Posts by Vidqun

11

Is there actually a valid Translation of the Bible ?

by Phizzy in

i saw a vid on-line awhile ago, i cannot remember the title so can't find it, but the guy was some sort of expert in the languages of the bible, and he made a very good case that there has never been a proper translation of the bible.. what he was saying was that all translators fall into the same trap of an overly slavish use of the etymology of words rather than how language was actually used at the time of writing.. he said that what was needed were scholars who were familiar with secular contemporaneous writings, and knew how language was used at the time.. this looks like a very interesting argument.. any thoughts ?

?.

Vidqun

TTWSYF, yes theoretically it should be like that. But remember, Hebrew existed for nearly 2000 years before it died off. During that period it had a developmental phase (time of the patriarchs, Moses), stabilization phase (time of the judges), bloom phase (David and Solomon), split (north vs. south), deterioration phase, (Babylonian exile), etc.

Bible narratives have been taken from all these phases. Changes in the language would have occurred as it was influenced by the languages of surrounding nations, e.g., Ugaritic (in the time of David and Solomon), and Aramaic (Laban was a Syrian, also Aramaic would transplant Hebrew after the Babylonian exile).

Some of the above changes are evident in the development of aspect/tense of the language. Early Hebrew concentrated on aspect (state of the verb), whereas later Hebrew leaned towards tense (past, present, future).

Another problem with Biblical Hebrew is its limited literature corpus, which consists of the Bible, inscriptions, the Cairo Genizah, and a few DSS MSS. That is not nearly enough to trace its development with any degree of accuracy or certainty, thus the educated guess work by scholars. They have done exceptionally well in working it out, but there are many gaps.

11

Is there actually a valid Translation of the Bible ?

by Phizzy in

i saw a vid on-line awhile ago, i cannot remember the title so can't find it, but the guy was some sort of expert in the languages of the bible, and he made a very good case that there has never been a proper translation of the bible.. what he was saying was that all translators fall into the same trap of an overly slavish use of the etymology of words rather than how language was actually used at the time of writing.. he said that what was needed were scholars who were familiar with secular contemporaneous writings, and knew how language was used at the time.. this looks like a very interesting argument.. any thoughts ?

?.

Vidqun

Phizzy, problem is Biblical Hebrew is a dead language. Nobody knows how it was used by 1) the man in the street, 2) religious leaders, and 3) political leaders. From what era does a certain portion of the Bible come from? From what era does the recension of that portion date? E. g. the two Isaiah Scrolls from the DSS, one is close to the MT, the other is a vulgar version of the day. The closest scholars have come to language use of a specific era is graffiti, monument inscriptions and clay tablets (business and government archives). But because these are insufficient to establish language use, a lot of "educated" guess work is involved. Wordstudies, as is done by the editors of Theological Dictionaries of the Old and New Testament, are valuable in that they establish the different meanings of words over long periods of time. On the other hand, the translators of the different versions have been trained in seminaries and colleges of different denominations (e.g. Catholic and Protestant), which would also influence their translating technique. I think the Greek koine of the NT is in a slightly better position. Archeaologists have unearthed a lot of correspondence from the time, buried in rubbish dumps under the sand in Egypt, e.g. Rylands and Bodmer papyri, so they have a better idea of how the language was used in the first, second and third century CE.

24

Why JWs record and report time?

by ThinkerBelle in

okay, so yes, i'm a born-in, but this point has always baffled me (and i guess i never bothered to research or ask).

what is the purpose of counting time in service?

when was it started and why?

Vidqun

A long time ago I looked it up for it bothered me. JWs reason that the first century Christians kept records. For example, three thousand were baptized (Acts 2:41). At that stage, the answer satisfied me because I trusted them and did not look for ulterior motives or hidden agendas.

Now I see it in a different light. Firstly, if you look carefully in Acts, you will notice they kept tally, but not accurately. Acts 2:41 NW says "about three thousand priests were baptized." So that was an estimate. Secondly, it concerns those who were baptized, and had nothing to do with reporting of time.

Conclusion: As was spelt out above, JWs use it as a gauge to measure spirituality. Who is spiritually weak? Avoid those. Who is spiritually strong? Appoint those, etc. It is all about control.

82

Intriguing - but Unsubstantiated!

by The Searcher in

according to one source on a western european 'apostate' website, the org's plan is to abandon the name "jehovah's witnesses" in the future, and replace it with "worshippers of jehovah.".

http://www.bruderinfo-aktuell.de/index.php/fixnews/#comment-4313 .

the gist of the account appears to be a repeat of rutherford's re-branding and debunking of old predictions made by the previous shower of fakers.

