The one that I heard, also about 15-20 years ago was about a Scottish JW couple that were in line to adopt refugee children. All the children were placed and they were so very sad. Lo and behold! There was one left, a little girl, somewhat older than the others. One problem, this little girl was so traumatized somewhere along the line, that she never spoke. The couple decided to adopt the little girl, and can you believe it, a miracle! When she entered her room, her eyes immediately fell on the Bible-story book. Yes, you've got it, she started speaking and could tell them her story... don't remember the rest or the moral of the story. It was so happefying, there was a tear in my eye....
Posts by Vidqun
-
33Heartwarming JW Facebook Comment
by exwhyzee inthis urban legend/anecdote was on the facebook page of a jw who is a facebook friend of mine.
it's kind of long but tell us what you think....it was all i could do to stop myself from making a snarky comment.
a young couple very much wanted to have a family, but his wife could not conceive, so they decided to adopt a baby.
-
-
-
22
CANADA | Toronto Star | May 3, 2013 - Jehovah's Witnesses: Kindness is an act of grace - not an obligation
by jwleaks inwho should be responsible for financially supporting jehovah's witnesses, who put misguided faith in the failed 1975 "end-of-the-world" predictions, and went full-time preaching without any consideration for retirement many years later?.
kindness is an act of grace not an obligationare successful brothers ethically required to help aging moneyless sister?
toronto star.
-
-
Vidqun
My brother (not a Witness) f#*&s up regularly because of bad decisions, then I bale him out, because he is my brother. Blood is thicker than water. In above case, if her worldly family starts taking care of her, the light might just go on for her. Why is it that the congregation or my JW family do not help or look after me? Is there something wrong with this religion? Where is the love and compassion they speak of? This is reverse psychology, in other words "giving a good witness."
-
51
Jeremiah Source Material
by Bobcat ini started this thread as a single place for anyone who would like to add references to source material, or anything else for that matter, pertaining to the jeremiah book study.. .
page 52:.
here is a thread and numerous comments concerning jeremiah 13:1-11 and whether or not jeremiah traveled to the euphrates to hide a garment.. .
-
-
Vidqun
"In principle" (principle = general truth - Webster) but not according to the letter. The writer asserts they are already doing this in a general, round-about way. Now it appears to be a basic doctrine, but later it will be strictly enforced (in the New System?).
The context deals with friendships. Personally, I view the above as another JW fallacy. When I was married and "in the truth" I had many friends. After my divorce the friendships would dry up. As a single person I did not fit in with the couples anymore, and was sidelined. As many here have remarked, JWs practice conditional love. If you are single and pioneering, you are acceptable. If not, you are viewed as weak = bad association. My five cents for what it's worth.
-
5
The Governing Body fits perfectly the Evil Slave of Matthew 24:48
by matt2414 in[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><!
48but suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, my master is staying away a long time,.
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><!
-
-
Vidqun
Well, rather them than me. I have said this before and I say it again:
"Recently, the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses has claimed the title “faithful and discreet slave” for themselves. This is a serious matter. When Jesus, as the master, returns and finds his slave to be faithful, he will appoint him over all his belongings. But when he arrives, and finds him beating his fellow slaves while imbibing with confirmed drunkards, he will be severely punished (Matt. 24:45-51; Luk. 12:41-48; cf. Rev. 18:3). In fact, he will be sentenced to death (Rev. 13:16 , 17; 14:9-12; 15:2; 16:2; 17:8; cf. 14:1, 4, 5)."
-
26
What's in a name? - Israel wasn't for Yaweh !
by snare&racket inwho the el' is el' ?.
the original god of israel was el, not yahweh, as is evident in the patriarchal narratives: the name isra-el means el rules, not yahweh rules that would be isra-yahu.
(bellah, 2011, p. 287).
