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:.
I'm assuming you didn't read the link provided.
In short, a failed prophecy in Isaiah 19 declaring Assyria and Egypt would convert to Yahwism and a 'stone' monument built to Yahweh in Egypt, and the publication of coded Pyramid measurements that seemingly contained scientific facts only God would have known, was all to coincidental to Russell's mind.
His fascination was not unique, it was shared by other Adventists of the day.
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:.
It was a fad. Not making excuses for anyone, but stupidity is different than demonic conspiracy.
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:.
The WT doctrines are hardly a 'clearer understanding' of the texts of the Bible. Theirs, like all church doctrines depend upon selective reading and eisegesis. The Catholic church at least has a core tenet that revelation is progressive, (Progressive revelation (Christianity) - Wikipedia) that is actually a much more mature approach to the diverse collection of writings in the Bible. The WT basically glosses the writings and misses or disregards the changing character of Judaism and later Christianity.
Ironically, they then use a similar progressive revelation excuse for their own adjustments in doctrine.
not sure if anyone really remembers this case, it was huge at the time.
the very interesting point though about this was that at the time the parents were known to be very active in the jw religion.
i also believe that the father may have been an elder(i could be mistaken, though).
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.
Your mistake is assuming a single 'Biblical' opinion regarding the future of the earth. The classic Jewish notion that they would become vindicated and dominate the world lingered in some Christian quarters but lapsed away in others. Revelation as a collection of reworked Jewish apocalypse scenes retains the idea that after a global war of evil the mirror Jerusalem would descend and bridge heaven and earth. In reading the abundant Jewish apocalyptic writings and commentary one comes away with a blending of Persian and Greek concepts. The Persian belief in a global battle between good and evil combined with the Greek concept of a decaying natural world ending then renewed in cyclical fashion. Many of these writings use expressions such as 'great conflagration' or 'rolling up' of the universe to be followed by a new heavens and new earth. They did not mean these as simple expressions referring to government and society, no, the very fabric of the universe was refined by fire or violent change and replaced/renewed/regenerated. As this eschatological concept developed a few centuries prior to the Jewish Messianic concept, the two have an inevitable but loosely defined connection. Jewish scholars have debated the minutia for nearly 2000 years.
Unsurprisingly there were subtle and not so subtle differences in the details, objectives and the role of Israel in all this. It follows the same is true of the NT. It would seem obvious that some texts assume a similar conflagration and replacement concept. But in other circles the shift away from eschatological thinking is obvious. The Gospel John goes to pains to avoid language of future imminent destruction and features what's called a 'realized eschatology', the Kingdom was here and now, and his disciples could be part of it.
is there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
Perhaps it might be good to remember that most of the research on these issues was done by Christians. not "atheists." It is possible to do intellectually honest research and still believe in mystery, it's again, a different form of Christianity than you are familiar with.
Since we all here have been in your position we understand very well, the inner gymnastics of belief and the inner struggle to keep it when faced with disconfirming evidence.
is there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
Regarding the mention of Caiaphas in the stories, it really is interesting. Mark the first has a generic "High Priest". Luke also leaves the High Priest unnamed in the arrest story. Matt names the High Priest as Caiaphas. The writer of John on the other hand originally named the High Priest as Annas but later efforts to harmonize the stories led to the insertion of lines that have Jesus brought to and tried by High Priest Annas who then hands him over to High Priest Caiaphas. The text reads easily without the insertions:
12 Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus. They bound him 13 and brought him first to Annas,who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year. 14Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jewish leaders that it would be good if one man died for the people.(Reference to 11:49,50 an obvious interruptive addition)
15 Simon Peter and another disciple were following Jesus. Because this disciple was known to the high priest, he went with Jesus into the high priest’s courtyard, 16 but Peter had to wait outside at the door. The other disciple, who was known to the high priest, came back, spoke to the servant girl on duty there and brought Peter in.
17 “You aren’t one of this man’s disciples too, are you?” she asked Peter.
He replied, “I am not.”
18 It was cold, and the servants and officials stood around a fire they had made to keep warm. Peter also was standing with them, warming himself.
19 Meanwhile, the high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching.
20 “I have spoken openly to the world,” Jesus replied. “I always taught in synagogues or at the temple, where all the Jews come together. I said nothing in secret. 21 Why question me? Ask those who heard me. Surely, they know what I said.”
22 When Jesus said this, one of the officials nearby slapped him in the face. “Is this the way you answer the high priest?” he demanded.
23 “If I said something wrong,” Jesus replied, “testify as to what is wrong. But if I spoke the truth, why did you strike me?” 24Then Annas sent him bound to Caiaphas the high priest.25 Meanwhile, Simon Peter was still standing there warming himself. So, they asked him, “You aren’t one of his disciples too, are you?”
He denied it, saying, “I am not.”
26 One of the high priest’s servants, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, challenged him, “Didn’t I see you with him in the garden?” 27 Again Peter denied it, and at that moment a rooster began to crow.
28 Then the Jewish leaders took Jesusfrom Caiaphasto the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness they did not enter the palace, because they wanted to be able to eat the Passover. 29 So Pilate came out to them and asked, “What charges are you bringing against this man?”
The abundant manuscripts variations in this section reveal an unsettled attempt to harmonize with Matthew.
In short, the progression of a generic High Priest in Mark was interpreted as Annas by the writer of John but Caiaphas by the writer of Matthew. John was then interpolated to try to harmonize but this still creates contradictions and the strange use of the term High Priest for both men in the same paragraph.
is there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
The 16th century copy of Pliny that contains the excerpt declares only that a figure named 'Christ' 'was worshipped as a god" and Christians had predawn chants and shared meals together. (love feasts of Paul?) This was ostensibly written about 112CE.
Pliny offers no evidence of a Jesus walking around Judea. The absence of some reference to him as a man may support the position that the Christians he examined did not know the Gospel story or understood it as dramatization.
is there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
There are some people born blind and deaf. They never see anything and never hear anything, and yet they still can learn that sound and sight exist without personally experiencing "evidence" in the way a seeing and hearing person does.
Someone born without senses would be a mental vegetable.
Religious concepts and imagery follow (subsequent) natural world sensory experience. However, what I think you are suggesting is something exists "beyond the senses". That is the domain of spiritualists.
Me, I'm acutely aware of my susceptibility to deception and delusional thinking. I've resolved that 'best evidence' is the best defense.
is there any independently verified evidence that a miracle worker called jesus existed and did the things that the bible said he did?.
the four gospels were written by unknown authors many decades after the so called events, so can't be considered as eyewitness accounts.
i think that there may have been a apocalyptic preacher who was executed by the romans and the story evolved from their.
I agree with Halcon, that religious 'truth' is not hinged upon the tangible. For some of us, that's a deal breaker, for others it elevates the faith. Since I'm not the arbiter of what is a real religion, I can't argue the point. I can, and we have, argued whether the Jesus story as it appears in the relatively late Gospels can be defended with tangible evidence and the answer is, no.
It's a foreign field to die upon, historicity. In the earliest years of Christianity, knowledge (gnosis) and mystery took center place. Now it seems obsessed with shrouds and stone bone boxes.
