Posts by David

19

Jesus in the old testament

by Steel in

about two years ago i was challenged by a householder to do the research on the subject.

of course thinking it was all bunk i decided to take a look off the reservation.

much to my surprise a lot of started to make sense and i started to understand the connections between the old and new testament .

I have to concur. Upon leaving the Witnesses I learned what Trinitarians actually believe. In all honesty none of the arguments advanced by Jehovah's Witnesses work with Trinitarians because Witnesses always start off with a false premise of misunderstanding what the Trinity is to begin with. Being that the doctrine was pre- and post-Biblical, the arguing from Scripture to prove one way or the other with a Trinitarian never works.

From my current standpoint, I have to say it doesn't make sense to believe in Jesus if he is not God. While Jews, as you know, don't accept Jesus as the Messiah, as the side note Myelaine brought up about the Catholic Church's admission that the Messiahship of Jesus actually transcends instead of instantly rising from Hebrew Scripture leans in favor of Jesus being the Epiphany that the majority of Christianity claims him to be.

Jesus did not fulfill the immediate Messianic hopes of the Jewish people, which even the questions raised by his apostles prove (as for example Acts 1:6 demonstrates). Therefore something beyond these hopes must have been seen in Jesus that got his followers to come to the conclusion that they embraced. Jesus himself was often unusually silent about declaring he was the Messiah, and except for his outward statement to the Samaritan woman at Jacob's Well (John 4:25, 26), he generally refused to openly acknowledge or support such a conclusion. Something beyond the Jewish concept of the Messiah was at work here, and as Catholicism acknowledges, it has become the touchstone of the Christian belief about a Messiah who redeems through his own self-surrendering sacrifice.

It would also make sense that this transcendent Messiahship of Jesus would contrast with the Great Theophany. For the Jews, God appeared through visible signs, in fear-inspiring flames, trumpet blasts, and thunderous voice at Mt. Sinai during the Great Theophany, whereas (according to Christians) God later comes through the visible sign of a humble human, hidden from sight in the Person of Jesus as Epiphany. In Theophany, the invisible God is made apparent through visible demonstrations, whereas in the Epiphany, the invisible God is hidden in human form, though visible. The Theophany demanded Moses to go up on behalf of the people in order to get God's Law, whereas in the Epiphany, God descends to the people in order to bring them God's liberation from the demands of law. In the Theophany, Moses is the mediator that brings God to the people, whereas in the Epiphany, God is now directly involved with the people through Jesus. The Theophany brings forth physical Israel, the Epiphany brings forth spiritual Israel. The Theophany occurs with humans making offerings to God of the flesh and blood of bulls, whereas in the Epiphany, God offers his life to humankind on the cross as the "body and blood" of life-saving "food" for humanity.

Again, Jews don't believe in the Trinity or in Jesus as the Messiah. But I can see the logic behind Christendom's view. When you do it the JW way and Jesus is just the archangel Michael in the flesh, all the rest is lost. It makes even less sense. If the New Covenant that Christianity believes in is supposed to be greater than the Old given to the Jews, why would the Great Theophany be paralleled with the arrival of an angel in the flesh? That makes no sense at all. That isn't greater or even comparable to the Great Theophany. No, even as a Jew I declare that this required the Epiphany of God, no less. If it is a greater covenant, it needed something greater than a theophany, something only an epiphany could provide. The mere materialization of an angel, even that of an archangel, could not fit the pattern.

19

Jesus in the old testament

by Steel in

about two years ago i was challenged by a householder to do the research on the subject.

of course thinking it was all bunk i decided to take a look off the reservation.

much to my surprise a lot of started to make sense and i started to understand the connections between the old and new testament .

David_Jay

Actualy, Myelaine, you are quoting from a follow-up of a previous quote.

