Posts by kepler

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.

35

The End of Biblical Studies?

by slimboyfat in

a while ago i read a book called the end of biblical studies by evangelical turned sceptical academic hector avalos.

i thought it was really interesting perhaps because it mirrors some of the stages i went through as regards how i viewed the bible as i was leaving the witnesses.

at first i still believed the bible was inspired by god but learned to use different methods to interpret it than witness eisegesis.

kepler

Vidqun,

I think there are a couple of things wrong with the picture drawn about the End of Bible Studies. Bible studies would end if everything was cut and dry and not to be a matter of uncertainty or controversy. And from what I can tell, there are a lot of things that are still uncertain or controversial. Based on that premise, let’s take another look at those three areas of consideration mentioned.

Textual basis: It is asserted that the Bible is the best preserved. Really? Other documents come down to us based on originals written in stone. Exodus gives an account of things that might have happened in the reign of Ramses III. If you look up Ramses, you can observe his mummified remains and numerous texts that he or his scribes wrote on monuments he commissioned. We have in our hands manuscripts of the NT that date from 3 rd or 4 th century, but not complete. We also know of the debates about what to include as NT and OT from that same era. The manuscript dating of the OT is another matter . We are aware of the Hebrew texts from which the Greek Septuagint was produced in the Alexandrian period in Egypt. We have things that were available from Qumran in Hebrew, but certainly not from the time of prophets such as Isaiah. Other original records in the middle east go back to the 2 nd and 3 rd millennium because they were not scrolls or bound books but written in stone form. This has implications for the historical basis.

Historical basis: There is not an absence of historical basis in the Bible, but many of the things that are claimed based on its texts do not stand up to archeological analysis. Claims made in Joshua for the sieges of Jericho and Ai are examples that come to mind. The stories in that book appear to be concocted explanations for ruins extant then. 19 th century archeologists just assumed that the dates given in the Bible or derived from it were accurate. And as a result there were several hundred year discrepancies in Egyptian history once they were compared with translations resulting from deciphering the Rosetta stone and other hieroglyphics. What is really odd is that the Exodus wandering of 40 years seems to end on a timeline that puts the Israelites entering into the Egyptian New Kingdom’s empire in Canaan. The appendices of the NWT is full of early 19 th century Biblically derived dating. Example: Moses in Numbers supposedly writing about events between 1512-1473 BC. This appendix also attributes the writing of Job to Moses. How do we know that Moses wrote anything? Even the tablets associated with him in the account were written by God.

At my house I have a recent Egyptian history that says that Thutmose III fought at Megiddo in April of 1458 against the Syrian forces, or the forces of the kingdom of Mittani. Along with the later battle of Kadesh with the Hittites (1274, Ramses II) there are detailed records including soldiers’ accounts still standing at the memorials of their graves. The name Pharaoh, which originally meant "house", was just being invented in Thutmose's time. It was a euphemism for whom Thutmose III was step-son, Queen Hathshepsup. I would say that if there is to be continued Bible study, it should include figuring out how such discrepancies occur.

Somewhere above it was stated that gaps or re-copying errors in Biblical texts are not significant. There are numerous examples of episodes that appear to be marginal notes of copyists that found their way into texts. The beginning and (especially) the end of Mark I would consider significant issues. Mark has a very old abrupt end and several later versions with some variety. Thanks to Mark 16:18 we have sects in this country that devote much time and ceremony to snake handling...

It was only a few days ago that I heard mention of comparing the search for Biblical source text with tracing human or animal genetic variations to an earlier genetic code. In either case, we do not have the original in front of us, but we do have analytical procedures to help identify its makeup.

Impressive literature: As a compendium of books, it would have to be. But since we do not know exactly when much of it was written, we might not be comparing it with other period literatures appropriately. It is hard to find a detailed narrative of anything in the second millennium BC, but if we had a 2 nd millennium Bible with its pre-occupations with events in Egypt, I would think its original script would be Egyptian hieroglyphics, wouldn’t you? Its dating is derivative of Babylonian methods. The beginning of the year and months are much the same. The alphabet owes much more to the Phoenician. Episodes such as the “discovery” during the reign of Josiah of what appears to be Deuteronomy (2 Kings 22:3) suggests that even parts of the Pentateuch could have arrived 800 years later than the NWT appendix would have us believe. When things were actually set down as texts, it is difficult to say, especially with events like Jerusalem’s destruction. But should it be as late as the 7 th century, then the Bible could be compared shortly with a large body of Greek literature.

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

Terry,

It took me a couple of readings to grasp what you were saying. One reason might be on account of the so-called paradigm effect. For example, there are other parts of the story that I or others might have stopped to examine and question. But then there are other parts such as "die" and "day" which somehow slipped past review amid all the other strange assumptions of a Garden of Eden in chapter two disconnected from chapter one.

But another aspect of the story is that the OT text and Judaism quickly drop it. Whether it was meant to do more than superficially explain origins is not entirely clear. Abraham, his descendants and Moses are pre-occupied with a Covenant in which events in the Garden of Eden appear have little bearing. The subject of Adam, Eve, apple and serpent in the garden are all dropped - as far as I can tell - until Paul picks it up again in the Epistles.

So I'm still back on message. Paul and the NT Gospel and Acts writers give an account of Christ's life, tell of miraculous events, relate who was present when they occurred and tell either what the Holy Spirit said or what the messengers of God said.

In fact, the establishment wrought by Rutherford so thoroughly puts a cap on things miraculous that reflecting on it sent me back to look again at Dostoevsky's sidebar story to "The Brothers Karamazov" - The Grand Inquisitor (Book V, chapter 5). Christ returns to 16th century Spain and is immediately arrested by the theocratic authorities. You could say that he was guilty of performing a miracle. And, as noted by the narrator, he came "that day and that hour, knoweth no man, not the Son, but the Father." In the Dostoevsky account the Grand Inquisitor an old man of ninety, passed by the cathedral, and witnessed the crowd and cure of a young girl.

It's not a dialog but a monolog when the Grand Inquisitor and Jesus meet face to face. Examination of the prisoner begins as follows:

"Is it 'Thou'?"... "Don't answer, be silent. What canst Thou say, indeed? I know too well what Thou wouldst say. And Thou has no right to add anything to what Thou hadst said of old. Why then art Thou come to hinder us?..."

This was brother Ivan's dream that he relates to younger brother Alyosha the monk. The book was written in 1874.

Interesting.