Posts by kepler

30

Odd, isn't it? Genesis never mentions Satan; Job mentions a serpent or Adam maybe once or not at all - and Eve gets 4 refs in whole Bible

by kepler in

my concordance searches indicate eve is mentioned twice in the ot and twice in the new.

i guess elsewhere in genesis she must be the wife or the woman.

interesting: since she was the only woman in the world and adam was the only man, i wonder how husband and wife as terminology were invented?

kepler

Test. I can't see some of the posts.

15

Applying Chapter 21 (Captives of a Concept)

by Cameron_Don in

jw
friends

note: i found the following experience where someone (rob) applied captives of a concepts chapter 21 when trying to help his father-in-law see some of the interesting he learned from the proclaimers book.. __________________________________________.

this past wednesday night, the 6th.

i met with my father-in-law.

kepler

RE:

-------------------------------

Hello, Kepler...

Here is a comment from my book about how the Governing Body has changed the meaning of “the end of the Gentile Times” from referring to the literal end of their rule in 1914 to their rule being invisibly interrupted in 1914 by an invisible Jesus Christ who was invisibly present as he was being invisibly enthroned to begin his invisible rule from the invisible heavens.”

How do Jehovah’s Witnesses know that all these invisible events occurred in 1914? They have no problem accepting this explanation because it comes from what they believe to be God’s visible organization. “

As long as Witnesses believe the Society is God’s organization they don’t need any proof of the above invisible events.

Don

-------------

Don,

So long as we are not spoiling this for potential readers - and you decide- When did everyone at Kingdom Hall come to realize this?

I mean, with General Relativity, say, in 1919 Eddington does an observation of a star's light bent in proximity to or prior to occultation by the sun. The change in angle is double what Newtonian physics predicted, but about right for General Relativity, given observational difficulties. The announcement is read in scientific conferences where, in one instance, Einstein happens to be lecturing - and there was supposedly applause.

Now analogously, how was this supposed to have occurred with Christ's return and selection of the pre-Jehovah's Witnesses organization to displace all earthly authority? The war had been going on since late June when Russell said in October that, yes, this is the one and then added it that the war was final and God's irrevocable decision for which prayer of reversal should not be considered. Shouldn't there have been a "telegram" about the "Archduke" if this was an invisible event observed?

And in 1919? Why the administrative delay? The 144,000 weren't in their celestial offices for the review? And how long did it take to get the word out? Wouldn't it have helped if that were well understood earlier? Why keep it a secret? Am I even getting the gist of this story right?

And still, if it happened in 1919 rather than one of the earlier years, what invisible observation was observed? Or is this another tea-leaves reading of scripture that hadn't occurred earlier? Could it not have occurred until after Rutherford had corporate control?

To tell the truth, most of the argument I had seen for a 1914 end or return ( your choice) was based on Russell's books and then a lot of that was based on his supposed measurements of pyramid passages, revised as required by calendar passage. This argument was subsequently denounced by Rutherford in the late 20s as not only in error but Satanic.

And then when anyone does the math on 1914 and Jerusalem's destruction, plus the the re-calculation of lunar eclipses during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar with a PC-based software, or resorts to Babylonian records cut in stone...

K

15

Applying Chapter 21 (Captives of a Concept)

by Cameron_Don in

jw
friends

note: i found the following experience where someone (rob) applied captives of a concepts chapter 21 when trying to help his father-in-law see some of the interesting he learned from the proclaimers book.. __________________________________________.

this past wednesday night, the 6th.

i met with my father-in-law.

kepler

...He was not aware that the writings that "Proclaimers" book stated (without stating) that the first 2 Presidents didn't know when Christ arrived.

“Had never made the correlation that The GB didn't know until 1943 that Christ had returned. He was visibly upset with this but a few minutes later composed himself.

“He went through automatic dispelling of the facts. I held firm to what the book was stating.

“I then asked that the Jehovah's Witnesses do without fail follow the bible scriptures. "There is no doubt they do" was his reply.

“Well, I told him I was surprised to learn that they were the only religion not watching for Christ's return and didn't open to him in 1914. In direct conflict with (Luke 12:36-37), which we immediately read in the Bible.

----------------------------------

Don Cameron,

Greetings. Read with interest your account of the family discussion about the "events" of 1914 to 1919. Elsewhere on this forum I had touched on the Faithful Slave doctrine and certainly the significance of 1914 and the subsequent selection of God's theocratic voice on Earth circa 1919. In fact, in one recent topic, I had asked specifically how it was possible to witness an invisible event: How do you know when it occurred? How to corroborate accounts ( e.g. two witnesses attesting to the same thing)? Understand that I am not a JW, but have been drawn into these discussions by circumstances ( my ex fiance decided to return to the faith and I took instructions for several months at home). So many ideas have not really sunk in from years of exposure or avidly reading piles of publications.

