Posts by David

44

The Jewish perspective of the OT according to poster David_Jay

by deegee in

i note your comments in the following threads regarding the jewish perspective on certain old testament (ot) events:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5700922233585664/when-you-stop-think-about-why-would-gods-chosen-people-old-testament-need-army?page=1&size=10 ,.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6065451475927040/why-didnt-god-also-reveal-himself-canaanites-just-he-did-moses-burning-bush.

David_Jay

(Tor, while answering all your questions immediately will take us off subject--and this is NOT a lesson in what the Jewish religion teaches about such things, but instead the PERSPECTIVE of Jews on their Scriptures [please see the OP and my first reply]--some of your questions are about to be answered here as we cover the next question. To learn more about what Jews believe religiously follow the instructions I have in the second post of this thread.)

THE STUBBORN, REBELLIOUS, AND CHALLENGING CHOSEN PEOPLE OF GOD: Why we are called the nation of "Israel" and not the nation of "Abraham"

"For whatever reason God chose to do this, I am sure we can all agree it was pretty unjust either way, and most here would have a bone to pick with God after all was said and done."

You could see the nods of agreement in the audience. If it had been a Southern Baptist church, such audience agreement would have been salted with an "Amen!" from a few congregants...except that you would probably never have had such agreement from Christians from any denomination if that message had been preached from their pulpits.

No. These were the words of a rabbi. This was his subject during one Shabbat service after our Torah portion was completed. It had just covered one of those parts of the Bible where the Jews were commanded to kill all their enemies in a battle of exterminating genocidal proportions.

And yes, you read it right. The rabbi and his congregation felt the reading of Scripture showed God as acting unjustly, with some agreeing that they would let God know personally how dissatisfied they were with God's behavior.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Chosen People, Israel. Ta-da!

Not what you were expecting, eh, my Watchtower-educated children? Well, that's us. God's "chosen people" in all our glory. Take it all in. We just had a reading from God's inspired Word, and as we have characteristically done since the days of Abraham, we took issue with what God had to say.

Chosen but not Only

Christian groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons (and many other "restoration gospel" movements) share a common earmark: they generally teach that being "chosen" by God is exclusive to being the "only" people of God.

These (and even older religious groups) have made such similar claims and connections for themselves that they have too often projected their definitions on "chosen" upon us. While it is also not correct to say that some Jews have not arrogantly made a similar connection, for the most part our theology doesn't make the same connection between being "chosen" of God and being the "only" people of God.

A very ancient part of Jewish theology teaches that God communicates with all peoples and nations. Some Jews teach that God offered all peoples the Torah, shopped it around until he got to us, and we decided to go into contract with God. This contract (or covenant) includes the responsibility of being a light to the nations, to work with God in redeeming us all from a world infected by our own failings, that of the Jews as well.

That makes us "chosen" for the purposes "spelled out" in the contract, but not "chosen" as in the "only" people or "only" religion God works with.

And the fact that God offered us this covenant also means God knew what God was getting into.

God's Chosen People, Not Always Obedient

Note that while we are called the children of Abraham, we are also called the nation of Israel. Have you ever wondered why the two names, and these particular two names? And why not just the children and "nation" of "Abraham"? Why does the nation get the name of Jacob, and then his second name "Israel"?

That is because we are in a covenant or contract with God. We are not slaves anymore as we were in Egypt. We are partners in God's purpose for the world. And just like any other contract relationship, the partners don't always see eye-to-eye.

Like our forefather Abraham, we often question God. (Genesis 18:16-33) And like Jacob, we actively "wrestle" with God and thus gain for ourselves the same name of "Israel."--Genesis 32:27, 28.

This seems to be part of the reason God has chosen us, or so one theological theory of Judaism suggests: God is "learning" how to deal with humanity and grow through his dealings with Israel.

Yeah, this flies in the face of the JW interpretation of Malachi 3:6 (which we understand that God doesn't change in reference to his covenant with us, not that God cannot change intentions, views, or the mind of God). But Jews have come to learn that God is not bound to the limits of the static description of God found in Scripture.

God says that despite being question by and wrestling with our forefathers, that God nevertheless love them. And even today we don't always agree with God. We often wrestle with his ways. And it appears that we have been chosen to play this very part.