The original was a direct quote from a 2001 Pontifical Biblical Commission document in which the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus fulfills a role of the Messiah that is not immediate. Catholicism believes that the Hebrew Scriptures, while providing many details in prophecy about the Messiah, were transcended by the coming of Jesus in that Catholics see him as a Messiah that imbued the Hebrew prophecies with far greater meaning than the Jews had expected and could not forsee.

The "something new" I spoke of was provided by Christ himself as he explained how his life (which followed a path even his apostles didn't expect--for instance, see Matthew 16:21-23) fulfilled the Scriptures. (See Luke 24:25-27, 44-47.) Without Christ, says Catholic doctrine, no one was privy to how these things would fit together in fulfillment. It was new, not something known to the Jews before.

Jewish scholars acknowledge this teaching of the Catholic Church, that this was a transcendent intrepretation, not direct or immediate. To claim that it is otherwise means that people like Peter would have expected Christ to be crucified. But neither he nor any of the apostles of even John the Baptist knew the scope of Christ's view. But Jews don't have an official stand on how direct or indirect Jesus was about his claims. The statement was that Judaism acknowledges the claim of transcendent fulfillment held by Catholicism, not that Jews have that view themselves.

By contrast, the teaching of Jehovah's Witnesses is that the prophecies about the Messiah are far more immediate and direct, clear enough for anyone to fully accept Jesus at first blush.

45

Official Increase in the Number of Jehovah's Witnesses You Shouldn't Trust

by David_Jay in

reports are coming from witnesses that, once again, the number of memorial partakers has risen considerably this past year, 2016. while confirmation is still to come on the exact numbers, the current explanations given for this increase surely causes a dilemma.. imagine the roman catholic church publishing each year the number of members who it felt were mistaken about what they believed in, that this same number of members was likely suffering from problems such as pride or even mental disorders or something along this line.

this number, by the way, was in the thousands too and growing annually.

what would you conclude, therefore about the catholic church and its admission?.

David_Jay

Thisismein1972,

"The great crowd are the increasing number of 'anointed' ones."

If I am not mistaken, I think they technically already tried this approach and this is what got them facing the current paradox.

Before announcing the "great crowd" fulfillment in the 1930s, the Witnesses were already facing a growth problem that led to 90,000-plus partaking participants in the Memorial by the end of the 1920s. Rutherford's revealing the "great crowd" in the mid 1930s was a way to deal with this.

You see, since the time of Russell, the Watchtower theology has always been teaching that there is a "remnant" of true Christians in the last days, the final sealing of the last of the 144,000. New Testament eschatology often employs heavy wordplay on Hebrew texts that speak of a "remnant of Israel" being "saved" such as at Romans 11:5. Considering themselves the "new" and now only true "Israel," and claiming theirs is a" restoration" of "true first-century" Christianity, there has never been a time that the center of the JWs has not be founded on the existence of this "remnant." These are now the last days because only a "remnant" of Christians is left, and the reason the "remnant" is present is because it is now truly the last days. In Watchtower theology one can never exist without the other.

But having 90,000-plus partakers was not a "remnant" of 144,000 Christians in 1920. It was a majority. Something had to be done since neither the "remnant" nor "last days" beliefs could be moved and neither the literal 144,000 teaching in the mind of a literalist. For then how could you ever have a true remnant if there was no definite number? So Rutherford developed the second class of Christians to explain the increasing "remnant." You might say this 2nd group of Christians is also the first time the Watchtower employed an overlapping 2 generations model, so to speak.

These are ad-hoc fixes, however. Saying a new overlapping number makes the original number retain its original qualities doesn't work. This is because of the time factor. The end has to come, and the original group has to be here to witness it otherwise it was never the original group to begin with. A "remnant" can only, by definition, dwindle.

But since the original members of the "remnant" are no longer here and they refuse to admit the end is it coming, the next best thing has been to say that people with the same earmarks make up the same "type" and thus the same original group is "still with us" (though we know this doesn't for rock bands or singing groups). As long as the same "type" of members exist, say the JWs, then the original group has yet to depart from the world scene.

