Posts by Bobcat

4

"Seven nations more populous than you are"

by FFGhost in

i wrote this up a few months ago:.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5087628499091456/camp-israel-problem-pooping.

this other little nugget from deuteronomy caught my eye as well:.

Bobcat

The words rendered "populous" and "more populous" in the NWT are the same word in the Hebrew (Strong's # 7227). The word basically means "many" or "great." It is possible to understand the first occurrence in Deut 7:1 to refer to 'many nations,' or 'great nations,' rather than 'many people' (as in population).

The second occurrence of the term is rendered "more populous" in the NWT, and could also be rendered as 'great' or 'greater' or 'larger,' rather than "more populous." (See the BibleHub translation listing here.)

But even if the word is meant in reference to population, it is also possible that the writer is speaking of these seven nations as being collectively "more populous." The NAC-Deuteronomy commentary suggests that that is one way to read the text. (p.177)

That would pare down 24,000,000 to a number larger than that of Israel, but still far less than 24 million.

One other point to note: A chronology based on the MT alone places the flood at around 2303 BCE (with variations according to who you cite). But if you factor in the LXX & SP regarding the post flood patriarchs (a 650 year increase), the date of the flood becomes ~ 2953 BCE. (For example, see here.)

The reason I point that out is because if one dates Israel's entry into the promised land at 1406 BCE (as many do), that allows for roughly 1550 years of human population growth after the flood, making a promised land population in the millions quite feasible. (For example, using this calculator, and a starting population of 8, and 1550 years, and a 1.2 % growth rate, gives an ending population of nearly 57 million.)

Of course, the 1.2 % growth rate is simply a guess. Reportedly, human population rose from ~1 billion in 1800 CE to about 7.7 billion now (220 years). This is a growth rate of about .935 %. So my guess of a 1.2 % growth rate above was predicated/guesstimated on the longer post-flood life spans reported in the Bible and more prevalent polygamy. But my point is that mathematically and linguistically, it would have been quite possible for the nations of the promised land to have (collectively) outnumbered Israel, even using a 2 or 2.5 million figure for Israel when they entered the promised land.

(Using a starting population of 8, 1550 years, and 1.3 % growth rate gives an ending population of nearly 4 billion. 1.2 % gave an ending population of about 57 million. Such is the exponential nature of population growth.)

12

What do you think about Nehemia Gordon theory regarding "Yehovah" as God's name pronunciation that never got completely lost?

by psyco in

nehemia gordon, in his book "shattering the conspiracy of silence", argues that "yehovah" is god's name pronunciation and it has never got completely lost, giving a linguistic explanation.

what do you think about that?.

Bobcat

Have you read the book? If so, I was curious what you think about it.

What is the gist of his argument about the Name?

Curious posters want to know.

13

The parable of the trees! (Judges 9:8-15

by slimboyfat in

do you recall reading this passage before?

i came across this it yesterday while preparing a bible presentation on trees.

i had no idea this passage existed.

Bobcat

For any interested, here (off-site) is a page (with links) that shows the literary structure of the book of Judges. The account about Abimelech can be found in the "E^" portion.

Constable's Notes has this to say about the parable:

Jotham’s fable was a parable with a moral (cf. 2 Sam. 12:1-4; 2 Kings 14:9-10). It is generally recognized as the first parable in the Bible. The olive and fig trees and the grape vine represented productive human beings, oil, figs, and wine being among the most important products of Canaan. Brambles bore no fruit and offered no shelter or protection. They only injured those who got too close to them. Moreover they spontaneously burst into flames in hot weather and sometimes caused much damage consequently (v. 15). Obviously the bramble represented Abimelech, the trees and vine more noble individuals, and the cedars of Lebanon the upright leaders of Shechem.

There are some elements in Jotham's parable that are used in other portions of the Bible. But there is no clear connection or reference to the parable with any other portion of the Bible (based on a search thru The Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament).

17

Another one that Jdubs miss

by HawayMan in

.

Bobcat

Hi John,

Yes, I don't agree with WT. I used to. But that was before I started doing my own study.

Thanks again for bringing up the thought of comparing erchomai with parousia.

17

Another one that Jdubs miss

by HawayMan in

.

Bobcat

Maybe I am misunderstanding you but are you saying his 'presence' and 'coming' are two different events?

