Posts by David

22

This might be a good week to start a conversation about Jeremiah 29:10

by George One Time in

at this week clam meeting, jeremiah 29:10 is discussed:.

jer 29:10—how does this verse demonstrate the accuracy of bible prophecy?

the mistranslation of this verse is the basis of the idea that the jews spend 70 years in exile in babylon.

David_Jay

You mean the 70 "weeks" of Daniel chapter 9. These are not years.

The Book of Daniel is found in the Writings section of the Tanakh, not the Prophets section. Daniel is also not included in the list of prophets recognized by Judaism.

The Book of Daniel is not a prophetic book like Jehovah's Witnesses believe. It is an apocalypse, a description of political intrigue during the Hasmonean era, describing the events leading up to the first Chanukah. The political intrigue is disguised as "prophecy" and in the dramas involving our legendary hero Daniel and the Chaldean kings. The historical Daniel lived long before the Babylonian exile, but he was not a prophet. He is known for living an exemplary Jewish life among Gentiles before the era of the Prophets even began.

Chapter 9 of Daniel is known as "ex eventu" prophecy, a retelling of history as if it was prophecy, but composed only after the event happened and the author was fully aware of it. It is actually talking about the actions of Antiochus IV Epiphanies which caused the rise of the Maccabees. "Daniel" is saying that the events leading to the first Chanukah were ordained by God by recording the history as if it were a prophecy.

22

This might be a good week to start a conversation about Jeremiah 29:10

by George One Time in

at this week clam meeting, jeremiah 29:10 is discussed:.

jer 29:10—how does this verse demonstrate the accuracy of bible prophecy?

the mistranslation of this verse is the basis of the idea that the jews spend 70 years in exile in babylon.

David_Jay

Jews themselves do not teach nor understand Jeremiah's 70-year prophecy as referring to the time we remained in exile.

The English rendition of this text from the NJPS Tanakh reads:

For thus said the Lord: When Babylon’s seventy years are over, I will take note of you, and I will fulfill to you My promise of favor—to bring you back to this place.

In other words, the prophet says that God has set a time limit for Babylon of 70 years. When did these years actually begin and why did they begin at this point? The prophet never says. Did they end when Israel was released? Did they end when the famous "writing on the wall" of Daniel was seen? Was it when Babylon fell to its enemies? Or was it when the first exiled Jew set foot back in Israel? Maybe it was when the Temple was built? Nobody knows any of this, at least not Jews.

The 70 years determination is merely a declaration similar to Genesis 6:3 where God says people has been given a limit of 120 years. This is determined to mean the limit of a lifespan, but just a few verses later Noah lives over 900 years. Jacob lives to be 147 years old. Then is this verse in Genesis Saying there will be only 120 years until the Flood of Noah? If so, when did those years start to count? Are they lunar years? If so, do they follow the Jewish lunar calendar with its leap years or that of a more universally accepted "year" of all the earth that has since been forgotten?

These verses have no specifics regarding what the years being discussed involved. They do share the same feature of God being spoken of setting a limit, but nothing more.

I still have to wonder how and why Christians like the JWs make such big deals over making precise determinations over them. Especially regarding the Babylonian exile, since we Jews experienced it and even we don't have precise information on Jeremiah's meaning, what gives others greater insight or over-concern about this verse? So somehow God gives the prophecy to Jews but only Gentiles get to know it's actual meaning? Yeah, right.

10

The Tribe of Dan was NOT a genuine tribe of Israel

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

the claim that dan was not a genuine tribe is not new, but as the haaretz article explains there is newer archaeological evidence to suggest that the contemporary claims about the tribe of dan have some merit.. so check out the haaretz claims at: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/archaeology/1.756385.

but there are wider implications in the story.

if this particular group of people did not travel from egypt (as god's word of truth also claims) then they must have lived in canaan all the time.. then consider that palestine (canaan) was for so long part of the egyptian empire, and we begin to see that most of story about the origins of the israelites is mythical..

David_Jay

A lot of Jews don't support or approve of the way the situation is carrying on in Israel. Many of us believe we can get along and live in peace.