This would push the "remnant" today up to over 98,000 (and mathematically over 144,000 to be honest), losing the quality of being only a "few remaining ones." And if they are no longer this "remnant," then it cannot be the end either.

The "generation" has been stretched this way, and now the "remnant" is (for the second time) losing its qualifications as such. They have pretty much cherry-picked Scripture to death and are left with a dilemma. They cannot escape the need for a "remnant," so they must again change their definition of "remnant" as they have for " generation. " The two-class tier system of Christians that Rutherford put forward did not work. The "remnant" grew regardless.

45

Official Increase in the Number of Jehovah's Witnesses You Shouldn't Trust

by David_Jay in

reports are coming from witnesses that, once again, the number of memorial partakers has risen considerably this past year, 2016. while confirmation is still to come on the exact numbers, the current explanations given for this increase surely causes a dilemma.. imagine the roman catholic church publishing each year the number of members who it felt were mistaken about what they believed in, that this same number of members was likely suffering from problems such as pride or even mental disorders or something along this line.

this number, by the way, was in the thousands too and growing annually.

what would you conclude, therefore about the catholic church and its admission?.

David_Jay

Schnell,

Ever see the musical, "The Book of Mormon"? There's the song the protagonist sings where he mentions all kinds of crazy LDS beliefs ("Ancient Jews build boats and sailed to America...[God] giving me my own planet...the Garden of Eden was in Jackson County, Missouri") he adds to these and more that "a Mormon just believes."

It's the same thing about being anointed as a Witness. A Witness "just believes."

And thanks punkofnice for adding that Watchtower quote. This is exactly what my OP is about: they are saying that this increase is made of their own membership by referring to their "past religious beliefs" and then go to suggest that those making up the increase are even mentally unstable!

Here they are claiming "our fastest growing group among us doesn't abandon falsehood and are mentally/emotionally unbalanced...So be sure to listen to them when they preach our message to you to see how our religion can make the same out of you!"

45

Official Increase in the Number of Jehovah's Witnesses You Shouldn't Trust

by David_Jay in

reports are coming from witnesses that, once again, the number of memorial partakers has risen considerably this past year, 2016. while confirmation is still to come on the exact numbers, the current explanations given for this increase surely causes a dilemma.. imagine the roman catholic church publishing each year the number of members who it felt were mistaken about what they believed in, that this same number of members was likely suffering from problems such as pride or even mental disorders or something along this line.

this number, by the way, was in the thousands too and growing annually.

what would you conclude, therefore about the catholic church and its admission?.

David_Jay

Actually, the Roman Catholic Church holds that the saints do indeed help those on earth. Saints that are canonized, for instance, are generally those who offer proof of being in Heaven by performing at least two miracles after their death. These miracles usually take the form of healing the sick on earth.

Catholics teach that the Church remains one body that continues to cooperate together as the Church Militant (those on earth) and the Church Triumphant or Glorified (those in Heaven). The Church Triumphant actively assists the Church Militant according to Catholic eschatology.

"Canonized" saints are those added to the official liturgy of the Mass, either to the listing of the saints asked to pray for the Church at the Easter Vigil or on the day of their "victory" (death). This official "listing" is what the word "canonized" means, like the official listing of the books of the Bible. Unless the saint was proven to be approved by God before or at the time of death (usually by dying as a faithful martyr), the saint must prove from Heaven that they are still working in union with the Church Militant. Those that do prove this get added to this prayer listing or canon.

The 144,000 teaching of JWs, on the other hand, neither entails a canonization (as Witnesses don't believe you can personally ask for a saint's help by praying to them and therefore has no listing in liturgy to add their name to, i.e., "St. Joan of Arc, pray for us.") Not only do Witnesses deny that miracles can happen anymore ( thus no way to prove from Heaven that someone is there), they believe prayer is an act of worship that can only rightfully be offered to God. (Prayer is actually only a request, and not exclusively an act of worship.)

