Posts by KalebOutWest

15

Is Jesus the Creator?

by Sea Breeze in

that's what the word says.

.

colossians 1:16. for by him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through him and for him..

KalebOutWest

Post Script:

The Feast of the Epiphany marks not only Christ's manifestation to the Gentiles (via the visit by the Magi) but reinforces the manifestation of Emmanuel, or "God with Us"--thus concluding the "Divine Mystery" celebrated 12 days prior.

15

Is Jesus the Creator?

by Sea Breeze in

that's what the word says.

.

colossians 1:16. for by him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through him and for him..

KalebOutWest

Though my mother was a Conservative Jew, my father was a Roman Catholic, and I had a formal Catholic education growing up.

"Christmas" is not the "birthday" of Jesus of Nazareth as taught by Jehovah's Witnesses. They are idiots.

In fact, it is only in English-speaking countries (mostly in the United States and the UK) where the word "Christmas" is employed due to the original Puritan hatred for the it's connection with Roman Catholicism. The title Christmas is derived from the Old English title Cristes Maesse which means “The Mass of Christ.” The actual name of the feast on the liturgical calendar is "The Nativity of our Lord." It is an 8-day solemnity (not a 24-hour celebration) that begins on sundown of December 24th (not the 25th) that celebrates the miracle of the Incarnation, of God taking on flesh to save humanity--but not the actual date of the birth of Jesus, son of Joseph and Mary.

The word in "Noel" in the carol "The First Noel" means "Nativity" in French because they do not call it "Christmas" in France. That is the word "Nativity" in French. The famous Spanish carol, "Feliz Navidad," employs the word in Spanish for "Nativity" as well, "Navidad" because they also do not use the word "Christmas."

Since the feast of the Epiphany follows so closely on January 6th, and there are several feast days for saints in-between, the celebrating generally continues until then, making for "12 Day of Christmas," so to speak, as the famous Christmas carol goes. Like the Jewish feasts that are celebrated for 8 days, the Catholic Church observes its liturgical solemnities for 8 days as well.

There are NO birthdays on the Christian litugical calendar, by the way, not even one for Jesus. All the days that celebrate the saints that are on the liturgical calendar are the day of their deaths, not their births. The only day marked on the liturgical calendar that Christians celebrate with certainty regarding Jesus is the day of his death. We know it as "Good Friday."

11

Fashion in Heaven

by peacefulpete in

why is it that fashions are assumed to have stayed the same in heaven for thousands of years?

you'd think that after wearing the same boring robe for eternity you'd crave something different.

yet no, angels and god are still wearing the same white onesie they had when they vacationed on earth with abraham.

KalebOutWest

What is funnier is that there it is not a "menorah." That symbol is a "chanuchiah," the 9-branched candelabra used only for Chanukah.

A menorah has only 7 branches and nothing else, save perhaps pomegranates or symbols of the 12 Tribes. The Magen David is generally included only on decor for Chanukah.

The Chanukah symbol comes from a fabricated legend after the rabbis rejected the books of 1 & 2 Maccabees from the Jewish canon. The so-called failure of the Hasmonean dynasty (it is blamed for marriage into the Herodian family and bringing Levitical kings to the table instead of Judean kings--and thus "cursing" the Jews...thus inventing the need for the Messiah), the military victory of the Hasmoneans was replaced with a "miracle" of God providing 8 days of oil for the lamp in the Temple (the 9th branch holds a lighter). In reality the Hasmoneans merely celebrated Sukkot (the Festival of Booths) two months late due to the fact that the Hellenistic forces had control over the Temple during the autumn months.

Sukkot is an 8-day feast (as are all Jewish holidays), and thus it became a custom to celebrate the victory of re-dedicating the Temple the same day every year with a "second Sukkot" observance.

Because Christians adopted the Alexandrian Septuagint library as the official Old Testament Canon, and it included the books of Maccabees, this made matters worse--not to mention that Jesus as well as the "outcast" Essenes employed the Book of Daniel as prophecy, also written by the Hasmoneans--the real story "had to be hidden."

