Posts by KalebOutWest

7

Oscar's Butt Plugs

by peacefulpete in

i'm actually embarrassed to say i watched the everything everywhere all at once movie on a plane.

kung fu with butt plugs and dildoes with a storyline impossible to follow.

i can't believe michelle yeoh agreed to it.

Everything Everwhere All at Once may not be everyone's piece of cake. A friend of mine did not like it either but enjoyed Tar far more, another choice for best picture, which was perhaps a lot more disturbing of a film to some since it deals with a fictional character at the center of cancel culture (what they must go to when "ignoring it all").

But Everything Everwhere..., despite all the craziness, is simply about a mother who could have lived all these various other lives, where in other worlds were far more special, but when given the choice to suddenly do so, choses to live the simpler life of living as a struggling business owner, in a marriage that has been struggling, carring for an aging father, and learning to love a lesbian daughter and her new girlfriend--something that comes new to her. As described by one of the directors: "I wanted to put my mom in The Matrix."

17

Interpretation of Acts 15:28,29

by Christianhonest in

what does the mandate to "abstain from blood" mean for jehovah's witnesses freed from the control of the governing body?.

it had previously been understood that the best translation of acts 15: 28-30 was "to abstain from blood.

" however, a careful analysis of the passage shows that the best translation of this passage is "to abstain from (shedding) blood," where the word "pour out," which does not appear in ancient manuscripts and other biblical versions, does.it appears there understood in elliptical form.in the same way it happened in the case of colossians 1: 16-20 where the new world translation of the holy scriptures correctly inserted the word "other" several times, understood there in elliptical form, in the phrase of the original greek "all things ", thus obtaining the correct translation" all (other) things ".even though christianity reaffirms itself in translating this passage as saying that "through him all things were created", because he maintains that jesus is god according to his pagan doctrine of the trinity, multiple biblical passages sustainthe biblical truth that jesus is not jehovah god, but his beloved son that god later used as his creative partner.according to this paul said that "though he existed in the form of god, he did not give consideration to a usurpation, namely, that he should be equal to god, no, rather, he emptied himself and took the form of a slave and he came to be in the likeness of men, more than that, when he was in the manner of a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death, yes, death on a torture stake, for this same reason, also, god he exalted a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above all else, so that in jesus' name every knee of those [who are] in heaven and those who are [over] the earth and those [who are] under the ground, and openly recognize * every tongue that jesus christ is lord for the glory of god the father.

KalebOutWest

Welcome Christianhonest.

From my days as a religion teacher (I am now retired) I can say you are correct. You would have received an A in my class.

Acts 15.28-29 is actually the proclamation of the earlier discussion in verses 19-21. There the council is discussing what seems to be the Noahide Laws.

We have to shed our Watchtower upbringing--completely throw it away--and think about what is happening here. This is a Jewish congregation of practicing Jews that followed the Torah, 100%, living in Jerusalem, practicing at the Temple itself, observing kashrut of all things (eating kosher--see Acts 10 for how Peter tells God in a vision he won't eat the non-kosher animals God offers him even though Peter is hungry).

The only difference between this congregation is that they believe the Jewish Messiah has come, in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, that is all. They don't even yet believe he is divine or that Gentiles came in. Right now they are kind of not sure who this "Paul" guy even is.

They do Jewish--and in a big way, and if you read the rest of Acts and history, Jewish Christians will keep doing this until the Bar Kokhba revolt in the 130s CE...and then the Jerusalem church goes down with the rest of the Jews.

This is important because the Jews aren't concerned about telling the Gentiles not to drink blood. Think about it. It's the exact same thing that happens with Jews and Christians today, nothing is changing.

If you ask a Jew if they think a Gentile can get into the Afterlife (if there is one--Jews aren't decided or sure on that), they are decided on one thing: just follow the Noahide Laws.

Remember that they've decided not to impose the laws of kashrut (or kosher) upon the Gentiles, meaning they are not going to be discussing what not to eat, so obviously the laws are going to be light on the discussion on dietary restrictions.