But in some respects, in proposing the topic of witnessing an invisible event, it struck me a little like a comedy sketch even as I wrote it. I could have laughed more if things had not turned out so terribly on a personal scale and on the much larger one of a century old world-wide multi-million victim network. But you have added even more spin to this curve ball. These events have become even more invisible if the principal witnesses had no knowledge of their own testimony or never even made such claims.

I hope you will reiterate some of what you have written here on the forum. And describe the argument in more detail.

Looking forward to reading your book.

Best regards,

K

14

How can one be a witness of events unseen and unheard?

by kepler in

back in the 13th century, the rumors coming to western europe of things happening in central asia could have been much worse.

events then were about as apocalyptic as anything we have experienced in our own day.

much of the world was coming under new management, that of the descendants of genghis khan.

kepler

Hi, folks.

It's been a while since any of us had made any updates to this topic, but I did come across something which had some bearing on it.

On another similar topic, I had made mention of the following:

"...On the authority that this publishing agency has vested in itself based on the PARABLE near the end of Matthew 24 (45-51), tying itself to the servant discussed in the second part of Isaiah (chapters 40-55). "

I had heard of this often enough, but I hadn't realized some of the background. Cameron_Don, brings up the matter on another thread.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/229474/1/Applying-Chapter-21-e2809cCaptives-of-a-Concepte2809d

What I took away from that is that these matters about a faithful slave were not even brought up in 1914-1920, much less resolved in favor of a governing body. I had seen elsewhere that in effusive declarations at Russell's funeral, he was called "The Faithful Slave", but if he was - then what did that make his successors? How was the mantle supposed to have been passed on?

I had started this topic based on the assumption that the arrival of Christ in 1914 and the selection of the WTBTS circa 1919 was a doctrine that originated shortly after the calendar dates on which they were purported to happen. I might have been wrong about that.

30

Odd, isn't it? Genesis never mentions Satan; Job mentions a serpent or Adam maybe once or not at all - and Eve gets 4 refs in whole Bible

by kepler in

my concordance searches indicate eve is mentioned twice in the ot and twice in the new.

i guess elsewhere in genesis she must be the wife or the woman.

interesting: since she was the only woman in the world and adam was the only man, i wonder how husband and wife as terminology were invented?

kepler

Hi, folks.

I appreciate the contributions on this subject. Sorry I hadn't responded earlier. To be honest, I didn't know what I could add.

Until finally. I noticed that as I rambled on above I had stumbled over an important doctrine.

"On the authority that this publishing agency has vested in itself based on the PARABLE near the end of Matthew 24 (45-51), tying itself to the servant discussed in the second part of Isaiah (chapters 40-55). "

I had of this often enough, but I hadn't realized some of the background. Cameron_Don, brings up the matter on another thread.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/229474/1/Applying-Chapter-21-e2809cCaptives-of-a-Concepte2809d

What I took away from that is that these matters about a faithful slave were not even brought up in 1914-1920, much less resolved in favor of a governing body. I had seen elsewhere that in effusive declarations at Russell's funeral, he was named as such, but if he was - then what did that make his successors?

It also has bearing on another topic I started earlier, about how can you witness something that you cannot see.

18

Official link of the Disaffiliation of the Watchtower to the UN

by TheScientist in

hello folks,.

i have other news.. i had seen in the brazilian forum that un had removed the document that speaks about the disaffiliation of the watchtower to it.. however, what really happened was the restructuring of the website, which caused the linkto got invalid... follow the official link of the document directly from the website of the un:.

http://search.un.org/smb/secf10.un.org/digilib/$/digitallibrary/dig/www.un.org/dpi/ngosection/pdfs/watchtower.pdf.

kepler

The Scientist,

Thanks as well. I took a look at that link and downloaded a couple of items.

A couple of years ago when I was given home instruction for much of the fall and winter, my instructors spent some time discoursing on the evil and illegitimacy of the United Nations. I had no idea what that was all about, save perhaps it was guilt by association with the League of Nations or that as a world wide governing body (excuse me), it had the temerity to even try. I never did get the full background; just the nods of assent by his two junior colleagues.

I don't know if this is faulty memory about a previous discussion or what. But I went back to the JW organization "letterhead" looking for one of the counsels who might have performed some UN-related activity. Ms. Carolyn Wah was the individual I was thinking of. She had published several papers on international affairs and minority rights, plus a supposed academic analyses of the WTBTS from a not very academically objective position.

But I did note that between the period of 1992 to 2001 when the NGO membership was active, associate counsel Wah represented the Society in litigation for the frozen assets of JW victims of Nazi concentration camp imprisonment.

www.swissbankclaims.com/pdfs_eng/WatchTowerBible.pdf

The assets were held in Swiss banks and the litigation proceeded via the US district court in New York, probably just blocks away from the Brooklyn headquarters. A lot of the argument in behalf of award to the society were based on things that an NGO might do.