Unfortunately, a lot of people, some Jews included, are just as close-minded as Jehovah's Witnesses and see everything as "us-and-them." Being pigheaded and stupid and a grade-A asshole comes in both Gentile and Jewish flavors.

10

The Tribe of Dan was NOT a genuine tribe of Israel

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

the claim that dan was not a genuine tribe is not new, but as the haaretz article explains there is newer archaeological evidence to suggest that the contemporary claims about the tribe of dan have some merit.. so check out the haaretz claims at: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/archaeology/1.756385.

but there are wider implications in the story.

if this particular group of people did not travel from egypt (as god's word of truth also claims) then they must have lived in canaan all the time.. then consider that palestine (canaan) was for so long part of the egyptian empire, and we begin to see that most of story about the origins of the israelites is mythical..

David_Jay

May I ask a question, David. If that is so, are the contemporary Palestinians (and possibly some others) descendants of ethnic "Jewish" people who at some point converted to Islam?

That's a good question, fulltimestudent. My bet is there is more in common then a lot of people want to admit.

Unfortunately the current government in Israel is quite taken with the conservative Orthodox movement, the very conservative, anti-liberal slice of Orthodoxy to be more precise. There are many Jews who, because they are not members of an Orthodox synagogue, are not recognized as Jewish and therefore are not granted citizenship in Israel, even though some of these people had parents and grandparents in concentration camps during the Holocaust and have a paper trail of history proving their ancestry. So you can imagine what these think of the Palestinians.

To make things worse, those governing the Palestinians are just as staunch about things. Anyone who isn't "one of us" doesn't belong. Those among them who want peace with Israel are persecuted for even recognizing that Jews may have a claim to their place on the land.

It's a powderkeg, and both sides probably have the same blood running through their veins somewhere, and there is some data that supports this: http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/science/1.681385

10

The Tribe of Dan was NOT a genuine tribe of Israel

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

the claim that dan was not a genuine tribe is not new, but as the haaretz article explains there is newer archaeological evidence to suggest that the contemporary claims about the tribe of dan have some merit.. so check out the haaretz claims at: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/archaeology/1.756385.

but there are wider implications in the story.

if this particular group of people did not travel from egypt (as god's word of truth also claims) then they must have lived in canaan all the time.. then consider that palestine (canaan) was for so long part of the egyptian empire, and we begin to see that most of story about the origins of the israelites is mythical..

David_Jay

While this may be news for many former and present JWs (and even some nominal Christians), I was raised being taught that the Biblical narrative of the Exodus is told in the genre of legend.

Jews have recognized for, I dunno, since forever that we actually merged with the people of Canaan/the Fertile Crescent (or we are them). The stories of "war conquests" are just legends describing in dramatic language how the monotheism of the Jews "conquered" the various religions of the land and made all of us one. It was as if these people "died" in conquests, but the stories are merely political legend.

The odd thing is that Jewish children know these things too, especially around Passover time since the Haggadah and stories around the Seder explain the Exodus legend in different terms than what is in the Bible. For instance, while "Ten Plagues" are still recognized during the Seder, the truth is that Judaism teaches there were 40, 70, 100, or more--or less--and the language of the Biblical Exodus is merely describing the hope of my people when we were Babylonian exiles, hoping that the "plagues" would come upon our then-present captors, the Chaldeans, and that we would be set free to return to the Promised Land in a new Exodus.

The Watchtower and other literalist Christians have taught people that the narratives in the Torah and Joshua and Kings, etc. is factual. It's not. I hear people all the time say they don't believe in God or even hate Jews because of all the "wars" we fought, believing we pillaged the peoples of the Fertile Crescent and replaced them.

The real truth is that this is what Christians tell people these stories mean. More likely than not, we who are Jews are merely the people of the Fertile Crescent, the very Canaanites we claimed to have "conquered." But I can say that a million times and people will still believe the Christian interpretation over the Jewish one.