As such you can probably see how and why we are not limited to following Scripture exactly as written all the time. Sometimes yes, other times no.

The biggest difference between how Jehovah's Witnesses (and many Christians) use Scripture is that they seem to follow them as closely as possible, even when there are contradictory commands to deal with. Jews on the other hand challenge Scripture, we question the Lord, we wrestle with God.

And that is what you should expect from the children of Abraham, from the nation of Israel, the Chosen People of God.

44

The Jewish perspective of the OT according to poster David_Jay

by deegee in

i note your comments in the following threads regarding the jewish perspective on certain old testament (ot) events:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5700922233585664/when-you-stop-think-about-why-would-gods-chosen-people-old-testament-need-army?page=1&size=10 ,.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6065451475927040/why-didnt-god-also-reveal-himself-canaanites-just-he-did-moses-burning-bush.

David_Jay

Thanks for the comments, Grreat Teacher and John_Mann.

John, as to your question about Ezra composing the Hebrew Scriptures while in Babylon: It is unlikely that anyone among the Jews was composing Scripture to a large extent during the Babylonian exile. It was a very dark time for my people.

To discuss this in complete detail would hijack this thread down a different course, but the short of it is that the Scriptures began to shape into the form as we might recognize them during the Davidic dynasty era.

During the exile it was likely only the royal family in exile that had any access to these texts, and while they weren't forgotten during this time and some work could have been done during this time, it was likely after the exile that Scripture began to really develop into the finalized form we know now. It is commonly held that Ezra may have had some hand in this but it's not the only worthy hypothesis that can be considered.

44

The Jewish perspective of the OT according to poster David_Jay

by deegee in

i note your comments in the following threads regarding the jewish perspective on certain old testament (ot) events:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5700922233585664/when-you-stop-think-about-why-would-gods-chosen-people-old-testament-need-army?page=1&size=10 ,.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6065451475927040/why-didnt-god-also-reveal-himself-canaanites-just-he-did-moses-burning-bush.

David_Jay

Do Jews believe that God appeared to Moses?

Keep in mind the illustration of The Miracle Worker. The Bible is the “play” version of the true story. It tells us things that are true, but it often employs narrative devices to get these points across.

Something did happen historically speaking. But is what we read in Scripture about Moses at the burning bush, is this some literal description? Even with those Jews who read the Exodus story more down the literalist path don’t read it at face value (for instance, literalist readings in Judaism see a contradiction in the Exodus text between 3:2 and 4, where one verse says it was an angel at the burning bush and the other says it was God).

What is commonly accepted is that Moses had some type of revelation, whether corporeal (visible to bystanders) or a vision (it is generally held Moses was seeing not a “fire” at the burning bush but the Shekinah) or that even the text is dramatizing the enlightenment Moses received upon learning that Jethro was the high priest of the same God worshipped by Moses’ ancestors, this is what the text is saying. Moses had a “revelation.” The actual nature of this will likely remain unknown, but it was truly a theophany and could have included aspects of some or all the above. (A “theophany” is a manifestation of the Divine as opposed to an “epiphany” where one comes to realize that the Divine is hidden in the guise of something else.)

Do Jews believe that God appeared to anyone among them instructing them to start their religion?

The answer to that is no. While it is part of our history that certain individuals experienced theophanies, there is no instruction for any "let's start the true religion" or anything like that.

This is not Mormonism. That religion is based on someone who claims that God instructed their leader to start that movement. But not Judaism. God didn't ask anyone of us to start the religion of the Jews, not Moses, not Abraham, no one. Not specifically anyway.

Part of that has to do with our concept of God. In short, since Abraham onward Jews have understood God to be the opposite of all deities worshipped by the nations. The physical universe is an effect caused by "something," and that Great Cause is what God is to us. While we refer to this Cause as "God," our concept of God is more of the "un-God," like the soft drink 7-Up used to be called the "un-cola." Nothing humans think a god is or can be describes the true God. God is greater, far more incomprehensible, yet closer and relatable than any god can be. In a sense there are no such things as gods. But the Great Cause of all we see, that is God.