Thus the victory symbol of the recaptured Temple was transformed by a religious story involving a "miracle," using a prayer for 8 nights that says "God commanded us to light" these lights, when in reality there is no such command nor miracle anywhere.

I know that is not about clothing and maybe not even funny, but there you go.

11

Fashion in Heaven

by peacefulpete in

why is it that fashions are assumed to have stayed the same in heaven for thousands of years?

you'd think that after wearing the same boring robe for eternity you'd crave something different.

yet no, angels and god are still wearing the same white onesie they had when they vacationed on earth with abraham.

KalebOutWest

I understood this was labeled under "humor." I know that Liberace is not a divine being--except here in my hometown of Las Vegas, where Liberace is indeed worshipped 24/7--literally.

The examples I provided are indeed facts, theological sound, but somewhat humorous in themselves. I find it astounding that my people the Jews would draw a birdman Moses accepting the Ten Commandments from God and bird-headed people crossing the Red Sea on Passover Night in a Passover Haggadah out of reverence for the command against idolatry, disregarding the fact that the Egyptians worshipped deities that looked just like this.

I find it amusing that the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel is covered with nudes, painted by an artist who not only wrote love sonnets to men (over 300, but who's counting).

When Michelangelo's poetry was first published, it was such a "source of discomfort" that the pronouns were originally changed until they were translated into English for the first time in 1893.

Bernadette Soubirous, like most Catholic saints and prophets, was originally hated and disbelieved by the clergy and the Catholic Church. The young maid never claimed to be seeing the Virgin Mary until the local priest demanded that Bernadette ask the woman to produce a miracle and tell her who she was. On her last appearance the woman gave Bernadette a brief explanation: "I am the Immaculate Conception." This was a complex expression regarding a dogma theologians in the Vatican had just agreed upon regarding Mary. Bernadette couldn't read much, let alone had any connections to Vatican discussions.

11

Fashion in Heaven

by peacefulpete in

why is it that fashions are assumed to have stayed the same in heaven for thousands of years?

you'd think that after wearing the same boring robe for eternity you'd crave something different.

yet no, angels and god are still wearing the same white onesie they had when they vacationed on earth with abraham.

KalebOutWest

I assume you might be speaking of illustrations common to the Watchtower and what comes to mind when thinking of famous religious paintings, such as Michaelangelo's work which adorns the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel and other Medieval and Renaissance depictions of angels and the Divine, etc.

There are two particular reasons for this: 1.) Judaism doesn't depict it's mythology and divine symbols, and thus 2.) what you are looking at, for the most part, has to do with Imperial Rome and its sensitivities (or, to be honest, the lack thereof when it comes to the practice of crucifixion and the art of Michaelangelo),

First, Judaism, even in its illuminated manuscripts, did not depict human forms--at least not ancient works. If you look at old Medieval illuminated works, such as very old Passover Haggadahs with Jewish illustrations, the anthropomorphic forms are actually animals with bird-like heads and odd fashions that do not necessarily represent common Jewish clothing. So fearful were Jews of breaking the commandment of creating idols that they did not even create human forms in religious settings.

As for Christians, from the earliest times this Jewish sensitivity, especially in connection with the crucifixion of Jesus (as well as creating any illustration of him), sort of followed. We do, however, see many depictions of "types" or "anti-types" that represent Jesus from the Old Testament (i.e., Jonah and the Whale meant "Jesus," for example, and thus Christians would depict this instead, or a young shepherd carrying a sheep in his arms or over his shoulders, etc.). What has this to do with clothing?

The Crucifixion and Loin Cloths

Despite the rejection of the historical, archeological, and religious evidence, there is another line of support that Jesus of Nazareth died on a cross that the Watchtower doesn't tell its followers about: art. Today it is common to see crucifixes with the corpus (crucified body) of Jesus wearing a loin cloth, whether it is a painting or sculpted form.