So not only can we ever know if the claimant JW partaker can rightfully make such a claim to be chosen, there is no theological belief in Watchtowerism that God will (or even desires to or can) offer supernatural validation of these partaker claim.

45

Official Increase in the Number of Jehovah's Witnesses You Shouldn't Trust

by David_Jay in

reports are coming from witnesses that, once again, the number of memorial partakers has risen considerably this past year, 2016. while confirmation is still to come on the exact numbers, the current explanations given for this increase surely causes a dilemma.. imagine the roman catholic church publishing each year the number of members who it felt were mistaken about what they believed in, that this same number of members was likely suffering from problems such as pride or even mental disorders or something along this line.

this number, by the way, was in the thousands too and growing annually.

what would you conclude, therefore about the catholic church and its admission?.

David_Jay

Steve2,

The hole in that argument is that this makes the current claim about new partakers illogical and unnecessary.

It makes no sense for the Watchtower to raise issue with this in its study articles, questioning the mental health of the partakers or stating they are "still holding on" to the hope they had before they were Witnesses. The study articles are not for the general public (which is why they are no longer included in the general issue) but for members, for baptized Witnesses. If the problem was with non-JW attendees at the Memorial, that would have been stated and easily controlled (you can easily hold a "closed communion," like the Catholic Church does). But the counsel has been produced for JW members, and it has been directed at them.

Consider the argument claiming that this is caused by "previous hopes" of the new partakers. How do they know what the "previous" or current hope for a non-Witness is? To have a previous hope means you disregarded it for something new. They only know this about Witnesses. It generally doesn't apply if you join one Christian group after being a part of another as they all usually have the same heavenly hope after death. How can they claim that non-JW partakers may be doing this out of pride or due to mental problems? You can't legitimately say this about a group of people who are just annual or one-time attendees.

No, the excuses they make and the counsel given can only be due to the fact that baptized Witnesses are causing the increase.

45

Official Increase in the Number of Jehovah's Witnesses You Shouldn't Trust

by David_Jay in

reports are coming from witnesses that, once again, the number of memorial partakers has risen considerably this past year, 2016. while confirmation is still to come on the exact numbers, the current explanations given for this increase surely causes a dilemma.. imagine the roman catholic church publishing each year the number of members who it felt were mistaken about what they believed in, that this same number of members was likely suffering from problems such as pride or even mental disorders or something along this line.

this number, by the way, was in the thousands too and growing annually.

what would you conclude, therefore about the catholic church and its admission?.

David_Jay

Reports are coming from Witnesses that, once again, the number of Memorial Partakers has risen considerably this past year, 2016. While confirmation is still to come on the exact numbers, the current explanations given for this increase surely causes a dilemma.

Imagine the Roman Catholic Church publishing each year the number of members who it felt were mistaken about what they believed in, that this same number of members was likely suffering from problems such as pride or even mental disorders or something along this line. This number, by the way, was in the thousands too and growing annually. What would you conclude, therefore about the Catholic Church and its admission?

For one thing, why so many unsound members? What kind of religion produces thousands of people like this? How does the Church know that these people have a mistaken view and what causes it? Is this a professional opinion, and if not, how could they even say such a thing about people?

Next, how would I know if I bumped into one of these "questionable" Catholics? Should I feel comfortable if one of these was talking to me right now? Should I believe what that person tells me about their religion? If they are mistaken about their own religious hope, these should avoid trying to recruit other members, right? Maybe the Church should do something to make sure these people with these misunderstandings are never in a teaching or educational position when it comes to preaching the gospel to others?

Well, as you might have guessed by now, I am not really talking about The Catholic Church. I am talking about Jehovah's Witnesses.

Every year now, it seems, the number of partakers at the Memorial increases by several thousand. If the current count is right, a jump of about 8 or 9000 has occurred since the late 1990s.

Jehovah's Witnesses say that many of these new partakers are likely just mistaken, that they may be suffering from some type of pride of even a mental problem. In other words, each time this number increases, the JWs are publishing an official count of people among them who are questionable.