This explains why so many things in Jewish worship seem similar to other religions but then have a facet or do something the complete opposite way others do. For instance, our God has a name, but we don't pronounce the name. Our God is greater than all others, but has no image. Our God is a mystery, but we can still relate to God.

The Jewish response to the God concept is what has become our religion. And it wasn't a religion to begin with. Like other nations of the ancient world, our God was connected to our national identity and ethnic customs. The worship of the Hebrews technically didn’t become what we know as a “religion” until after the Babylonian exile. Granted an entirely new thread can be developed to debate the ins and outs of that, but before then what the Jews did in worship of their God was linked to their ethnic or cultural identity. Jews worshipped their God, and people of other nations worshipped theirs. Rarely did a person from a different nationality worship the deity of another nation. Things didn’t work that way as they do now. The worship of the Jews was no different in the religious paradigm of the ancient world. In fact, it was very much limited by it, shaped by it, and governed by it.

While this doesn't mean Jews don't hold that God did not revealed things regarding our religion. God did indeed do this, sometimes more directly than others, but our response to God began the moment we became aware of this Great Cause. Whether it was a formal act of liturgy or the mere refusal to worship the images of heathens, the worship of the Jews began when they became aware that there was something greater than all the religious ideas humans could come up with.

44

The Jewish perspective of the OT according to poster David_Jay

by deegee in

i note your comments in the following threads regarding the jewish perspective on certain old testament (ot) events:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5700922233585664/when-you-stop-think-about-why-would-gods-chosen-people-old-testament-need-army?page=1&size=10 ,.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6065451475927040/why-didnt-god-also-reveal-himself-canaanites-just-he-did-moses-burning-bush.

David_Jay

Tor,

Ah, that's easy. You want to contact the Rockefeller Archaeological Museum in Jerusalem.

Now, there is no "hall of records" or any sole document with the date as it is figured via a whole set of dates and records (I believe they actually go back from the fall of Babylon itself, the established pivot date of that era in history), and they likely don't have anything as you said that would wake up the Jehovah's Witnesses. But they are an excellent source on the archaeological history of the Hebrews.

And if they can't help you, they should be able to lead you to sources that can. But Jews are not the source for the date itself as it was figured by secular historians, archaeologists and the like, not by something kept by the Jews (just like Americans as a whole aren't the source or have a "hall of records" for all the dates involving events in their history).

44

The Jewish perspective of the OT according to poster David_Jay

by deegee in

i note your comments in the following threads regarding the jewish perspective on certain old testament (ot) events:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5700922233585664/when-you-stop-think-about-why-would-gods-chosen-people-old-testament-need-army?page=1&size=10 ,.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6065451475927040/why-didnt-god-also-reveal-himself-canaanites-just-he-did-moses-burning-bush.

David_Jay

I am not involved in apologetics, which you would have known if you had bothered to read things from the beginning.

Much of what I am writing is not indicative of my own personal views (in fact, a lot of this would look quite different if I was talking about my personal convictions on these very same matters). A religious apology is about defending one’s religious views. I am not here to defend or promote any religious view or even the Scriptures.

I'm trying to answer the OP's request by giving him a Jewish perspective on the matters that the OP asked about. Jews don't have absolute dogmas, so to offer what that perspective is would mean that I am going to be writing a lot about things in an objective manner. I can't defend a lot of this because I don't subscribe to a lot of it myself. An apology would require that.

44

The Jewish perspective of the OT according to poster David_Jay

by deegee in

i note your comments in the following threads regarding the jewish perspective on certain old testament (ot) events:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5700922233585664/when-you-stop-think-about-why-would-gods-chosen-people-old-testament-need-army?page=1&size=10 ,.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6065451475927040/why-didnt-god-also-reveal-himself-canaanites-just-he-did-moses-burning-bush.

David_Jay

Azor,

If someone had taken the legends of America's founders and started a religion with it, a religion that eventually caused division and hatred and suffering in the world, that virtually enslaved millions to its whims, is it the book's fault?

And what if this religion had no Americans in it? It was neither founded by Americans, and the people in it never really checked with Americans to see if their take on the legends was correct.

