Posts by Bobcat

48

WT Says O.K. To Visit With Disfellowshipped Family Members...Discreetly!

by JW GoneBad in

discreetly!.

that was the word the speaker used to tell jws at the regional convention that when the need to visit or associate with d'fd family members....okay to do so......only discreetly!.

on friday morning in the 6 part symposium entitled 'what must be kept in second place?

Bobcat

Since this thread has run its course, I'll make a comment about Friday's program:

It was interesting to see how they wove several thoughts into the whole day's program -

Pioneering - every experience, skit, etc (bar none), had pioneering as its end goal. In every case the experience or skit ended well when the participants either got back into pioneering or started pioneering. And any drama or setback experienced threatened one's pioneering. Everybody interviewed was a pionner.
The Kingdom's 100th year of operation & 1914 were woven into talks & comments throughout the day. Yet nothing was said to prove or backup the chronology related to 1914. (Not that they can.) Once or twice it was mentioned that the 20th century was a century of warfare (mentioning 100 million or so killed in warfare during that century). But no proof offered that this was anything different from past centuries.
The Governing Body. This was interesting how they did this. There were, of course, comments throughout the whole day about how "the slave" has done this or provided that. There were also a couple of talks via tie-in by GB member David Splane from East Rutherford NJ. (There was also a tied-in talk by a brother introduced as a 'GB helper.' His somewhat un-fluent or halting speaking manner gave me the impression of a man who was part of a harem, or a professional brown-noser. Maybe that's not the best way to describe it. But there was something about him . . .) But anyways, there was a part on a talk about "thrones" (God's, Jesus', and "the anointed's"). Part of this talk was about how we could trust "the anointed." There were a couple of interviews where brothers remembered how they knew various GB members and what down-to-earth and loving brothers they were. There were no other examples of "anopinted" except for GB members. And of course, it was assumed without doubt that they were "anointed." There was also an interview with a CO's wife late in the afternoon where she recalled the July 2013 WT "new light" about "Feeding the Many by the Few" and she plainly stated that "the slave" was the GB and how we must accept that, and how these eight (or seven?) were responsible for feeding 8 million JWs and the rest of the world (spiritually).

Like I said, just from a propaganda standpoint, it was interesting to see how they wove those three ideas into the day as a whole. Obviously, the individual parts are analyzed to bring about or achieve an overall goal that is bigger than any individual part. As some have mentioned elsewhere, there was also some crass emotionalism in some of the video presentations and the afternoon drama. (Yes, there was a short live drama in the afternoon.)

48

WT Says O.K. To Visit With Disfellowshipped Family Members...Discreetly!

by JW GoneBad in

discreetly!.

that was the word the speaker used to tell jws at the regional convention that when the need to visit or associate with d'fd family members....okay to do so......only discreetly!.

on friday morning in the 6 part symposium entitled 'what must be kept in second place?

Bobcat

I just attended Friday at Columbia SC and I was listening closely to the talk that the OP mentioned regarding DFed ones and the word "discreetly."

It was on the afternoon symposium about 'Keeping the Kingdom First & things to put in second place.' (I didn't have a program so I don't have the exact name of the part.

The speaker definitely said "we don't associate with DFed relatives." He said it in a context of how some relatives might be disturbed by the fact that 'we don't associate with relatives who are DFed.'

A sentence or two later he mentioned that we should treat our non-witness relatives 'discreetly and with respect.'

So he used the word "discreetly," but not with regard to DFed relatives. It was in connection with "non-witness" relatives.

5

Evacuate Earth..Antone see it??

by jam in

Bobcat

Is this the one?:

.

I haven't seen or heard of it before this. Looks interesting.

Bobcat

20

John 1:1-18

by Doug Mason in

i spent a couple of hours trying to work out the poetic structure of john 1:1-18. i have made my first rough draft available as a word document so that others can amend it for themselves.

the text i used is from the niv.

it will be interesting to see the poetic structures produced by analyses of other translations.. http://www.jwstudies.com/chiasms_of_john_1_vv_1_to_18.docx.

Bobcat

Doug:

I think pages 9 - 13 of the BECNT commentary may be a good starting point for what you are looking for. It shows the book of John from both a literary and a chronological format. There is a literary structure to it. But I don't think it could work into one large chiasmus.

By the way, note footnote 22 on the bottom of page 11. This is why I started this thread some time back.

Bobcat

20

John 1:1-18

by Doug Mason in

i spent a couple of hours trying to work out the poetic structure of john 1:1-18. i have made my first rough draft available as a word document so that others can amend it for themselves.

the text i used is from the niv.

it will be interesting to see the poetic structures produced by analyses of other translations.. http://www.jwstudies.com/chiasms_of_john_1_vv_1_to_18.docx.