However, Jesus did not wear a loin cloth when he was put to death. In fact, not only does the Biblical account make a big fuss about the "big fuss" that the Roman soldiers had over the unique underwear Jesus wore for being a supposedly poor rabbi (John 19:23-24), it was part of what made crucifixion so much worse than the average hanging or impaling. People were hung nude on the side of well-traveled roads, often those walked upon into the main city area so that everybody could see those hanging. Above their heads was a sign that advertised their crime. The victim died slowly of asphixiation over several days and had to urinate and dedicate upon themselves for all to see. It was very shameful.

One of the very first depictions of Jesus on the cross was created not by a Christian but by a Pagan making fun of Christianity and Jesus. Scratched onto a rock surface, the Alexemenos Graffito depicts Jesus in the nude.

Eventually, once Christians felt comfortable enough to depict Jesus in their own art they employed their own tropes to do so, but never as Jesus crucified. First, around the 3rd and 4th century CE, Jesus was depicted as Emperor in royal Roman clothing. Next, there were images where Jesus was depicted with the tropes of Zeus (meaning he had replaced that god or conquered him). Sometimes he was depicted as the "new" Samson of the Old Testament, using powerful muscles to tear down the temples of the false gods! But his clothing reflected the robes of a conquering Pagan god or hero.

When the time came that the crucifixion could finally be depicted by Christians, they themselves placed the loin cloth on Jesus, even though such an invention did not actually exist at the time. The reason? By then Christianity was now the religion of the State, and the sensitivities of the Roman people were that divinities did not depict the divine uncovered in such a state. What we are looking at is an Imperalist invention known as "The Drape."

It was still recognized (to this day) that this is just an artistic device for modesty's sake. Roman Catholicism reminds people during Lent in its liturgy that Jesus Christ was totally naked during his crucifixion, stripped entirely nude, and that this even has a theological connection to his being the Last Adam of 1 Cor 15:45:

Clothing gives a man his social position; it gives him his place in society, it makes him someone. His public stripping means that Jesus is no longer anything at all, he is simply an outcast, despised by all alike. The moment of the stripping reminds us of the expulsion from Paradise: God’s splendour has fallen away from man, who now stands naked and exposed, unclad and ashamed. And so Jesus once more takes on the condition of fallen man.

If you notice in many religious paintings and statues, the more divine in Christianity someone is, the more clothed they are. In Michelangelo's The Creation of Adam, God is clothed, but practically no one else is.

Codes

Clothing generally carries specific color codes in Christian art as well.

When Jesus wears white as opposed to red and blue in a painting, it means something. White represents being holy, whereas red represents the blood of Christ. Blue represents the Divine nature of Jesus and purple his kingship. Depending on the theme of the painting or statue, etc., the colors of the clothing are selected or left out. Often they are opposed to the others in the action in scene.

Mary also has colors used for her as well, with blue often used to represent her virginity. She wears black during scenes of the Passion and Red is often used for the Assumption. (Black is used to a powerful effect for Mary in the film The Passion of the Christ.)

The Apostle Paul is associated with red-colored garments that lean to favor rust.

And on and on and on...

Approved Visions

While I am not the authority, nor am I encouraging it here by mentioning this (and even the Roman Catholic Church does not state that people must believe such things), the Church has rarely stated that a handful of events have their nod of "approval"--meaning that in modern times some people who have claimed to be visited by Jesus or one of the saints might have indeed had some type of supernatural experience (according to the Holy See).

I mention this in line with our "clothing" discussion, because some of these "approved" visionaries discussed, of all things, the clothing of those that "visited" them.

One of the most famous (and curious) is the case of St. Bernadette Soubirous of Lourdes, France who, in 1858, claimed she was visited by "a lady" that only she could see in what was once a hazadous waste dump in a grotto but now the site of a famous spring. While Bernadette at the time did not know that her various visits were that of the Virigin Mary (at 14 the girl had a good memory, but due to a previous illness was not able to get a very formal education for her age) or why others could not see or hear what she was witnessing, she did describe the "lady" in a precise manner repeatedly.