Yes, this book of American legends may have been misused, and the stories therein are not factual: George Washington never chopped down a cherry tree as a boy who 'cannot tell a lie;' Lincoln was never born in a tiny log cabin; there were no such people as Paul Bunyon or Johnny Appleseed; Betsy Ross never invented the American flag, and Paul Revere's midnight ride never happened the way it is told in this book.

Okay, it's a book of legends. And the book has been misused to enslave people to a religion based on teachings that claimed the legends were fact.

But the Americans never taught that these legends were fact. The Americans were never enslaved by these same legends either. In fact, the Americans built a society not based on these legends, but one that created these lessons to teach different lessons than the one this false religion did. These legends helped America grow, their cause for freedom to grow stronger, and inspired hope in the American people.

But because this religion took its legends and based a religion on them and forced others to follow their interpretation on it, well that is not the fault of either the Americans or their legends, is it?

The millions of adherents to this new religion could have checked with the Americans any time to see if what they were learning was true. But instead the members of this false religion not only ignored what the Americans taught, these members treated the Americans as condemned to hell, etc.

Do you see where I am going with this?

I'm sorry that someone took the legends of my people, the Jews, and got you involved in a religion that by misusing and twisting the legends caused you and countless others such great suffering. But many who believed these twisted interpretations also persecuted us during the centuries. Antisemitism is literally an invention of these legend robbers, and the Holocaust was the culmination of their hatred for us.

It wasn't our legends that enslaved others anymore than our own stories caused us to be thrown into concentration camps and slaughtered. It was not the people who wrote these stories or their descendants who did this. The enslavement and hatred and violence came not from our legends, but was caused by those who took them and reinterpreted them and ignored us when we told them and tried to tell the world that this interpretation was wrong. People ignored us then, and people are ignoring us now.

Again, the same library of books never enslaved us as our culture and religion are not based on it. If the book is at fault for enslaving and beguiling millions, it would have done the same to us. It hasn't.

I am so sorry someone took the stories of my people and caused you any hurt and treated you so badly in the name of these tales. It was not us, however. It was not our our stories themselves that did this.

And I am writing this information because you are absolutely right: who the hell cares? Why bother to ask the Jews about these things? What do they know? It's all their fault for writing those damn things anyway.

That is why I am writing this. Because people don't care to check with the people who originally wrote it, our stories will continue to cause the problems in the world by those who twist them.

But if a man uses fiberglass for insulation and doesn't read the instructions (because "who the hell cares" what the manufacturers have to say about their own product, right?), is he really right for being mad at the fiberglass for any harm that comes from his own mishandling of it? If you never go to the manufacturers for direction, whose fault is it that the fiberglass causes suffering?

44

The Jewish perspective of the OT according to poster David_Jay

by deegee in

i note your comments in the following threads regarding the jewish perspective on certain old testament (ot) events:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5700922233585664/when-you-stop-think-about-why-would-gods-chosen-people-old-testament-need-army?page=1&size=10 ,.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6065451475927040/why-didnt-god-also-reveal-himself-canaanites-just-he-did-moses-burning-bush.

David_Jay

And, by the way, before someone asks, my writing "586/587" is due to some previous dating of the event due to counting years according to an older method.

Counting accession years, an older traditional figure has been 586 BCE for the year in which Jerusalem fell. But the date according to records has been verified as being the 10th of Ab (25 August) 587 BCE. Some Jewish figures still use the 586 date since our calendar begins with an Autumn new year day, making the fall of Jerusalem in the period where both Jewish calendar years cross.

44

The Jewish perspective of the OT according to poster David_Jay

by deegee in

i note your comments in the following threads regarding the jewish perspective on certain old testament (ot) events:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5700922233585664/when-you-stop-think-about-why-would-gods-chosen-people-old-testament-need-army?page=1&size=10 ,.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6065451475927040/why-didnt-god-also-reveal-himself-canaanites-just-he-did-moses-burning-bush.

David_Jay

The deportation began in 597 with the destruction of Judah in 587/586.

Sorry, but I have been gone for so long that I had forgotten that Witnesses place such emphasis on their 607 date that they mark the exile as beginning with the fall of Judah.