It is good these stories are coming to light in Haaretz. With the return of Jews to Israel it is now possible to do critical archeological study and prove that the Jewish view has always been right and the Christian view (that these stories in the Old Testament are factual) has always been wrong.

22

Are JW's non- violent

by notalone in

jw
friends

okay, i keep reading something and though jw's do not get involved in national wars, my experience has always been they are very violent people.

every convention i have ever been to was filled with children being beat within an inch of their lives for just not being able to take a third day of mind-droning silence without being able to move or now even sleep.

i have seen whole congregations laugh at stories of children being beaten and calling out to "jehovah".

David_Jay

Violence is not just behavior that results in physical damage or hurt. Violence is also, by definition, the exhibition of an intention or desire to see harm befall another.

A "mean person" who bullies with words can also be described as violent, especially when those words are delivered with force or ardor. A boss that constantly belittles, has fits of anger (even without hurting or striking another), and bullies those in her or his employ can be described as "violent."

From my personal experience, and I am certain it is that of others, many an elder and overseer exhibited violent attitudes. Some would explode in those "secret meetings," and there would sometimes be more than loud shouting but actual tossing of things in anger and threats.

This behavior did trickle down. "Hating" things and people "Jehovah hates" was often exhibited by very forceful frowns and sometimes audible insulting grumbles. I know that after I disassociated myself, I did see a few JWs once from a distance, across a crowded restaurant, displaying such horrible expressions of disgust toward me that others who saw them focusing their "hate faces" at me could see something was wrong with these people and the way they were behaving in public. "Who peed in her coffee?" a bystander whispered to someone else about one of these disgruntled, contorted faces.

Hate is merely a projection of violence. If you hate someone with your words and attitude, you've already beat them to death in your heart. When people burn books, they are merely practicing for later when they'll burn the authors and readers of the same.

Saying Jehovah's Witnesses are not violent because their hatred never goes past their heart is like saying Jesus was lying when he said adultery is committed when lust lives in the heart.--Matthew 5:28.

23

Jesus Christ dead for three days and three nights really?

by Crazyguy in

has anyone done a detail research on this subject?

the gospels seem to contradict one another and christians apologists have a bunch of different ways to try to explain away the problems.

has anyone have a concrete explanation for or against him truly being dead three days and three nights as the story goes?.

David_Jay

@snowbird

In reference to John 19:31: A "high Sabbath" is when a Jewish festival day of rest lands on a Saturday, meaning two Sabbaths are occurring at the same time.

While I applaud your work, you mentioned the "high" or "great Sabbath" occurring from sundown Wednesday to sundown Thursday. That is impossible. Only when Nisan 15 lands on Shabbat or Saturday (sundown Friday to sundown Saturday) is it a "high Sabbath."

Not all Jewish festivals have a day of rest added to them like Passover does (for example, Chanukah has no additional rest day so there is never a "high Sabbath" for that celebration). This year we Jews celebrated Passover (Nisan 15) on Monday April 10. We didn't have a high Sabbath with Passover this year.

Next year, however, in 2018, Nisan 15 will land on Friday night, the same night Shabbat begins. That will be a Great or "high" Sabbath for us then. This was the same situation in the year when Jesus was crucified.

23

Jesus Christ dead for three days and three nights really?

by Crazyguy in

has anyone done a detail research on this subject?

the gospels seem to contradict one another and christians apologists have a bunch of different ways to try to explain away the problems.

has anyone have a concrete explanation for or against him truly being dead three days and three nights as the story goes?.

David_Jay

Cofty is correct.

It is actually Church tradition that Jesus rose three days after his death. It isn’t Biblical. None of the Biblical reports of the resurrection of Jesus ever say anything of the sort that “three days later” Jesus rose from the tomb. Literalist Christians, like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, often use the texts of Matthew 12:40 and John 2:19 to support their stand for adopting the traditional view, but these texts are not reporting on the actual resurrection.