In verse 20, James proposes the following, likely due to four elements found in Pagan (that is Roman, not heathen, which is non-Roman or Hellenistic, which is Greek) worship, so that Gentiles refrain from:

Things polluted by idols
Incest (the Greek word pornia means illegal or improper sexual activity)
Eating Inhumanely (Consuming living and strangled creatures showed disrespect for life)
Bloodshed (Justice; shedding blood and from failing to establish justice)

Leviticus 17-18 makes similar demands of non-citizens who choose to dwell in the land, so it seems that this is what they were using as a basis for their decision-making.

We also have to take into account that the Book of Acts was finalized in Koine Greek. The events took place in Aramaic and Biblical Hebrew. So the words you read in English are translations of translations.

That means "abstain from blood" is a Hebrewism and not a Hellenism or Greek expression. You have to remember to read it that way, as Christianhonest wisely points out.

This is a Jewish council of rabbis. James is a rabbi, not a "Christian priest" or "elder." While this came to be known as the Jerusalem Church and it disappeared in 135 CE during the Bar Kokhba revolt, it was really a Jewish establishment that thought of itself as a Jewish council with one exception, that they found the Jewish Messiah. They thus did everything else by the Jewish book, and we here made exceptions for Gentiles so they could worship in ways different from them.

So you have to read Acts not like a Jehovah's Witness. You have to read it like a Greek translation of a Jewish world.

53

1975 on the back burner

by Fisherman in

“1975” still marks 6000 years from the creation of adam in wt calendar.

according to “all scriptures inspired” book, there is a gap between the creation of adam and the creation of eve and her marriage to adam.

it was at that point in time when eve was created that marked the end of the 6th creative day and the beginning of god’s rest, the 7th day as recorded in genesis.

KalebOutWest

A footnote:

This is why C.T. Russell made his announcement that the Gentile Times ended in October of 1914 and the Annual Meeting takes place in the Autumn.

Russell believed that the Gentile Times ended on Rosh Hashanah, according to his calculations, in 1914 of that year.

And the Annual Meeting was set to occur on the same date too. This was based on the calculations made by the SDA church that holds their celebrations of Jewish festivals for their Christian congregations. Sometimes they do these things according to the Jewish calendar, but sometimes they, like Russell, believe the Jews have it wrong. (Nisan 14 is one of those other calculations that Russell believed the SDA church over the Jews.)

But the Creation, according to Jewish tradition (and JW theology) is in the autumn of the year--and that is also noted in the "Sons of God" book where 1975 first appears--and now you know why.

53

1975 on the back burner

by Fisherman in

“1975” still marks 6000 years from the creation of adam in wt calendar.

according to “all scriptures inspired” book, there is a gap between the creation of adam and the creation of eve and her marriage to adam.

it was at that point in time when eve was created that marked the end of the 6th creative day and the beginning of god’s rest, the 7th day as recorded in genesis.

KalebOutWest

I think one of the reasons they may have stopped is because they ran into some problem calculating what a "day" actually stood for.

In Genesis each "day" is basically "evening" until "morning" as in Genesis 1.5 which states "and there was evening and there was morning, a first day."

It doesn't even say if this was a 12-hour day. 12-hour days only occur at certain times of the year from certain places on the surface of the globe. According to Jewish tradition, this was Rosh Hashanah: autumn, and there are no 12-hour days in the autumn from evening to morning.

To add to this paradox the Hebrews did not believe that the earth was a sphere in Genesis chapter one but a flat platter over which a half bowl was tossed over, the firmament, upon which the sun, moon, and stars were affixed. This firmament kept out the heavenly or cosmos of waters from falling upon the earth (the dividing of the waters above from the waters below was established by the firmament which was named "sky", remember?)...

So there was no globe or hemisphere over which to pinpoint a spot for seasons for 12 or 24-hour days to calculate and divide the years to start the march of prophetic years the Millerites had divised and that Franz had pulled out of the old hat to come up with 1975.

Like the Mormons have done with many of their old teachings and some of the failed prophecies, the Watchtower stops talking about things and hopes that people forget. The less people talk about stuff, the less people remember. The less they remember, the less it becomes considers official teaching.