The fall of Judah was indeed in 586, and this is the date that is affirmed by a plethora of independent witnesses. But for Jews we mark the Babylonian exile with the first series of deportations, which was 597. I truly meant to focus and write 587/586 in some places, such as writing about the year confirmed by so many independent witnesses, but I am so far removed from being a Witness that I just kept writing 597, for that is how Jews mark this point in history, not with the actual fall.

Just to repeat, the 607 date is indeed wrong, and the confirmed date for the fall of Judah is 587/586 BCE. But the Jews count from the deportation onward.

A sidepoint: I was wondering when I was going to be so far removed from from Watchtower World that I was going to make a slip like that. Hooray, I am already there!

44

The Jewish perspective of the OT according to poster David_Jay

by deegee in

i note your comments in the following threads regarding the jewish perspective on certain old testament (ot) events:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5700922233585664/when-you-stop-think-about-why-would-gods-chosen-people-old-testament-need-army?page=1&size=10 ,.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6065451475927040/why-didnt-god-also-reveal-himself-canaanites-just-he-did-moses-burning-bush.

David_Jay

Thanks, Tor.

While I am definitely not "the" authority on the subject, the reason the date for the Jewish deportation to Babylon is set so well at 597 BCE is because it is one of those monumental historical events that can not only be verified from various dependable, disinterested sources, it was as a major changing point in the history of the Jews that has affected just about everything.

Being that the other major religious players on the world scene, namely Christianity and Islam, have Judaism as a foundational focal point, the fact that the worship of the Jews actually became a religion in its own right at this point in time with these events makes the date essential to the majority of people living in earth. Even if you are atheist or agnostic, you live in a world affected by Islam and Christianity. And these religions, in turn, have a pivotal connection to the history and development of the Hebrews and their worship development. It's a date and event that just isn't fooled with.

Now this is not to say that we have documents that literally say 597 BCE is the year (especially since the BCE/CE system is based on the Christian solar calendar), but as I am sure you can find from anyone else who has done their research on the subject that the date is easy to verify because of all the disinterested and unrelated secular witnesses.

Because of this number of verifiable witnesses on the date and the importance of the event, historians have made it one of the pivotal dates from which to date other events in history. Therefore you will find numerous studies on the subject and much data easily via an Internet search engine. Instead of repeating it all here, you can trust what you read from most sources. Some great work on the subject has also been done by ex-JWs.

Besides, the reason given by the Jehovah's Witnesses why they disregard this well-supported date is a two-fold argument that can't hold water: first, counting 2,520 years from 597 BCE doesn't end up at a year that benefits the Jehovah's Witness paradigm and second, the way all the world's experts have been reading the data COULD be wrong.

Lastly, the calculations in the secular and religious history of the Jews are also part of this data. All the best data, all the best experts, and all these unrelated dependable sources are rejected by the Jehovah's Witnesses.

So again we have Gentiles saying that they know more about our history than we do. Like one person once told me: "What do Jews know about the Bible?"

44

The Jewish perspective of the OT according to poster David_Jay

by deegee in

i note your comments in the following threads regarding the jewish perspective on certain old testament (ot) events:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5700922233585664/when-you-stop-think-about-why-would-gods-chosen-people-old-testament-need-army?page=1&size=10 ,.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6065451475927040/why-didnt-god-also-reveal-himself-canaanites-just-he-did-moses-burning-bush.

David_Jay

THE ORIGIN AND SOURCE OF THE JEWISH SCRIPTURES

Interestingly, though there are basically three schools of Biblical-origin thought in Judaism--the origin concept of literalism, the origin concept of liberalism, and all that lies in between--all three end up at the same place: the ultimate source of the Scriptures is God. This goes for the books of Torah, the Prophets, and all the other Writings (like Psalms).

But it is what that means to those in the various three camps--"the Scriptures come from God"--that differs greatly. And in the end, the eventual conclusions are always somewhat different from what a Christian (and those who have been exposed to only their brand of theology) would think.

In other words, I could have just told you the answer in a language you don't understand and we would still be right here. Like everybody else, Jews have their own definitions for things. Nothing is ever easy. You keep ordering eggs for breakfast, they keep sending you scrambled eggs, and you don't like scrambled eggs! Yadda, yadda, yadda.