From 11 February to 16 July 1858, she reported 18 visits of the "lady" as wearing a white veil, a blue girdle, with a golden rose on each foot, and holding a rosary of pearls.--from the Lourdes Apparitions, Wikipedia & The Song of Bernadette by Franz Werfel.

Whatever you think of visions or the supernatural, I always thought this was a peculiar amount of detail from a teenage girl.

15

Dip Anyone?

by peacefulpete in

a quick comment regarding how subsequent gospel writers often felt an irresistible need to clarify or expand upon their sources.

in the last supper story, the gospel that came to be named after mark 14 has jesus declare that one of the twelve who eats with him from the same bowl will betray him.

17 and evening having come, he cometh with the twelve,18 and as they are reclining, and eating, jesus said, `verily i say to you -- one of you, who is eating with me -- shall deliver me up.

KalebOutWest

joey jojo wrote:

Kaleb, I thought my life growing up as a JW was tedious and I particularly resented the chafing I felt at having my life dictated by the beliefs of my parents, even if some were beneficial.
It amazes me hearing about all the traditional rituals that practising Jews (and others) follow. I'm not necessarily saying it's all bad, however, to me at least, there is something disturbing about having every aspect of your life and how you spend your time pre-determined.

peacefulpete gave the perfect answer. This is why I can see peacefulpete as a professor teaching at some university somewhere.

Jews don't have leaders or pastors or popes. A rabbi is not their authority or master. The Mosaic Law does not dictate to Jews what to do with their day or how to live each moment of their lives. If life were so simple and I really had such a guide, all my daily troubles would be over.

In reality a lot of what you might be suspecting comes from what you admitted--your past experience with the Witnesses. They tend to decipher Jewish life that way because the New Testament is written using rhetoric and not genuine language. Witnesses, as you know, read the Bible literally. The Gospels tell stories of Pharisees dictating a "heavy-burdened" life for Jews.

Jews, on the other hand, live on a theological spectrum. One moment we feel like being very zealous and want to follow every one of our cultural traditions. The next day we want to be like Paul Rudd and practice his type of Judaism, eating every slice of bacon we can find. We love HaShem one moment, argue with Him the next, deny His existence the day after that, and become pious Jews the next. We can and do all this all the time.

It's why we're the Children of Israel (meaning "He Who Wrestles with God") and not Jehovah's Witnesses (those who blindly listen and obey everything that comes from the Governing Body). We are a free people, struggling with an Ineffable God that we don't know, don't comprehend, cannot see or understand, and is probably not even an entity. (Many of us don't even believe in God.)

Our God is not a "God-Is-Love" God or "Ask-and-Ye-Shall-Receive" God or "I-Can-Do-Anything" God. Ours is the God who answered the poor smuck Job who was merely asking questions: "Who are you to ask questions of Me?" Ours is the God who told Moses who asked Him for a Name: "I Am However I Wish to Self-Identify Myself As, So There! Nyah!"

We kind of act the same way in response. It's a push and pull, a tug-of-war, a love-hate relationship that works. Kind of. Well not all the time. But the bagels are good.

Some of us are very serious--but I tell you, that even those serious people have their days where they dance across the rainbow of Jewish possibilities. It's never what it looks like on the outside. "Nobody puts baby in the corner" and forces them to do anything. (Hey, that happened in a Jewish context in that movie--hmmm.)

A good read on this is the book Open Judaism: A Guide for Believers, Atheists and Agnostics by Barry L. Schwartz published in 2023 by JPS. (And that is "believers, atheists and agnostics" among us Jews, not among you non-Jews--that should tell you something.) It will open your eyes if you think you know how we Jews live and what we believe.

With that, I have to prepare for Shabbat dinner on my end. Shabbat shalom!

15

Dip Anyone?

by peacefulpete in

a quick comment regarding how subsequent gospel writers often felt an irresistible need to clarify or expand upon their sources.

in the last supper story, the gospel that came to be named after mark 14 has jesus declare that one of the twelve who eats with him from the same bowl will betray him.

