Posts by peacefulpete

75

WATCHTOWER JAN 2025: WHY IS THE WATCHTOWER OBSESSED WITH THE RANSOM?

by raymond frantz in

https://youtu.be/ocufvpm3t04?si=75zmussxknhlsrs7.

the first watchtower for 2025 is out, and immediately, articles 4 and 5 drew my attention.

these will be studied near the memorial season, a time the witnesses prepare for their yearly commemoration of jesus’ death, i will be returning on this articles near at the time.

peacefulpete

I'll just say that regarding the "ransom" concept. Early Christians did not share a consistent view. The death had no redemptive value for many believers, rather it was understood as a model of selflessness or whose return to life amounted to victory over death, which gave him power to do the same for others. Anyone who reads the Anti-Nicene Fathers comes away with a distinct impression no one had a clear answer, and many theories were framed. This one of the arguments used by those who insist upon an historical Jesus. They argue that the crucifixion defied expectations and required a creative explanation. I'm not convinced of this, as I said, many early Christians perceived the drama as non-transactional but christologically relevant.

It might be said the root of the problem was readers getting hung up on the use of the Greek word for ransom. In the LXX the verb 'ransom' is used many times to simply means rescue, with no hint of suggesting an exchange of tit for tat as creative thinkers like Origen supposed.

e.g. EX6:6

Go, speak to the children of Israel, saying, I the Lord; and I will lead you forth from the tyranny of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from bondage, and I will ransom you with a high arm, and great judgment.

Speaking about Origen, (Philocalia of Origen) he had an enlightened take of the OT and Gospels:

1,16. If the use of the Law had been everywhere made perfectly clear, and strict historical sequence had been preserved, we should not have believed that the Scriptures could be understood in any other than the obvious sense.69 The Word (Logos) of God therefore arranged for certain stumbling-blocks and offences and impossibilities to be embedded in the Law and the historical portion, so that we may not be drawn hither and thither by the mere attractiveness of the style, and thus either forsake the doctrinal part because we receive no instruction worthy of God, or cleave to the letter and learn nothing more Divine. And this we ought to know, that the chief purpose being to show the spiritual connection both in past occurrences and in things to be done, wherever the Word found historical events capable of adaptation to these mystic truths, He made use of them, but concealed the deeper sense from the many; but where in setting forth the sequence of things spiritual there was no actual event related for the sake of the more mystic meaning, Scripture interweaves the imaginative with the historical, sometimes introducing what is utterly impossible, sometimes what is possible but never occurred. Sometimes it is only a few words, not literally true, which have been inserted; sometimes the insertions are of greater length. And we must this way understand even the giving of the Law, for therein we may frequently discover the immediate use, adapted to the times when the Law was given; sometimes, however, no good reason appears. And elsewhere we have even impossible commands, for readers of greater ability and those who have more of the spirit of inquiry; so that, applying themselves |18 to the labour of investigating the things written, they may have a fitting conviction of the necessity of looking therein for a meaning worthy of God. And not only did the Spirit thus deal with the Scriptures before the coming of Christ, but, inasmuch as He is the same Spirit, and proceedeth from the One God, (as emanation of God) He has done the same with the Gospels and the writings of the Apostles; for not even they are purely historical, incidents which never occurred being interwoven in the "corporeal" sense; nor in the Law and the Commandments does the Spirit make the reasonableness altogether clear.

IOW, the stories were meant to be understood on two levels. Those with 'less ability' or conviction would understand them as literal, the more gifted and determined would see the 'spiritual' meaning behind the narratives.

75

WATCHTOWER JAN 2025: WHY IS THE WATCHTOWER OBSESSED WITH THE RANSOM?

by raymond frantz in

https://youtu.be/ocufvpm3t04?si=75zmussxknhlsrs7.

the first watchtower for 2025 is out, and immediately, articles 4 and 5 drew my attention.

these will be studied near the memorial season, a time the witnesses prepare for their yearly commemoration of jesus’ death, i will be returning on this articles near at the time.

peacefulpete

Christians had better start 'working' to make this a kinder more compassionate world because their God has made empty promises to help for thousands of years.