That's the way it works in Mormonland. And that's the way 1975 has been working in Watchtowerland too.

If you try to dig it up, people shrug. And it doesn't work when you compare it to both critical academic theology and tradition teachings. Watchtower likes it that way. They learned this little trick from the Mormon leadership.

So you won't hear anymore speculations about Biblical creative days anytime soon...or probably ever again.

53

1975 on the back burner

by Fisherman in

“1975” still marks 6000 years from the creation of adam in wt calendar.

according to “all scriptures inspired” book, there is a gap between the creation of adam and the creation of eve and her marriage to adam.

it was at that point in time when eve was created that marked the end of the 6th creative day and the beginning of god’s rest, the 7th day as recorded in genesis.

KalebOutWest

I have a moment to add before I close and I don't want to add much further.

I was born a Jew, left in the hands of my JW aunt for 10 years, and returned to Judaism as an adult.

"Chumash" is a codex as opposed to a scroll which is a "sofer."

Etymologically speaking, chumash came into Yiddish/Askenazi usasge from Hebrew since the Hebrew word for five is also "chumash" and in a codex, the Torah is divided into "fifths," namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

And Jews do not, repeat, not see the Torah and the Talmud as the same.

53

1975 on the back burner

by Fisherman in

“1975” still marks 6000 years from the creation of adam in wt calendar.

according to “all scriptures inspired” book, there is a gap between the creation of adam and the creation of eve and her marriage to adam.

it was at that point in time when eve was created that marked the end of the 6th creative day and the beginning of god’s rest, the 7th day as recorded in genesis.

KalebOutWest

When used for a book, it's actually Yiddish, not Hebrew.

I'm a Jew. The Hebrew word for five, got coined by the Askhenazi Jews as a term for a codex Torah.

I speak and pray in Hebrew, Ladino, and Yiddish.

I am a practing Reconstructionist Jew

I am not going to debate further. I have a flight to catch

53

1975 on the back burner

by Fisherman in

“1975” still marks 6000 years from the creation of adam in wt calendar.

according to “all scriptures inspired” book, there is a gap between the creation of adam and the creation of eve and her marriage to adam.

it was at that point in time when eve was created that marked the end of the 6th creative day and the beginning of god’s rest, the 7th day as recorded in genesis.

KalebOutWest

Fisherman,

Actually, "chumash" is a technical term, and while I understand what you personally mean, it is not an exclusive synonym for "Torah." It means "codex" or a book in codex form. It often is used for a book like the Torah in codex format, but can also mean the Hebrew or even the Christian Bible in codex format as opposed to scrolls.

Reform Jews have not traditionally taught that the Torah was allegorical as whole, since it does not contain merely narratives, and not all of its narratives are the same. Some of its narratives are mythology and some are folklore and the rest is law. Allegory does not apply to folklore nor to all forms of mythology.

There are also strands of history--very little--and, since 1999, there are some Reform scholars who now believe that some of the events described are more historical that Reform has held to be myth. A great change happened in that movement where English (or the vernacular) was dropped and Hebrew was adopted as well as tradtional garb and traditions were reincorporated in imitation of Reconstructionism. (The claim was a rising "response to secularism.") Alongside this has been a growing view of more traditionalism in view of the Biblical narrative in Reform Judaism. Some are even reconsidering the historicity of the Exodus.

53

1975 on the back burner

by Fisherman in

“1975” still marks 6000 years from the creation of adam in wt calendar.

according to “all scriptures inspired” book, there is a gap between the creation of adam and the creation of eve and her marriage to adam.

it was at that point in time when eve was created that marked the end of the 6th creative day and the beginning of god’s rest, the 7th day as recorded in genesis.

KalebOutWest

Try The Jewish Study Bible which houses the latest revision, the 1985 JPS English translation of the Hebrew Bible. The introduction to Genesis and the footnotes to Genesis chapter 1 will not only tell you what I wrote, but also give you a table demonstrating the tableu motif of how days 1-3 of the creative week set the stage for days 4-6. Not only is this the standard English translation accepted by all denominations (and created by them), the footnotes and study materials were created by the best scholars from all Jewish denominations as well.