Bobcat

Doug:

In my haste to type the material in, I forgot to give the full source. I guess I shouldn't assume that everyone could figure out "BECNT." (Although it does seem you did.)

For anybody else who might want to take a look at this, BECNT stands for Baker Exegetical Commentary of the New Testament. (This is the volume on the gospel of John.) The material I referenced above was from pages 20 & 21. The book is chock full of additional references in the footnotes. The preview at Google books includes this section. See here. (Use the right and left arrows just after "Front Cover" to scroll down to page 19 and on. This is where it discusses the prologue.)

Take Care

Bobcat

11

New Light: 3rd heaven?

by problemaddict in

forgive me if this has been covered.

last year i did a synopsis of the convention, but my wife decided she did not want to go this year (thats a win), so i didn't either.

a good friend of mine however tipped me to something in david splanes talk.. its pretty mild, but seems a bit wacky.

Bobcat

I posted a comment about this topic here on another board.

When you look at the context (2 Cor 12:1-10) and the reason that Paul mentioned this experience, he was sarcastically showing that he could present himself to the Corinthians just as fabulously as the 'super-apostles' that he was being compared with. But he chose not to do that way.

So, while the GB present "new light" about what they speculate the "third heaven" is, they, by their actions, show that they miss the point Paul was trying to make. (Matthew 23:24)

20

John 1:1-18

by Doug Mason in

i spent a couple of hours trying to work out the poetic structure of john 1:1-18. i have made my first rough draft available as a word document so that others can amend it for themselves.

the text i used is from the niv.

it will be interesting to see the poetic structures produced by analyses of other translations.. http://www.jwstudies.com/chiasms_of_john_1_vv_1_to_18.docx.

Bobcat

Snowbird:

I'm finding as I get older I'm having difficulty choosing my words. I sometimes wonder if a bang on the head I received some years back might be part of it.

48

WT Says O.K. To Visit With Disfellowshipped Family Members...Discreetly!

by JW GoneBad in

discreetly!.

that was the word the speaker used to tell jws at the regional convention that when the need to visit or associate with d'fd family members....okay to do so......only discreetly!.

on friday morning in the 6 part symposium entitled 'what must be kept in second place?

Bobcat

If this was a rogue statement, I would be surprised that the DC overseer didn't correct it later for the audience. This is a big WT doctrine at stake.

Sometimes it is hard to get a verbal statement, heard only once, and without knowing that it is coming, straight. Then again, sometimes speakers get their words mangled and things don't come out as intended.

20

John 1:1-18

by Doug Mason in

i spent a couple of hours trying to work out the poetic structure of john 1:1-18. i have made my first rough draft available as a word document so that others can amend it for themselves.

the text i used is from the niv.

it will be interesting to see the poetic structures produced by analyses of other translations.. http://www.jwstudies.com/chiasms_of_john_1_vv_1_to_18.docx.

Bobcat

Snowbird:

Sometimes I have a problem pulling the word I want up from the dictionary on the top of my shoulders.

20

John 1:1-18

by Doug Mason in

i spent a couple of hours trying to work out the poetic structure of john 1:1-18. i have made my first rough draft available as a word document so that others can amend it for themselves.

the text i used is from the niv.

it will be interesting to see the poetic structures produced by analyses of other translations.. http://www.jwstudies.com/chiasms_of_john_1_vv_1_to_18.docx.

Bobcat

The BECNT-John commentary offers a chiasm for verses 1-2 as well as the whole of the prologue in 1-18

Verses 1-2:

A Ἐν ἀρχῇ (In the beginning)

. . . B ἦν (was)

. . . . . . C ὁ λόγος, (the Word)

. . . . . . . . . D καὶ ὁ λόγος (and the Word)

. . . . . . . . . . . .E ἦν (was)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F πρὸς τὸν θεόν, (with the God)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F' καὶ θεὸς (and God)

. . . . . . . . . . . . E' ἦν (was)

. . . . . . . . . D' ὁ λόγος. (the Word)

. . . . . .C' Οὗτος (He)

. . . B' ἦν (was)

A' ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν. (in the beginning with the God)

The commentary calls the above "staircase parallelism," as well as chaistic.

Here is how it chiastically outlines verses 1-18:

A The Word's activity in creation (1:1-5)

. . . B John's witness concerning the light (1:6-8)

. . . . . .C The incarnation of the Word and the privilege of becoming God's children (1:9-14)

. . . B' John's witness concerning the Word's preeminence (1:15)

A' The final revelation brought by Jesus Christ (1:16-18)

The commentary mentions that there are variations of this.

The commentary mentions that verses 1 & 2 have a literary relationship with verse 18, in effect forming a . . . I can't think of the correct word at the moment, but it has a literary meaning similar to 'bookends.' "Framing" might be it, but somehow my mind is telling me there is another term.

Bobcat

(Edited: "inclusio" - that's the word I was looking for.)