The Harrowing of Hell: A Tradition Based on a Jewish Legend

The Christian tradition came first, decades before the New Testament texts included actual resurrection narratives. The earliest composed gospels were “oracle gospels” or written collection of Jesus’ sayings. No narrative of any type was included. The so-called Q source is often believed to be such an “oracle gospel,” and the report of Papias in which he describes the apostle Matthew as having composed a gospel in Hebrew was likely such a sayings-source. The earliest gospel account, Mark, originally had no resurrection narrative as demonstrated in its oldest extant forms.

The original oral tradition came to be known as the Harrowing of Hell. Though viewed as genuine theology in Catholicism, for instance, the story is the legend of Jesus’ trip to the Netherworld after his death on the cross. During this trip, Jesus redeems the faithful people of God who died before his passion and death. The earliest “written” form of this belief comes in the form of primitive Christian sarcophagi art depicting the prophet Jonah and the big fish or whale. The “three days” comes from this Old Testament/Tanakh story.

The narrative of Jonah the prophet is a comedy, not literal history. While possibly the work of the actual prophet Jonah, it is a moral lesson, written in a form not too different from the genre employed by Aesop and his moral tales. Designed to teach the Jewish people that all races are God’s children and to demonstrate the evils of prejudice (shown by the negative attitudes and actions of Jonah), the story of Jonah being in Sheol for “three days and nights” and coming out to preach a message that “saved” the people of Nineveh is understood as a legend among Jews.

Matthew 12:40

It was likely viewed this way too by the earliest Christians. Note that while Matthew 12:40 has Jesus saying he “will be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights,” the same gospel reports that Jesus died just hours before the Sabbath began (the day of preparation), was dead during the entire Sabbath (the day after the preparation), and rose the day after the Sabbath. (Matthew 27:26; 28:1) Apparently neither the author nor his audience had yet made a literal interpretation of Jonah’s legend to Jesus’ death or words. In Matthew, the expression at 12:40 is merely an example of Jesus rising after a death-like experience like Jonah’s, one that would end up in people being redeemed by a message to repent.--Note Matthew 12:41.*

John 2:19

John’s account is not literal by any respect. He rearranges the death of Jesus to occur on Thursday, the day of Preparation for the Passover when the lambs were slaughtered for the Seder meal instead of on Friday, as in the synoptics, which is the Preparation for the Sabbath. John does this because in his account Jesus is “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.” (John 1:29) John is concerned with teaching not a literal but a very spiritual account of Jesus. Apparently moving Jesus’ death to Thursday also fit in with the Jonah legend and helped it develop into the “three days” that became a requisite for belief in Christianity. The inclusion of “I believe...He descended into hell. On the third day he rose again,” in the Apostles Creed and “We believe...On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the Scriptures” in the Nicene Creed are proof of this later more literal view.

Devising a Literal Reading to Cover a Tradition

The literalism of American NRMs (New Religious Movements) that spewed forth from the Second Great Awakening included a lack of academic scholarship which still plagues them today. Groups like the Jehovah’s Witnesses cannot honestly reconcile the lack of evidence of “three days” dead in a tomb with the tradition upon which Christianity was built, and therefore texts like Matthew 12:40 and John 2:19 get taught as if they are literal reports of the resurrection. As noted above, they are not.

The Jewish tradition upon which Jonah built his parable of being in the belly of the fish for three days and linking it to being in Sheol is from Hosea 6:2. There the expression “three days” connected to being “raised up” merely means an expectation of “soon.” Of interest is that the mention of Jonah’s experience in the fish’s belly being likened to Sheol comes from the prayer found at Jonah 2:3-10. These verses were likely not written by Jonah himself but composed later by someone who might not have been aware of Jonah’s intentions to teach a moral lesson by means of a humorous and fanciful narrative.

*Footnote: According to the NABRE about Matthew 12:40: “The sign was simply Jonah’s preaching to the Ninevites (Lk 11:30, 32), Matthew here adds Jonah’s sojourn in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, a prefigurement of Jesus’ sojourn in the abode of the dead and, implicitly, of his resurrection.”--Italics added.