17 and evening having come, he cometh with the twelve,18 and as they are reclining, and eating, jesus said, `verily i say to you -- one of you, who is eating with me -- shall deliver me up.

KalebOutWest

You are looking at a rare Sephardic Haggadah from the 4th century, CE. It is so rare that it was placed on Sefaria, the library you are looking at.

It is famous for several things, especially that word, kazayit, which nobody really knows the exact meaning of. The Haggadah talks about practices that are not followed or observed by Jews prior to it or after--or if they are, we don't understand the words, which is likely the problem.

I am Sephardic. Our language is Ladino, but it went through various revisions, and this is likely the cause of some of the problems for some of the puzzles caused with some of the vocabulary.

Kazayit is believed to mean "pea-sized" or perhaps, better yet the size of an olive. But then the question is are we being asked to dip the size of what which is kazayit? The bread? What is between the bread? What is mixed between the bread, as like a sandwich? And why?

There is the Hillel sandwich custom, which might have come from the 1st century according to tradition. But it is not dipped into the water nor is any portion taken from it to be eaten separately it. So the above that you quoted is curious but is definitely neither universal or understood.

I do not offer my opinions in my post. As you put it:

We may not agree on everything, but I enjoy your perspective.

I try never to offer my personal perspective. The perspective belongs to others, those of the JPS, SBL, friends of mine on the CBA, USCCB, and other academics I have worked with and have been my teachers.

I haven't anymore time, but I do hope you do take my advice that I think that there is more than sticking to one's personal views and trying to reinvent the wheel all the time. If you don't start with a foundation, you can't even learn to properly use the tools that are out there. I think you have a great mind and talent. You just need to discipline yourself to know that there are basic facts that are such-and-such and that these things are not as problematic or do not matter as much as you worry about.

In order to put you three-dimensional thinking to work, you need to start at a foundation. I hope you take my advice. You have the workings of a great educator.

Have a great holiday season or whatever, and a happy new year.

15

Dip Anyone?

by peacefulpete in

a quick comment regarding how subsequent gospel writers often felt an irresistible need to clarify or expand upon their sources.

in the last supper story, the gospel that came to be named after mark 14 has jesus declare that one of the twelve who eats with him from the same bowl will betray him.

17 and evening having come, he cometh with the twelve,18 and as they are reclining, and eating, jesus said, `verily i say to you -- one of you, who is eating with me -- shall deliver me up.

KalebOutWest

I was observing the High Holy Days which took over most of late September to prepare for this year, began with Rosh Hashanah in the beginning of October and did not end until right before Halloween with Sukkot.

I am about to disappear again now due to Thanksgiving and prep for Chanukah. I have family that observes Christmas, thus I will be busy.

15

Dip Anyone?

by peacefulpete in

a quick comment regarding how subsequent gospel writers often felt an irresistible need to clarify or expand upon their sources.

in the last supper story, the gospel that came to be named after mark 14 has jesus declare that one of the twelve who eats with him from the same bowl will betray him.

17 and evening having come, he cometh with the twelve,18 and as they are reclining, and eating, jesus said, `verily i say to you -- one of you, who is eating with me -- shall deliver me up.

KalebOutWest

If you read any study Bible, like say the new SBL, it will always tell you, the author of John purposefully doesn't have a Seder or Passover. Instead the events of Passion are changed for theological purposes to Nisan 14 in order for Jesus to die at 3 pm, the hour that slaughtering of the Passover lambs begins in the Temple by the priests.

In John's gospel there is no Seder, only the washing of the feet and the discourse. There is a meal, and the anti-communion but no Passover. In John's gospel Jesus is "the lamb that takes away the sin of the world." John's gospel is a "signs" gospel, not a narrative.

Mark is the first or one of the first Gospels written. (According to the SBL the Mark-first theory is now in jeopardy and the traditional view that Matthew is first now seems promising.) All of the texts come from a Jewish and for the Jewish Christian community.

