

the subscription money (as little as $3.95) goes entirely to charity.. secondarily, by broadening our view of the new testament era on up through two millennia to the present day, our knowledge of all things 'christian' is deepened to include actual knowledge (as opposed to watchtower fabrication.

by this i don't mean to imply you'll fall to your knees and get saved, but rather, you'll simply have facts to inform your present transitional mindset toward whatever end you finally choose.. now .

Jonathan Drake

Thank you finkelstein. I really disn't want to have to type another long post.

As as far as the insinuation that I'm lazy and have not read the bible, I'll let that stand on its own merit. I spend a great deal of time studying the bible, and I was aware of all the information in the previous post above. So I get the sense I may have made you feel insulted somehow and if so I apologize. I was in a hurry this morning trying to get out and go somewhere, so it's possible I didn't express myself properly.

67

Exactly what is the HISTORIC view of the DIVINE or of what being GOD meant long ago?

by TerryWalstrom in

the purpose of this topic is twofold.. first, any who are endlessly fascinated by scholarship, practised by genuine bible scholars, are urged by me to do what i did, subscribe to bart ehrman's blog.

the subscription money (as little as $3.95) goes entirely to charity.. secondarily, by broadening our view of the new testament era on up through two millennia to the present day, our knowledge of all things 'christian' is deepened to include actual knowledge (as opposed to watchtower fabrication.

by this i don't mean to imply you'll fall to your knees and get saved, but rather, you'll simply have facts to inform your present transitional mindset toward whatever end you finally choose.. now .

Jonathan Drake

Sorry in. Y first post I meant to address you not cofty.. Oi I'm out of it today.

well all I can tell you is I've read this in several works of scholars, so unless you have a doctorate or masters in classical language and such things I'm going to trust the more educated sources telling me this phrase, the one specifically used by Christ, was unique to him and unaccounted for.

like I said, the referenced where this is discussed they are addressing the original language ohrase not the transliteration, which may match the translation of a similar phrase elsewhere, however this one in particular is unique to Christ.

11

The Bible's huge implicit contradiction on the subject of love for God vs love for your fellow man.

by Island Man in

"if anyone makes the statement: i love god, and yet is hating his brother, he is a liar.

for he who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot be loving god, whom he has not seen" - 1 john 4:20. here the bible implies that it is far easier to love a visible person than an invisible one.

therefore if one lacks love for a visible person, how much more so he must lack love for the invisible god.

Jonathan Drake

@ctrwtf

wow Ty, for some reason I assumed that was the gospel... :/ lol

67

Exactly what is the HISTORIC view of the DIVINE or of what being GOD meant long ago?

by TerryWalstrom in

the purpose of this topic is twofold.. first, any who are endlessly fascinated by scholarship, practised by genuine bible scholars, are urged by me to do what i did, subscribe to bart ehrman's blog.

the subscription money (as little as $3.95) goes entirely to charity.. secondarily, by broadening our view of the new testament era on up through two millennia to the present day, our knowledge of all things 'christian' is deepened to include actual knowledge (as opposed to watchtower fabrication.

by this i don't mean to imply you'll fall to your knees and get saved, but rather, you'll simply have facts to inform your present transitional mindset toward whatever end you finally choose.. now .

Jonathan Drake

@cofty

scholars can't account for the origination of the phrase Son of Man. It's unique to Christ himself. They call it an ideolect, and he only used it when referencing himself. So when Christ asked, who are they saying the son of man is? It was the same as him saying, who are they saying I am?

son of man is not a phrase found anywhere else at that time, and when he said it it was not a reference to the Old Testament references to someone like A son of man, which is a different phrase.