Just think, there are thousands and thousands of Jehovah's Witnesses who, according to this explanation on what is causing or behind the increase, aren't really following the true leading of the Holy Spirit, aren't hoping in something real, and may even have mental problems. And this growing number of questionable Jehovah's Witnesses is published every year!

It is like saying: "Here is this year's official count of Jehovah's Witnesses you shouldn't trust when they tell you about their hope!" And the number is in the thousands--and increasing! What kind of a religion is this that it not only admits to producing this kind of member, but that some of the largest percentages of growth are experienced in the growing size of this group?!

If this number doesn't really represent those who are truly anointed, what is it saying about these thousands and thousands of additional ones? And what about these going out into the public to teach the world "life saving truths"?

Would you trust a Jew who was known to be mistaken about some of the most vital parts of their personal beliefs to give you an accurate view of the Jewish religion? Would you trust the person anymore if they were Catholic or Hindu or Baptist to offer the same about theirs? Or course not! So just think, there are thousands of Jehovah's Witnesses who are just as mistaken, and their number increases each year. Should you be receiving a witness from these mistaken people?

If they aren't mistaken, then why say they might be? If they are, or just some are, why is your religion producing such a large increase in this type of person?

22

The uptake...

by Thisismein1972 in

with recent events pointing at watchtower growth, i felt compelled to say a few words.. if the figures turn out to be true, then we should not be discouraged.

after 9/11 there was a surge in, not only the watchtower, but other demonisation of organised religion.

whenever there is a a paradigm shifting event that puts fear into others, this tends to have a life changing affect on an individual.. now let us zoom to the present.

David_Jay

Perhaps I am missing a key element here, but I am not sure what growth or stagnation or even diminishing numbers has to do with how we feel about the religion we have left.

Often the craziest of cults, even after undeniable exposure as fraudulent, continue in some form. There are survivors of the Branch Davidian compound who still believe in what David Koresh preached. The Fundamental LDS Church continues even though its leader is in jail, exposed as a pedophile. Several tiny groups are still preaching Armstrong's odd and failed take on the Bible, even though the Worldwide Church of God denounced their leader and his teachings as a cult when he died before Jesus returned as promised. E-Bible Fellowship still functions with a small group of followers even after setting several well-publicized failed dates for the end of the world. And the Speedo-wearing guru of the cult Buddafield continues to gather followers though he has been exposed as a fraud in the CNN film "Holy Hell."

In reality, these groups and leaders, though some still have their adherrents, are over. They have had their day. They have been exposed as the liars and wellsprings of falsehood they are. Nobody in the world really gives a moment's thought to those adherents that refuse to leave now or even, God forbid, join these cults from this point on. It is clear to everyone that if you do, you're an idiot.

Don't waste your time worrying about people who freely choose to waste their time. At this point it is totally clear that the Jehovah's Witnesses are a cult. It may be a surprise to us ex-members now that we have come to accept it, but the world in general isn't going to suddenly shine the spotlight on the Watchtower and expose it as a cult, causing the movement to come tumbling down. Why not? Because the world always knew it was a cult.

They are not going to be more interested in the pedophile and child abuse news involving the Jehovah's Witnesses coming from the ARC as they were with the Catholic Church. Why not? Because the world generally sees the Church as an authentic religion, a place where such things should not be happening. But the world of the Watchtower? Like the cult groups listed above, the world gave up on the Witnesses long ago. As I recently heard one person say who I mentioned it to: "It's not surprising news. It's a cult. You kind of expect that kind of thing to be going on anyway. The only people surprised are those in the cult."

When the world didn't end with 1914 and then later the Patriarchal "worthies" weren't resurrected in 1925 to go live at Beth Sarim, the world closed its doors of interest on the JWs, heck, probably even before then.