103

What will you be doing on the evening of the 11th ?

by Phizzy in

mrs phizzy and myself will be eating out, sure in the knowledge we will not have jw's using the same restaurant.. i may have a cigar along with my brandy at the meal's end to celebrate my (our) freedom..

David_Jay

Yes, for those who may wonder about my last post, the language was purposefully facetious. The message is true but I thought using some language JWs use in their publications would present it with a sardonic touch.

103

What will you be doing on the evening of the 11th ?

by Phizzy in

mrs phizzy and myself will be eating out, sure in the knowledge we will not have jw's using the same restaurant.. i may have a cigar along with my brandy at the meal's end to celebrate my (our) freedom..

David_Jay

Djeggnog wrote:

No, I've no interest in arguing with you over anything...

Adding:

I spoke in opposition to your view of the dats when Nisan 14 occurs in 2017. I don't recall saying anything to you here about "worshipping according to Bible truth"; you made this up.

First of all, speaking "in opposition" is presenting an argument. If you had no desire to do this, you would have never posted anything "in opposition to your view of the dats [sic] when Nisan 14 occurs." Arguing is "expressing opposing views in an exchange" or "to speak in opposition of another's view."

This you were clearly doing to begin with. The reason you replied now is because you had no answer to give me. You had immediate answers for others, but you could not answer mine right away. So you took the time to research it.

Finding you could not argue against the facts I presented, in order to save face you finally came back and now claim that you just don't have an "interest" in the subject any longer.

And I was not saying that you personally made a claim about "worshipping according to Bible truth." That is the teaching of the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses. I was speaking against their claim. If the Memorial was really taking place on Nisan 14, the Full Moon would not have risen a day earlier.

And if you do not agree that the Jehovah's Witnesses do not teach according to Bible truth, then you are telling us that you don't believe what your religion teaches. But on the other hand, if you do agree that the witnesses teach according to Bible truth, then you have just demonstrated that you cannot explain the point I countered with.

The solution is simple. Either the Witnesses are wrong and that is why you couldn't give an answer, or the Witnesses are right but you are bad at explaining what they really teach.

Either way, no one should pay further attention to you. If the religion is false, who wants to listen to you--a member of a false religion? If the religion is true, who wants to listen to you--a bad example and bad teacher of life saving truths.

We Jews are still celebrating the Passover for a few more days yet. Part of this celebration is to declare liberty to those enslaved even today. People can be enslaved by false religions and even bad teachers of truth. Whatever happens to be the case with you, what kind of Jew would I be and what kind of liberty could I declare if I did not speak up against the tyranny of falsehood?

Remember how Elijah challenged the false prophets of Baal? He proved their worship was false since they could not get Baal to ignite their sacrifice. If your worship of Jehovah were true, there would be no question you could not answer. You would not merely say you have no interest. You would have the answer immediately, as fire from Jehovah ignited Elijah's offering. Is not the "sacrifice of praise, that is, the fruit of our lips" greater than the offerings of the Jews? (Hebrews 13:15) Is not the spirit of God with you? Why are your lips not ignited with the flame of the spirit, the power from Jehovah that should light your offering of "the fruit of our lips"? Why no answer after all this time?

That is because you are like the prophets of Baal. You do not worship Jehovah. You claim to and make an idol of his name, but you fail to offer the 'sacrifice of praise...the fruit of lips.' Jehovah cannot fail, cannot offer imprecise dates for the Memorial, nor be powerless to give one of his true worshippers the ability to light their "sacrifce of praise."

Therefore you are like the prophets of Baal, a worshiper not of the God of Abraham but of a false idol that enslaves people to the imprecise, imperfect direction of fallible men who run the organization that offered the Memorial on the wrong day.

Passover is a call to end all types of slavery. So if you wish to offer your words that enslave people to your false religion, in the spirit of Passover I declare you another false teacher like Jannes and Jambres. And I declare all who have left the Jehovah's Witnesses freed from the tyranny of falsehood, from slavery to lies.

Be gone, you false representative of the God of Abraham. You are but a worshiper of a dungy idol you call "Jehovah" but is anything but!

David_Jay

Posts by David_Jay