Literal is not Liberal

The literal origin approach in Judaism is that every word, every stroke from a stylus, every "iota" in Scripture comes from God. The "inspiration" process is similar to a command-like dictation, though even in the literal camp this doesn't necessarily mean God literally dictated each word and the writers merely wrote what they heard. It does, however, mean that whatever the particulars of the process for the writer was (not all had the same experience), the words are the result of a direct-from-God process, through a human scribe of course.

But the liberal origin view is that the writers may not have been controlled so directly. Their own thoughts, some of their own opinions, and even their lack of knowledge about things caused them to write the text as we have it. Yet, their writing was still not mundane writ in the end. God still "inspired" or directed this process so that the essential religious truths were preserved. It was very human, perhaps with some writers conscious of God's guidance, others not so much. This view is less dictation but just as much influence.

Then you have those who swim in between or borrow from both ends of this paradigm. Regardless of the position, however, the same conclusion is reached: it comes from God.

Thought You Were Going to Get Off Easy, Huh?

No, it's not that simple in the end. For you see, just because a Jew might subscribe to the literal view of inspiration doesn't guarantee that he reads the Scriptures literally. Sure, a lot of those who read Scripture in a literal fashion do subscribe to the more literal view. Yet not everyone who is a literalist believes in the literal "direct line from God" view.

The same goes for more moderate readers and those who employ more critical methodologies. Viewing the process one way doesn't mean you read the text any particular way.

And then there's the "concept" of God. No two Jews have the same concept of the Creator. Just because you accept a literal transmission view doesn't mean you believe that God has a literal voice that can be heard. Since the universal concept of God in Judaism is that God essentially transcends the human ability to fully understand God, therefore God is a mystery and can't possibly be reduced to human and mundane terms. Therefore how a God that cannot be defined literally transmits a text would not be an easy thing to define.

Now, Which Texts are Inspired?

Well, they all were.

Again that depends what you think that "all" includes...probably also what you think "inspiration" does for a text.

Let's simplify this be telling you what "inspiration" ISN'T for Jews. It isn't what it means for most Christians like the Jehovah's Witnesses. It doesn't mean that a text is a form of revelation from God that now means it is the basis for true religion.

See, just because you are "inspired" by God to do something doesn't mean what you do as a result is a revelation of truth upon which to base a religion. Have you ever been inspired by a song? A book or movie? A friend? These things may have inspired you to do something, right? But that something was not necessarily to write a book, let alone create a foundational compendium for a religion. For Jews "inspiration" from God kind of means the same thing.

God may have inspired someone to write something down, but it didn't mean that what they wrote was limited to a literal description of something religious upon which to base one's convictions upon. In Jewish thought, God inspires many things. God can inspire art, poetry, a man to marry a woman, a woman to invent a cure for a horrible disease, or 70 scribes to translate the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek and name it LXX (pronounced "Septuagint," but I don't see how you get that pronounciation from those three letters, LOL ). Even if God inspired you to write some of the Psalms, this doesn't mean that you wrote something that is meant to be read as literal theological truth (but it could mean you are King David and, for the moment, dead). It only means that you did something God wanted you to do (at least in Jewish terms of the word).

You see for Jews our religion and culture and nation were already inspired of God. We didn't need Scriptures upon which to base these things upon. We already had these things. We didn't need Scriptures to validate the truthfulness of our beliefs either. In fact, you might say, the writers of the Scriptures were inspired by our long-standing religion and our culture to compose what you now call the Bible (and that in a sense would count as inspiration from God since that's where such things came from too).

And because he was a Jew, that is essentially what Paul meant when he wrote to Timothy that "all Scripture is inspired of God." (2 Timothy 3:16) This is a Jewish concept, originally anyway. Paul meant that the Scriptures were written under God's influence or direction, not that they were official documents of doctrine (though they are used for doctrine and theology).

That is also why it is so odd to hear that the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses claims it is not inspired in a recent study edition of The Watchtower. To employ the original meaning of the term as used by the Jews, the Governing Body has just told the world they are not guided by any divine influence whatsoever. That is weird, no?

Well, anyway, that's your first answer. Is anyone feeling a bit like Helen Keller either before or after her "way wah" experience yet? More to come.

David_Jay

Posts by David_Jay