Do you suppose that it was just coincidental that this claim on assets was submitted during the period of UN NGO status?

Does anyone know how that was resolved?

And, of course, were there other activities understaken of a similar nature (1992-2001)?

30

Odd, isn't it? Genesis never mentions Satan; Job mentions a serpent or Adam maybe once or not at all - and Eve gets 4 refs in whole Bible

by kepler in

my concordance searches indicate eve is mentioned twice in the ot and twice in the new.

i guess elsewhere in genesis she must be the wife or the woman.

interesting: since she was the only woman in the world and adam was the only man, i wonder how husband and wife as terminology were invented?

kepler

My concordance searches indicate Eve is mentioned twice in the OT and twice in the New. I guess elsewhere in Genesis she must be the wife or the woman. Interesting: Since she was the only woman in the world and Adam was the only man, I wonder how husband and wife as terminology were invented? But I'm digressing.

"Now the serpent..." That's how this whole metaphysical structure is introduced in Gen 3:1. And mentioned no more after 3:14. "Dan shall be a serpent" in Gen 49:17, but, "he will be a snake on the road, a viper on the path, who bistes the horse on the hock so that its rider falls backwards." He will also govern his people like any other of the tribes of Israel." Gen 49:16. Then Moses did some things with staff and serpents in Exodus...

Job at 26:13: (KJV) By his spirit he hath garnished the heavens; his hand hath formed the crooked serpent.

My New Jerusalem Bible only has verses 1 -4 in Chapter 26.

Again, Job on Adam (KJV 31:33):"If I covered my transgressions, as Adam, by hiding my iniquity in my bosom..."

The NJB: "Have I ever concealed my transgression from others or kept my fault a secret in my breast?"

Is it possible that references to Adam and the serpent in KJV are what are known as "glosses"? I thought that only happened when someone had evidence in a text for the Trinity.

So here we go. I just noticed a lengthy animated topic on Satan and Adam's talk in the Garden. But yet as far as I can tell, Adam didn't even get to speak with the Serpent. And surprisingly, in one of the 2 instances of Eve's name in the NT, we can quote Paul in II Corinthians 11:3. "I am afaid that, just as the serpent with his cunning seduced Eve, your minds may be led astray from single-minded devotion to Christ. " As he relates, he is concerned that others teaching other Gospels will lead people astray. But what is Paul driving at? Because he speaks of Adam's sin in Romans 5:14. Adam, as far as I can tell, if he did not deal directly with the serpent, was covering for Eve. Even by Paul's logic, the Serpent does not figure in this issue between Adam and God. And judging from what transpires in the story of Job, why should I think otherwise. In the trials of Job, whatever their basis, God and Satan have nothing to say about the "Adam and Eve Incident".

But all the same, for every page of the Bible, we have a NY-based publisher that is willing to write hundreds of thousands of pages of dogmatic commentary to be treated with the same veneration or more. The connections between garden serpent, Satan, Adam and Job are all readily apparent because we have been hearing about them for so long. And why? On the authority that this publishing agency has vested in itself based on the PARABLE near the end of Matthew 24 (45-51), tying itself to the servant discussed in the second part of Isaiah (chapters 40-55).

The synoptic Gospels give three accounts of Jesus describing the destruction of the Temple, but only Matthew provides this parable. In other words, focus on Luke 17 or Mark 12-13 would you leave with a different impression of the consequences of Jerusalem's future travails. In Luke it sounds more like the Rapture of other Protestant sects [ 34: I tell you, on that night, when two are in one bed, one will be taken" - this sounds like more than 144,000]. In Mark the instruction is directed toward all: be a faithful doorkeeper awaiting the master of the house. And when I read Matthew, I see a story with a bifurcation: a branch related to a master pleased with his servant's conduct; the other, a description of the master's anger if the servant is derelict or abusive to those left in his charge. But in none of these do I see anything with Rutherford or his successor's names on it - any more than anyone else's, save for the obvious boasts of being prophets.

33

Has Anyone Seen "Prometheus"?

by Low-Key Lysmith in

i loved it!

but then, it went right along with my own personal beliefs concerning mankind's origins, so i'm a little biased.. wondering what a religious person's thoughts would be?.

kepler

Memories return of previous pictures about aliens and viewer impressions.

Decades ago, one of the local UFO enthusiasts was asked if he had seen "Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind." Yes, he had. But he didn't like it, because "Actually, it was not realistic."

33

Has Anyone Seen "Prometheus"?

by Low-Key Lysmith in

i loved it!

but then, it went right along with my own personal beliefs concerning mankind's origins, so i'm a little biased.. wondering what a religious person's thoughts would be?.

kepler

Didn't see the movie. As a matter of fact, was more curious about another (partial) space opera, about a planet named "Melancholia" that ends up destroying the set. An update on "When Worlds Collide" - but in a way a little more plausible.