Another Jewish Bible of interest is the one created by Conservative movement. Using the same NJPS English text, but also housing the Masoretic text, it has their scholars giving commentary representing the views of Conservative Judaism. Known as Etz Hayim: Torah and Commentary, it was not only lightly referenced in my post, it also teaches such things such as the Exodus not being historical and Moses not being a historical figure--which is common in Judaism.

Why do we Jews count our years the way we do if we agree that the Genesis account is a Biblical myth? Blame Rabbi Yose ben Halafta of the 2nd century CE and then thank Maimonides of the 12th century CE.

First, Halafta tried to create a calendar based on a tradition from the Talmud that Adam was created on the first day of Rosh Hashana. His calculations weren't very good, and Jews basically ignored his ideas.

But around the middle ages, Jews decided they needed a calendar of their own, perhaps in response to presure from Christian society. Halafta's calendar tried to calculate the day based on the Torah's narrative that Adam was created on the 6th day, but the year and the system didn't always seem to work. The new moons didn't match, festival days would disappear or end up on the wrong month or in different season. It was not scientific.

But Jews liked the tradition of it all, and it fit the liturgy. So keeping the ideas, the famous scholar Maimonides found ways to fix it, finding a way of inserting leap months, and having to reset the entire calendar (which required to drop an entire year). We use this system to this day.

The Maimonides system actually begins with the year "0," which is unusual for a calendar, even though Jews cannot guaratee that Adam and Eve were real people--but it fixed a lot of problems and helped to preserve some of the system.

One last source, though not always agreeing with all the points I mentioned, but they do debate them--whether the Exodus is historical for instance or Moses wrote any of the Torah--is produced by Orthodox (you read that correctly) scholars, and can be found online at https://www.thetorah.com/. I have heard from Orthodox rabbis of Yeshiva students crying when learning that Moses not writing the Torah, and now what?

53

1975 on the back burner

by Fisherman in

“1975” still marks 6000 years from the creation of adam in wt calendar.

according to “all scriptures inspired” book, there is a gap between the creation of adam and the creation of eve and her marriage to adam.

it was at that point in time when eve was created that marked the end of the 6th creative day and the beginning of god’s rest, the 7th day as recorded in genesis.

KalebOutWest

To answer peacefulpete:

Genesis 1 says man and woman were made at the same time. So which creation story is more authoritative?

Upon returning to my Jewish roots after leaving my "lovely time" studying Watcthowers for about a decade (actually I loved my aunt, she was a very nice woman regardless of her odd beliefs), this is what I eventually learned in Hebrew school.

Genesis chapter 1 is likely the last part of the Torah ever written--the newest section. (Funny, huh?) But this is often true with most books even today. Once you know how a book ends (in this case, Deuteronomy), you want to start the book with a "bang."

There are several creation "myths" (origin stories that followed a format common to Bronze Age Mesopotamia) in Genesis, and this one sets the stage for older creation myth that follows (one that was likely composed in Babylonian exile).

Neither is more "authoritative" than the other in Judaism as they are not specifying a time period, but a law, as this Torah, not history as the Watchtower teaches. Remember in Judaism, Genesis through Deuteronomy make up the Mosaic Law, not a Jewish history book, and therefore any narrative within is designed to teach a lesson to set legal precedence, not to explain what happened in the past.

The "days" in Genesis chapter 1 are actually a common narrative device in Mesopotamian storytelling. If you notice the first 3 days actually repeat themselves in the last 3 days, where day 1 sets the stage for day 4, day 2 for 5, and 3 for 6, creating a high degree of symmetry (for instance, God says: "Let there be light" on day 1, "setting the stage" for the 4th day where God creates the luminaries of the sun, moon and stars, then on day 2 God creates the heavens to separate the waters on earth from the waters of the cosmos, "setting the stage" for the 5th day where God creates the birds to fly in the sky and the fish to swim in the seas, etc.)