Vidqun

Yes, a name change would make sense. According to JW Theology, strictly speaking it is only the anointed that should be called Jehovah's Witnesses. According to them, fleshly Israel has been replaced by the "Israel of God." The other sheep are not part of this Israel. They are merely companions of those belonging to the little flock.

22

Similarities between the Governing Body and an abusive spouse

by Zoos in

i was looking at a list of methods used by abusive spouses to manipulate and control their "domain" and was struck by how similar the mentality is to the governing body's approach to the flock.

obviously not everything on the list applies as there is no sexual component in the congregation and there is no physical contact, but the similarities were shocking.. http://www.helpguide.org/articles/abuse/domestic-violence-and-abuse.htm.

abusers use a variety of tactics to manipulate you and exert their power:.

Vidqun

Well Mad Irishman, I think you are partly right. It's not right comparing the GB to abusive husbands, wife beaters, and the like. I think we are demeaning these by comparing them to the GB. The GB and their henchmen are much lower than that. By giving pedophiles and predators the benefit of the doubt, and by victimizing the young with their policies, the members of the GB are rock bottom. Shark feces come to mind. If you have followed the Australian RC, you will know what I am talking about.

22

Similarities between the Governing Body and an abusive spouse

by Zoos in

i was looking at a list of methods used by abusive spouses to manipulate and control their "domain" and was struck by how similar the mentality is to the governing body's approach to the flock.

obviously not everything on the list applies as there is no sexual component in the congregation and there is no physical contact, but the similarities were shocking.. http://www.helpguide.org/articles/abuse/domestic-violence-and-abuse.htm.

abusers use a variety of tactics to manipulate you and exert their power:.

Vidqun

Zoos, this reminds me of Mt. 24:45-51. The first part [45-47] JWs like. The second part [48-51] they ignore, cognitive dissonance at its best.

45 Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?

46 Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so.

47 Truly I say to YOU, He will appoint him over all his belongings.

48 But if ever that evil slave should say in his heart, My master is delaying,

49 and should start to beat his fellow slaves and should eat and drink with the confirmed drunkards,

50 the master of that slave will come on a day that he does not expect and in an hour that he does not know,

51 and will punish him with the greatest severity and will assign him his part with the hypocrites. There is where [his] weeping and the gnashing of [his] teeth will be.

(Matt. 24:45-51 NWT)

11

I'm looking for the verse that says that shepherds will be like wolves fleecing the fold.

by Tempest in a Teacup in

jw
friends

i remember reading it in a forum member's post, somewhere last year or so.

the poster said she (i think it's a she) quoted the scripture to one elder and told him that it applied to him.

could you please help me with this verse?.

Vidqun

First part is the judgment of the shepherds. If you keep on reading, there's a judgment between fat sheep and lean sheep, as well as goats [20], which is also quite interesting.

11

I'm looking for the verse that says that shepherds will be like wolves fleecing the fold.

by Tempest in a Teacup in

jw
friends

i remember reading it in a forum member's post, somewhere last year or so.

the poster said she (i think it's a she) quoted the scripture to one elder and told him that it applied to him.

could you please help me with this verse?.

Vidqun

Don't know whether this is what you are looking for: Try Ezek. 34:1-11.

29

Why some are religious or not?

by Vidqun in

time article: several years before pope francis became pope of the catholic church in 2013, psychologists began to debunk the idea that being more educated meant a person was less likely to be religious.

instead, a new social psychology theoryone that had little to do with education levelarose.

according to dual process theory, people are either deliberative or intuitive when they make decisions.

Vidqun

Phizzy, interesting observation, I think you've got a point. The article says that education isn't the most important factor, rather the way we think - critical thinking skills. As the researcher said: "what type of critical thinking you're prone to do..." And you're right, it depends on the measure of intuitiveness and the measure of deliberativeness. All of us have both, but not in equal measure.

29

Why some are religious or not?

by Vidqun in

time article: several years before pope francis became pope of the catholic church in 2013, psychologists began to debunk the idea that being more educated meant a person was less likely to be religious.

instead, a new social psychology theoryone that had little to do with education levelarose.

according to dual process theory, people are either deliberative or intuitive when they make decisions.

Vidqun

Time article: Several years before Pope Francis became pope of the Catholic Church in 2013, psychologists began to debunk the idea that being more educated meant a person was less likely to be religious. Instead, a new social psychology theory—one that had little to do with education level—arose. According to dual process theory, people are either deliberative or intuitive when they make decisions. People who are more deliberative tend to carefully think things through and find a rational reason for their choices, while people who are more intuitive do what appears to feel right.

I've always wondered about this. The above seems to make sense. Perhaps my intuitiveness talking? Any thoughts on the subject?