From time to time had heard of the notion that life on earth got its head start from elsewhere. Francis Crick, one of the discoverers of DNA back in the early 50s, about a decade or so later went around suggesting that life on Earth got started, maybe if some aliens had stopped by and left their garbage here.

Or other variations, that elementary lifeforms or advanced organic chemistry compounds are abundant galaxy wide and drift around, or that places like Mars where it could have got an earlier start, contaminated the earth via impact debris from other collisions that got knocked off the surface. We've got the martian meteorites of recent arrival, picked off glacier surfaces in Antarctica or Greenland - but the arguments that microbial formations were anything that once lived - far short of a scientific consensus - but the search goes on.

What I have heard about the movie though is that there is some Space Odyssey early scene of an alien 3.5 billion years ago seeding the earth with some bacteria or something - and then, like "The Search for Spock" or "Nemo", people from Earth take off looking for the guy.

Well, exo-planets aren't exactly like the moon hanging around nearby in the sky. If the little green men from billions of years back came from planet Zong orbiting star Zing, both Earth and Zing-Zong are orbiting the center of the galaxy. Their paths are arbitrary. They are two stars in a crowd of a couple hundred billion. What would place them in proximity now? How could you tell?

And what do you know! From what I hear it's like the identical twins that were raised by adoptive parents. We named our dogs fido; so did the aliens. We grew up to be firemen. So did the aliens. And it all started with archeobacteria or whatever. The aliens must have got impatient about their plans having to wait until the Pre-Cambrian for anything multi-cellular to show up. But they had a dream, ... I guess. How did the dinosaurs fit into the scheme? I guess they needed to have a 200 million year jungle picture episode. All gets wrapped up in the 23rd century though, right?

That business about "Melancholia". I don't know if the director had any idea, but as the exo-planet picture has been getting clearer, part of the clarity is that a whole lot of planets get ejected out of star systems. Maybe one for every star. Space is pretty empty, true, but I can remember when people debated about whether there were any planets at all, much less whether they were any running loose like the home of Ming the Merciless, the planet Mongo. Maybe a chilled down Neptune. 2012, 2013 a chance in a million, true. But if aimed right,an interloper like that could put a kabosh on an eterna corporate party on a paradise earth.

46

stake or cross?

by Tekel in

kepler

Was it (stauros) a stake or cross?

I will cite a noted authority on this matter, "Judge" Joseph Rutherford who refers to this matter in his book of the 1920s, "The Harp of God". On page 135 of The Harp of God in a chapter titled “The Ransom”, Rutherford writes: “Thus died the Son of God, the great anti-typical ‘Lamb… which taketh away the sin of the world’. (John 1:29) In the eyes of those that stood by he died as a sinner, crucified between two thieves under the charge of disloyalty to the constituted powers, yet wholly innocent, harmless and without sin.”

On page 181 of the same book, on the first page of a chapter titled, String 7: Mystery Reveaedl, paragraph 299.

“ On the last night before his crucifixion [Jesus] was instructing them in various things that would be helpful to them in the days to come.”

As OGD wrote, Greek was the local language, but the administration of Palestine and court procedings were undertaken under Roman law. In an early episode of his career Julius Caesar crucified the pirates who took him captive among his many commentaries, if not on the Gallic Wars, but writing in Latin all the same. Spartacus and the other gladiators who had revolted in the 70s BC were crucified (6000, if not Spartacus included) by Crassus or Pompey, but the historical accounts (Appian and Livy) we have describe the administration of justice with the same Greek verb as appears in the NT. My conclusion: when a Roman writes stauros in Greek, he means cross.

I suppose much of this is a matter of the mind's eye. Substitute Christ saying to the rich man, give up all that he owns and "then pick up your torture stake and come follow me." Lenny Bruce had once considered the possibility of Christ's execution in New York state being by electric chair. ..But in either alternate case, somehow the message seems distorted. Cross in subsequent context signifies "sacrifice". I don't know about you, but to me, "taking up the torture stake" simply denotes masochism. Bad translation no matter how many crossbars are involved in one or the other.

The southern constellation Alpha Crucis is not simply a line but a cross...

If there were a transformation of this notion from stake to cross, it must have come early. Constantine's wife searched for the remains of the "true cross" and Constantine himself claimed he was inspired by a vision ("in hoc signum"). Whether either are inspiring or not, the vision of a vertical post does not seem as "visual" as two intersecting lines or timbers. Both of these 4th century figures spoke Greek; so I don't think they were having Greek translation problems. But they were not around when the "Judge" had a 20th century PR inspiration that would distinguish his movement from all of those millenia old "pagan cults". Just one of the many ways that Christian community had gone off the rails until the great leader, speaker and writer came along to put it back on the track after 1914.