-
-
Vidqun
mP, I have a book called "Israelite Religions" by Richard S. Hess, a professor of OT Studies and acclaimed archaeologist. The title of the book explains it all. Israel was never a one religion state. It had a Yahwistic state religion at some stage, but the other religions were never completely suppressed, in fact during certain times they would flourish. This is clear from the archaeological evidence and the Bible itself. Israel's name (= contenders with El) says it all, whereas the name "Judah" (= yehudah: yehu + ydh > praise to YHWH) is a theophoric compound name. They lived up to their name and proved to be more faithful.
Back to Snare, he asserts,
There is NO evidence of any Moses EVER existing. So no scholar has ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER had evidence for that. A biblical or christian scholar MAY hypothesise that based on the embarassment that El was worshipped and all of the sudden is compelled to appease the broken biblical narrative. Of course it doesnt explain who Adam, Eve, Enoch, Noah etc worshiped if YHWH was not invented until Moses. But then again, we know gods, cities, nations, peoples, religion etc existed before the biblical adam... so it's a mute point.
“In view of the bibliography cited [about four pages], it should come as no surprise that scholars have widely differing views concerning Moses. There is Martin Noth’s Moses, of whom nothing is known except the site of his burial outside Israel. There is Julius Wellhausen’s Moses, the liberator who led the Israelites to the oasis of Kadesh. There are Moses the priest of Eduard Meyer, Moses the prophet of André Neher and Martin Buber, Moses the Egyptian of Sigmund Freud and A. Slosman, Moses the lawgiver of Jewish tradition, Moses the theologian of the Koran, Moses the Mystic of Gregory of Nyssa, and many more” (TDOT, vol. IX, pp. 28-32).
Most are pro-Moses. These judge him according to his legacy. Very few of these believe him to be a figment of an overactive Jewish imagination. There seems to be a few scholars that was “anti-Moses” but these are clearly in the minority.
-
26
What's in a name? - Israel wasn't for Yaweh !
by snare&racket inwho the el' is el' ?.
the original god of israel was el, not yahweh, as is evident in the patriarchal narratives: the name isra-el means el rules, not yahweh rules that would be isra-yahu.
(bellah, 2011, p. 287).
-
-
Vidqun
You just make shit up. El was before Yaweh, long before. El and Yaweh is the same person. Lie to yourself all you want, have fun explaining to yourself how Jehovah (lol) was content with his people calling themselves Isa-EL-ites, or his promised land Isra-EL.
Let’s first look at the etymology of the name “Israel.” It is by no means a foregone conclusion as your source contends. Note the first two has to do with “fighting.”
“The etymology of the name “Israel” has not been explained satisfactorily.”
“This translation of the verbal element is based entirely on the popular etymologies cited, and is therefore by no means compelling. This obvious fact has led over the years to a wealth of proposed interpretations” (TDOT, vol. VI, pp. 399, 400).
HALOT gives five choices: a) to fight against Gn 32 29 Hos 12 4f ; b) same derivation but God as sbj., “El fights”, so Eissfeldt OLZ 58:331; c) to rule, prove oneself, be ruler (Noth 207ff); d) Arb. to shine (HBauer ZAW 51:83); e)to heal (Albright JBL 46:165ff.; 63:221 96 ) .
Let’s go to your second source Mark S. Smith: He makes a statement: “The original god of Israel was El.” He continues: “This reconstruction may be inferred from two pieces of information. First, the name Israel is not a Yahwistic name, but an El name…” “Second, Genesis 49:24-25 presents a series of El epithets separate from the mention of Yahweh in verse 18…”
So the evidence is quite flimsy. And do we know for certain who borrowed from whom? Did the writer borrow from the priests of Ugarit or vice versa?
Can you show ONE reference to what you said, one paper? One scholar? One piece of evidence...... just one? JUST ONE ?
While we are dealing with Mark S. Smith, do me a favor and get his book, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism. Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts. It will acquaint you with the origin and development of monotheism in Israel. You will find “Mosaic Monotheism” is discussed on pp. 150-151.
-
74
There is no doubt that Adam wasn't the first man. How do believers get around that small fact?
by jam inusing bible in determing the date of the creation of adam .
anyone in their right mind believe this to be true in today age.. don,t you think this nullify the whole bible?
the very first book.