The text about "making all foods clean" at Mark 7:19 cannot be about relaxing kashrut (kosher) laws because when Peter, after Pentecost, receives his famous rooftop vision to "slaughter and eat," he tells God he has never eaten anything that wasn't kosher. (Acts 10) Later in Acts 21, Paul visits the Jewish Christians and gets arrested for demonstrating that he lives the Law of Moses just like other Jewish Christians.

The traditional take is that Mark is the secretary of Peter, and that the Gospel is Peter's take on the matter. I think that is more of a tradition. But, I think it is safe to assume that the text is not talking about the laws of kashrut, otherwise Peter and these Jewish Christians would have stopped observing these laws, like the bishop of Jerusalem, James whose representatives observed kosher and caused the problem that led to the division between Paul and Peter.

Mark's words are about whether it was necessary to visit the mikvah after each time one went to the market. The Pharisees said yes, since priests washed after handling sacrifices. The Pharisees also washed their foods and any bags and vessels they carried they products in.

Jesus was teaching that since the markets already sold kosher food (as they were within the walks of Jerusalem) then all foods were clean. Nobody needed to visit a mikvah (a ceremony bath) to be made clean either.

As for the Passover Seder in the other Gospels, they occur on the 15th of Nisan. This is why Jehovah's Witnesses have a problem dating the Memorial. Christians read the Passion account from John during Lent, and Pastor Russell thought this was literal. He dated the death of Jesus based on the Lenten readings used by the very churches he condemned.

I suggest it might be advantageous for you to take a college course in theology as well as Biblical history. I think you would enjoy both.

You post interesting things. I think you would make a great instructor. You should think about teaching on the academic level.

15

Dip Anyone?

by peacefulpete in

a quick comment regarding how subsequent gospel writers often felt an irresistible need to clarify or expand upon their sources.

in the last supper story, the gospel that came to be named after mark 14 has jesus declare that one of the twelve who eats with him from the same bowl will betray him.

17 and evening having come, he cometh with the twelve,18 and as they are reclining, and eating, jesus said, `verily i say to you -- one of you, who is eating with me -- shall deliver me up.

KalebOutWest

If you tell someone you were "carving pumpkins," you might expect them to imagine you were celebrating or observing Halloween. But if the person you were talking to lived in a country that had no Christians and did not observe the day (it is actually a North American phenomenon), they would not necessarily catch on.

The same goes for what you are reading here. The idea of "dipping" has to do with being at a Passover Seder in which foods are slightly touched or nibbled upon in an "order" (thus the Hebrew word "Seder") according to a strict liturgy.

The "bowl" and the "dipping" actually don't mean much. There is a bowl of salt water on the table. Over the centuries and (depending on which type of Jew you are or have been) certain of the Passover food item are dipped in this "bowl of tears" at certain moments during the Seder meal.

What is being emphasized in not necessarily Judas or the bowl or the dipping but the bread.

Why? Because according to Christian tradition (which oddly is not directly written in the text but only implied) Judas Isacriot does not partake of the institution of Holy Communion or what is termed the "Eucharist."

What he does receive is an anti-communion or one that induces the introduction of Satan the devil.

This is because what is being emphasized--according to Christology--is the "fulfillment" of Psalm 41:9: "Even my close friend in whom I trusted, who are of my bread, has lifted the heel against me"--even though the psalmist never says this is a prophetic forecast or is about a future messianic figure.

The language used in the Gospels is clearly chosen from Psalm 41 and from the fact that the maztah is not salted for Passover. To do so would make it impure, not kosher for a Passover Seder. (You never dip Passover bread in the bowl or add salt to it.)

The symbolism is that when one partakes of the Eucharist, one partakes of Christ. But Judas got bread dipped in saltwater, and next, as John wrote, "Satan entered into him."

These points aren't immediate since non-Jews are often reading the Gospels today. But the authors were Jewish and they were writing to Jewish Christians. Thus they often left things out because they didn't realize who else would ever be reading these texts.