The narrative ends with the creation of humans, made "in God's image" who rests on the Sabbath. This tells the Jews that they too, since they are in God's image, must rest on the Sabbath and obey the Law.

This is a prologue for the older story that follows next, where Adam and Eve want to be "like God," even though they are already in God's image. After they steal from God, they cover themselves up, considering themselves "naked," hating their "image," feeling shame. When God called for Adam in the garden, Adam 'fails to listen.' The story is about breaking one of the Ten Commandments (stealing), symbolizing the Jews losing the Promised Land and their Temple due to breaking the covenant, looking back from the exile in Babylon and wondering if they will ever get back.

It is very interesting how and why various Christian movement developed time prophecies from these stories. Jews never read them as history. When you open a Jewish Bible and simply read the footnotes and any study appendix that may be added, it is all there. Yet it remains highly ignored.

I recall when I lived among the Witnesses, studying about 1975 since the elder who studied the Live Forever book with me came in the Watchtower religion due to the 1975 fervor. I also recall how when I was young someone in my town had black-and-white posters and stickers printed and stuck them all over the place in 1975 that read "Jehovah is coming." I never made the connection back then until I met him and we talked about it. He didn't recall the stickers, but I did, and I thought it was all so very odd.

I also remember doing extra research on many of the calculations used. Most of them are borrowed from the Millerites and Adventism. The most frightening I learned was that much of this is based on the failed prediction of the Great Disappointment of 1844.

Remember 1874, the original date for the "invisible presence" of Christ? They changed it to 1914. Where did they get that? Russell decided that it was prophecied to add "thirty years" to the Great Disappointment of 1844, and that would end in 1874. In other words, Russell was just saying Christ was testing people to see if people would still wait for him after being disappointed the first time to therefore notice him coming in full invisibility 30 years later in 1874.--Millenial Dawn, "Thy KIngdom Come" (Vol III), 1st Ed, 1891, pp 123, 124.

92

Chance or intelligent design?

by ExBethelitenowPIMA in

cofty could you answer how the single cell came about by chance?.

i know the argument for complexity in nature says natural selection over billions of years but this could not explain the complexity of the single cell the building blocks of life?.

KalebOutWest

Ever since the creation of the world God’s eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been seen and understood through the things God has made. So they are without excuse...--Romans 1.20, NRSVue.

Jehovah's Witnesses love to use this text to support that nature and the Bible prove some sort of design, and that Paul was saying that we have proof in what we see around us that God created the world.

But this isn't exactly what Paul was writing to the Romans. What chapter one is about (and in fact the rest of Romans) is how Christians related to the Jews and the Roman state--specifically the act of sacrificing to the emperor and his image, which Jews normally were exempt.

What Paul was trying to argue in Romans is that Christians were Jews, spiritually speaking, and thus could demand that they too were legally exempt from sacrificing too. We know this because this is what happened historically, and Rome didn't allow it when the Christians attempted this argument, and eventually the Romans began to start putting the Christians in prison when they refused to do this act. When they continued to refuse to do this in prison, the Christians (who still claimed they were Jews by means of the argument of Paul in Romans) were either beheaded, fed to animals, burned at the stake, or crucified.

Romans 1.20 is in reference to this argument, the "they" is the Romans who worship the image of their leaders as gods. They also used eagles and bears and other animals and such as symbols of power, and this is what Paul is referencing in the verses around the text.

What Paul is stating is not that there is clear evidence in nature that God created the world, but he is playing off the expression "divine nature," which the Romans used for their emperors, which they claimed for themselves. Clearly no Roman ruler had the power to create the world or the sea or the heavens, as they knew it then, is what Paul was stating, and that there was obviously some unseen power behind this that they didn't have, so that those who did engage in the act of sacrifice to the emperor or were trying to force them to were being unreasonable. Roman rulers neither created the world or controlled the forces of nature.

It is not a scientific claim, however. Nor is it a statement about design. It is basically stating: "My God is like this, as you can tell by what my God created. What has your Roman god created? Nothing? Obviously!"

There are similar arguments in the Qumran writings contrasting the Roman regime and their demands regarding sacrifice to the emperor as well as from Philo.