It was surely over well by the 1975 fiasco, and the Witnesses were definitely a laughingstock then. If you had the unfortunate experience of becoming a Jehovah's Witness after 1975 like I did as a teenager who knew no better, the world in general kind of instantly gave up on you at that point. In their eyes we were like those still following David Koresh after his compound in Waco had burned to the ground. People just consider others who do such things as stupid idiots. And guess what, we were.

And it is now definitely over for that religion. It is over 100 years after 1914, they have had to dismiss almost half of their doctrine as "the light getting brighter" and spend their days rationalizing over a graph of overlapping generations to justify to themselves why they are still hanging on.

It is over. It was over a long time ago. You are looking now at a ship of fools. It never went anywhere and will never do so. The world in general has given up even laughing at them. Their leaders are guilty of abusing the children of members or are turning a blind eye to such horrors in the ranks they govern? Well what did you expect, says the world. It's a cult. Cults do things like that to children. It is sad, should be stopped, but it's also expected. It's a cult. People been saying this for over 100 years. Where have you been?

Why are you concerned over growth of anything happening in his cult? I know it sounds harsh, and every life is precious. But the proof is already there that it is a failed cult. They are not going to listen en masse either inside of outside. At this point all you have is a group of ignorant folks and the unfortunate children of theirs who get born into the group. I am not saying give up on trying to expose them, but concerned about growth? Even fish out of water sputter around on the ground for some time before totally expiring.

34

Why didn't God also reveal himself to the Canaanites just as he did to Moses in the burning bush?

by deegee in

why didn't god also reveal himself to the canaanites just as he did to moses in the burning bush so that the massacre/genocide of the canaanites could have been avoided?.

why didn't god also invite the native palestinians into his covenant, giving them the same laws he gave the israelites, and establish an egalitarian society where people of all races could live together in harmony?.

instead, he ordered his people to invade and slaughter the natives, killing them to the last man, woman and child, specifically instructing them to show no mercy to anyone under any circumstances.

David_Jay

I should add here: while the ideas of Finkelstein are quite popular as part of a mystical movement that makes the strong connections you read above in Finkelstein's post (you can Google this and find a plethora of blogs and even quasi-religious movements that share these views), they are not accepted or advanced by either Jewish or mainstream academia.

Though the most popular critical theory in Judaism is that the monotheistic God-concept may have originated with the Moabites, this does not mean that a theophany closer to the traditional narrative is completely dismissed.

And while I am not saying that the theories presented by Finklestein are impossible or without merit. It is just, again, the work of people who are not Jews who for whatever reasons, often suggest that their views are of more merit than my own people's.

34

Why didn't God also reveal himself to the Canaanites just as he did to Moses in the burning bush?

by deegee in

why didn't god also reveal himself to the canaanites just as he did to moses in the burning bush so that the massacre/genocide of the canaanites could have been avoided?.

why didn't god also invite the native palestinians into his covenant, giving them the same laws he gave the israelites, and establish an egalitarian society where people of all races could live together in harmony?.

instead, he ordered his people to invade and slaughter the natives, killing them to the last man, woman and child, specifically instructing them to show no mercy to anyone under any circumstances.

David_Jay

Yes, Crazyguy, the Hyskos are considered to be connected to the very same I have been speaking of, with some variations of course (and the possibility that there could be something more literal possible in line with the Jewish tradition than critical research has yet revealed).

The Hyskos, we're the ruling party however. When their dynasty ended, the Hyskos were ousted. The Hyskos were known for welcoming refugees, and it is from these refugees that later were turned into servants, it is suggested, that the slave exodus came forth. The refugee/slaves are sometimes referred to as Hyskos, but they are in actually not the same. The Hyskos were the rulers when Joseph is supposed to have entered Egypt.

But do understand two things: one, I am speaking only in generalities encompassing a wide spectrum of theories and two, I do not have a personal opinion on the matter or believe a definitive outline of the details can be established at present via any approach. As such I am not debating your view and necessarily advocating another. I am merely adding food for thought and letting you know I am quite studied in my own people's history.

David_Jay

Posts by David_Jay