-
-
Vidqun
James, this reminds me of "Prometheus." That's probably from where they started developing their plot for the movie.
-
26
What's in a name? - Israel wasn't for Yaweh !
by snare&racket inwho the el' is el' ?.
the original god of israel was el, not yahweh, as is evident in the patriarchal narratives: the name isra-el means el rules, not yahweh rules that would be isra-yahu.
(bellah, 2011, p. 287).
-
-
Vidqun
Quite a few scholars assert that Moses was the one that introduced Yahweh worship to the Israelites. Yahweh was one of the gods going around, but Moses would establish monotheism, i.e., worship of Yahweh.
-
74
There is no doubt that Adam wasn't the first man. How do believers get around that small fact?
by jam inusing bible in determing the date of the creation of adam .
anyone in their right mind believe this to be true in today age.. don,t you think this nullify the whole bible?
the very first book.
-
-
Vidqun
Bohm, did you carry on reading from there? Unfortunately, the JWN editor won't allow me to break it up. What say you about the rest? Unfortunately, the JWN editor won't allow me to break it up. Both those sources are very knowledgable in their fields. You present a theory, and your peers shoot it down or offer something better. They don't resort to unicorns. Leave those for the kindergarten kids to play with.
-
74
There is no doubt that Adam wasn't the first man. How do believers get around that small fact?
by jam inusing bible in determing the date of the creation of adam .
anyone in their right mind believe this to be true in today age.. don,t you think this nullify the whole bible?
the very first book.
-
-
Vidqun
Jeffro, interesting opinion. Perhaps our definitions should be more flexible. What exactly did the writer of Genesis mean? We just don't know. And do not make the common mistake of trying to dress Genesis (or any of the ancient writings) in a 21st Century jacket. It just won't fit. Here is a few interesting thoughts on the origin of writing and human civilization. Perhaps Adam was the first "civilized" man? Yes, I know it's a theory. If you do not like it, you have to disprove it. The adherents of the theory of a monogenetic origin of writing trace all writing systems to a single system. These discern the following steps in the development of writing: Pictographic writing > logographic writing (one sign, one word) > phonetic system. The oldest system of writing, probably invented in Mesopotamia after 3400 BCE, was a pictographic system. So, for example, a picture of the solar disc meant «sun» and «light». This logographic system was perfected until it became a phonetic system. About 3000 BCE Sumerian scribes supplemented their logographic system by introducing a phonetic or syllabic use of signs, making it an agglutanitive language: it is made up of elements which almost always consist of a single syllable. When Akkadian scribes took over this writing system, they inherited both logographic and phonetic signs. They would add new phonetic values based on Akkadian, as well as determinatives and semantic classifiers. These have a specialized logographic value: the determinative is a logogram preceding or following a word and identifying the class to which it belongs. It is not to be pronounced when reading the text aloud. Phonetic complements are added to a logogram to specify its reading. Phonetic (syllabic) values of a sign can be represented in alphabetic script. Due in part to the nature of the Summerian language, a given syllable in Akkadian may be represented by one of several signs. See J. T. Barrera, The Jewish and the Chrtistian Bible, Brill, Eerdmans (1998), p. 81. A different perspective on the origin and development of man from an economic and political perspective, see F. Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, (1992). Fukuyama views Western Civilization as the final development in the evolution of mankind’s political aspirations. In man’s “struggle for recognition” he has at last reached a juncture called “liberal democracy,” which includes “liberal politics” and “liberal economics.” Although there would be room for nationalism in such a concept, harsh autocracies and dictatorships could not be tolerated. The break-up of the USSR, and more recently, “the Arab Spring” in Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Tunisia, are good examples of a natural movement towards some form of “liberal democracy.” Such a “universal and homogenous state,” Fukuyama views as “the end of history.” The “first men” would be engaged in bloody warfare on the battle field, whereas the “last men” would assert themselves in new and unforeseen ways in the economic and political arena. The fact that man’s aspirations to self-worth and recognition would to a large degree be attained, he has thus arrived as “the last man.”