31

Loss of a Jehovah’s Witness who I considered a friend

by Fallen_Winter in

jw
friends

i have known a jehovah’s witness for approximately 15 years and i have considered her a friend although i know that jehovah’s witnesses cannot have friends who are not jehovah’s witnesses.

approximately two years ago, i was going through a very difficult time and i asked my friend if we could have bible study.

she said yes and we have been studying the bible since.

peacefulpete

I realize that there are many motives for "studying" with the JWs. Truth is not one of them. For most churches including the JWs, 'Truth' is a brand. You are not studying the Bible you are being groomed (not sexually but emotionally and intellectually), led to a conclusion, a belief system and the keys to that are information control, emotional investment, and repetition. Genuine pursuit of knowledge with intellectual honesty involves unstructured questions about evidence and historicity. It involves use of reference works and professional scholarship, a diversity of voices and opinions.

You are now in a vulnerable position, your emotional ties and use of their sectarian lingo such as describing the church as 'the Truth" suggest you were almost fully indoctrinated/initiated. Some instinct for self-preservation/protection deep within you prevented full compliance. Listen to it.

Someday this experience might be a mere footnote of your life, the time you almost got sucked into a high control sect.

13

Does maths prove the bible is wrong?

by joey jojo in

there might be a few that find this post boring, because, you know - its maths.. i like maths but im not a mathematician or condsider myself any type of expert on the subject.. there is a branch of maths called propositional logic that is used widely in computers and computer programming that allows computers to make decisions based on certain conditions.

for example: if a condition exists, then do something.

like: if the a button is pressed, then the letter a will appear on the screen.

peacefulpete

It is the Achille's heal of literalism, at least it should be. Every detail needs be sound for the whole to be literal and true. The problem is the mind is very good at dodging.

The opening of the whole book again is a good example of this. The formulaic structure (7 day/Sabbath) used by the P author was more important than logic much less scientific accuracy. He was writing poetry with a religious agenda. That has been discussed here in some depth before. His chiastic approach of 3 days followed by corresponding 3 days created a seeming discrepancy where light exists prior to luminaries.

The original writers saw no issue as it was poetic allegory. However, later readers, as separate mind do, didn't understand this and tended to read secret meaning into the text. For many readers of the late 2nd temple period, the "light" must have been more than, and distinct from, physical light from the sun/moon/stars. The very popular concept of emanations of God lent to the personification of this "light" from Genesis 1 into a Logos, Son of God. Jewish and Christian writers embraced this idea.

old thread:

Light

IOW, when the text defied logical, literal understanding, it was reinterpreted as mystical. Hence from a poetic narrative glitch evolved the words and theology of John 1:1.

In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the Light of all mankind. 5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome[a] it.

30

Experiences After Leaving

by Freeatlast2024 in

i am writing to ask if anyone cares to share their experience and/or offer advice for people leaving.

i was raised in the religion, and both my parents died when i was very young.

i recently stopped associating because my conscience no longer allows me to preach or support the organization.

peacefulpete

Not to sound contrary but while every sect/religion/cult is unique is some ways, in many others they are similar. In our circle of friends are former Baptists, WELLS Lutherans, and nuns and even a sex cult. They all went through a process to get their footing in the larger world and faced losses in doing so. They are all better for having left their high control settings.

60

1/25 WT: Oral and Anal sex are a go - if she's ok with it

by neat blue dog in

he will not pressure her to engage in sexual acts that make her feel uncomfortable, that are demeaning, or that bother her conscience..... the bible does not provide details as to what sexual practices between a husband and a wife should be considered clean or unclean.

a christian couple must make decisions that reflect their resolve to honor jehovah, to please each other, and to maintain a clean conscience.

generally speaking, a couple would not discuss with others this intimate aspect of their marriage..

peacefulpete

It will probably be reversed again, lol. As a couple comments have said, it's just a bizarre test of control. In years gone by marriages were ended over the opinions of a bunch of old guys about what body part can touch what body part. Is sucking toes forbidden? How about tongue in ears? Licking armpits? Can you draw us a diagram? You can? now I'm turned on.

59

Proof of two destinies for believers in the Bible, heavenly and earthly

by slimboyfat in

the jw idea that believers are destined either for heavenly life or for endless life on earth comes in for significant criticism by critics of various kinds.

even some groups, such as the christadelphians, who share belief in a future paradise earth, don’t share the view that some christians are destined for life in heaven.

yet there is surprisingly quite a lot of evidence in the bible for the existence of two distinct groups of believers.

peacefulpete

Part of the appeal of apocalyptic prophecy interpretation is its quasi-scientific sounding words and impressively complicated charts. By engaging the mind with seemingly impenetrable puzzles they distract themselves from the disconfirming realities of the texts themselves. Their faith is portrayed as a 'science'. The 'Gnostic' faiths did the same with their pictographs and diagrams uncovering hidden insights from the spirit world.

164

How did JWs arrive at a clearer understanding of what the Bible teaches than other Christian denominations?

by slimboyfat in

for jws who believe that jehovah had a hand in reviving the truth in the nineteenth century this is enough explanation for how jws managed to achieve a closer approximation to early christian beliefs and practices than other groups.

but is there an explanation for this phenomenon that doesn’t rely on supernatural intervention?

new testament scholar james dunn explains the difficulty of interpreting the biblical texts in this way:.

peacefulpete

Sarah Brightman & Andrea Bocelli - Time to Say Goodbye (1997) [720p] (youtube.com)

164

How did JWs arrive at a clearer understanding of what the Bible teaches than other Christian denominations?

by slimboyfat in

for jws who believe that jehovah had a hand in reviving the truth in the nineteenth century this is enough explanation for how jws managed to achieve a closer approximation to early christian beliefs and practices than other groups.

but is there an explanation for this phenomenon that doesn’t rely on supernatural intervention?

new testament scholar james dunn explains the difficulty of interpreting the biblical texts in this way:.

peacefulpete

but it must be noted that Philo's Logos is fundamentally different from the Christian Logos. Philo saw the Logos as a mediating principle, not as a person who could incarnate.

I do understand Philo's Logos/Son, who shifted from allegorical to heavily personified, is distinct from how Nicaea understood Jesus.

Yet I'll remind you that Philo himself allowed for the possibility of incarnation in the stories of visitations, however unquestionably he preferred understanding the anthropomorphic tales to be allegorical. Serving to "explain the supreme to the human condition which needs images because of the limitations of human understanding" as David Baker phrased it. He, as well as Greek 'pagan' writers, had no difficulty reading older tales filled with incarnations and anthropomorphisms as allegorical. In fact, they had no qualms creating new tales with the same allegorical approach.

Why would we assume the writers of the dozens of Gospels felt any different?

When we see in Mark, and its embellished versions, pervasive use of OT allegory and typology, we have to ask if the entirety was intended to be understood this way. The implied recurring refrain is "What that writer meant was....". As Augustine said: “in the Old Testament the New lies hid, and in the New the Old is exposed".

IMO, the writer of the earliest Gospels incarnated their Christ using OT source material just as they drew nearly every aspect of his biography and actions from the OT. They did it in the same way as Philo understood the incarnation stories of the OT; to "explain the supreme to the human condition".

164

How did JWs arrive at a clearer understanding of what the Bible teaches than other Christian denominations?

by slimboyfat in

for jws who believe that jehovah had a hand in reviving the truth in the nineteenth century this is enough explanation for how jws managed to achieve a closer approximation to early christian beliefs and practices than other groups.

but is there an explanation for this phenomenon that doesn’t rely on supernatural intervention?

new testament scholar james dunn explains the difficulty of interpreting the biblical texts in this way:.

peacefulpete

So, Philo and other Hellenized Jews understood many passages in the OT as identifying emanations (Son of God, Word, Wisdom, heavenly high Priest, Great Angel, Glory of God, Prescence of God, Spirit of God etc.) of the Most High, that in fact were the only direct connection with humans.

He/it/she bridged the transcendent/immanence (tangible/earthly) barrier. The Son of God, Word, Great Angel etc. was worshipped as God and, as an emanation of God, that was not understood as polytheism. Son of God was the same as saying Glory of God. It follows that prior to any creative acts, these emanations of God were not necessary. The expressions/beings Son of God, Logos and Wisdom are all specifically referred to in the OT, Philo and Gospel John as the first and only direct generation of God by God Most High.

It should be said that Philo and his school were not completely original in their understanding, they were perceptively observing the work of the Deuteronomists and Priestly editors in consciously providing a buffer between God and earthly matters. (e.g. injection of an angel with God's name or use of new terms Glory of God and Presence of God as representations of God) We even see this concept in Talmudic references to 'Metatron' the Great Angel who stood in for God. Philo simply took that precedent and described it through the lens of Neoplatonism, and in doing so expanded upon both sources. This Hellenization of Judaism was, a couple centuries later, disavowed in an effort to reinvent Judaism as distinct both from Hellenism and Christianity. However, in reality the belief, very popular during late 2nd Temple times, was that the Greek thinkers had in fact drawn many of their ideas, from the Torah and therefore simply represented 'Moses in attic Greek'.

The idea that the Logos/Sophia (and other variants as well) was the site of God's presence in the world-indeed of God's Word or Wisdom as a mediator figure-was a very widespread one in the thought-world of first century and even second-century Judaism.
Leslie W. Barnard, Justin Martyr: His Life and Thought.

As a natural consequence of messianism of the late 2nd temple period, in some circles the Logos was assigned a new role, heavenly Messiah. We see this in popular writings like 1 Enoch. 1 Enoch regarded as scripture by some NT writers wherein a supernatural being with a human or human appearing Son of Man.

For from the beginning the Son of Man (man) was hidden,
and the Most High preserved him in the Presence of His might,
and he revealed him to the chosen. . . .
And all the kings and the mighty and the exalted and those who rule the land will fall on their faces in his presence; and they will worship and set their hope on the Son of Man,
and they will supplicate and petition for mercy from him.

This mirrors the Son of Man section of Daniel in thought and wording. While the "son of Man has been debated to be variously an alternative name/form of Yahweh, Michael and by later Christians as Jesus, in fact they are all right. The figure is fated to save the Jews as the Most High's agent. While identification with Yahweh might surprise, recall that it was Yahweh's appearance as a man that started all this.

As was discussed here in other threads the Son of Man's description as 'rider on the clouds' suggests a Yahweh/Baal connection but yet Michael is later in the section identified as the savior of the Jews. This might represent a later hand attempting to clarify, as Michael the Great Prince (who is like God) was also another of the names of the Great Angel/second power. Christian writers had Jesus self-identify as that Son of Man figure and Son of God, which is why the audience accused him of blaspheme. He was identifying as an emanation of God i.e. God.

Another theological element of the times was the Adam Elyon, heavenly Man concept. Philo speaks of this as well. It all revolves around the two creation stories in Genesis but in the end, there is a 'heavenly man' and the earthly. Various Christain sects link the concepts, the Logos, Son of Man and the Heavenly Adam.

At a point now lost to us (mid 1rst century BCE-mid 1rst century CE) this Logos, Son of God personified emanation became the focus of a new Jewish sect. That group itself soon splintered into sects, in some cases over the matter of the Jewish Law. For instance, the Elcesaites retained a fully Jewish perspective of the Law, denied Paul, but were anchored in Christian mystic concepts that later Church fathers deemed heretical. that The Ascension of Isaiah (minus some later interpolations) appears to represent an early (preGospel) form of worship that embraced the concept of the second power. The writer clearly says Adam, Abel and all the righteous worshipped the Angel of the Most High also called the Glory of God. The distinct aspect is the description of this figure descending though the levels of heaven in disguise as a man of flesh and eventually being killed by demonic enemies by being hung on a tree.