I said:

The first difference between these two words is that erchomai is a verb; parousia is a noun. Erchomai expresses movement, parousia is an event. And thus, the two words can be used in the same context, such as at Mt 24:36-44. The verbs in the context describing Jesus' "coming" (vss. 37, 42, 44) are all part of the event, his parousia. (vs. 39)

I made a mistake in the above quote. Mt 24:37 uses the term parousia. The NET renders it as "coming." That is why I thought (without checking) that erchomai occurred there. But my point is the same. Erchomai is a verb. It expresses action. Parousia is a noun. An event is a noun, a thing. Since erchomai is a verb it cannot be an event, which is a noun. But erchomai can be something that happens during an event.

17

Another one that Jdubs miss

by HawayMan in

.

Bobcat

Hi John,

I'm glad you brought this up. I have a post (here - off site) devoted to the word parousia. But the focus of the post is on whether the NT ever associates Jesus' parousia with his enthronement (as the WT does).

When I get a chance I am going to have to add a post discussing the differences between erchomai and parousia.

The first difference between these two words is that erchomai is a verb; parousia is a noun. Erchomai expresses movement, parousia is an event. And thus, the two words can be used in the same context, such as at Mt 24:36-44. The verbs in the context describing Jesus' "coming" (vss. 37, 42, 44) are all part of the event, his parousia. (vs. 39)

Parousia means "presence," but the way it is used in the NT and anciently gives it an added flavor that, to me, "presence" does not convey. It is more like an official state visit, with all that such a visit would include.

In the NT (as my link shows), parousia is associated with Jesus rewarding his faithful servants and punishing the others. Mt 24:27 associates it with sudden and widespread effects. And with death, such as one might find on a large battlefield. (Mt 24:28 - for which, see footnote # 38 in the NET Bible here.)

To me, "advent" much better encapsulates how the NT uses parousia. "Presence" doesn't carry any of those overtones. But I would say that "presence" much better encapsulates what the WT teaches about Jesus' parousia, that is, an invisible presence that only a few know about, something much different from how the NT presents it.

17

Another one that Jdubs miss

by HawayMan in

.

Bobcat

who do you think Jesus Christ (whether he was a real being or only a literary character) meant by the term "faithful and discreet slave"?

At this link (off site) I have a number of links and references to research into various aspects of the F&DS parable. I posted this also for the sake of lurkers.

51

PIMO elder

by Reservations in

jw
friends

i’m reservations, pimo elder.

i’m in no position to leave the organisation, maybe some people will see that as weak or whatever, but we have to all go down our own path in life.. i would like to be able to wake people up in my congregation, how do you think best to do this?

any ideas?.

Bobcat

Hi Reservations,

This is just my opinion, but as an elder, you won't be able to help anyone to wake up. In my experience, people wake up when they are ready to, often for personal reasons rather than anything doctrinal or organizational.

I think what is more likely is that, as an elder trying to wake people up, you will be outed in some way and end up out of the organization - the very thing you were wanting to avoid. The WT has built in just too many layers of mind control. Someone will see that your thinking is out of line with the WT and will expose you.

For peace of mind (and again, my opinion) your best bet would be to resign as an elder, get off the school, and stop commenting at the meetings. And give them no reason whatsoever. NONE. This will catch people's attention. Will it wake them up? In my experience, only when they themselves are ready. But you will have the peace of mind knowing that you are no longer supporting something you no longer believe in.

If you give your real reason for stopping everything that I just mentioned above, that in itself may become their reason to put you out. The mind control is just that pervasive. But you may get some satisfaction in withholding your reasons, just like the WT withholds information from the R&F. Give them a taste of their own medicine.

Well, that's my opinion.

16

2700 years ago Jews ate pigs

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

from haaretz newspaper:.

what does a pig skeleton discovered in jerusalem say about first temple era jews?.

the argument here is that sanctions on eating pork were only introduced in the 2nd temple era.. so what does that tell you bout biblical accuracy.. .

Bobcat

I have a thread on the topic (of the swine, with related links): Here.

One of the things I have wondered about is the demons requesting Jesus to send them into the swine, and then they immediately drown the swine. What was their logic?

My speculation: The promised land was set apart for the descendants of Abraham. The rest of the world was given to the nations (at the tower of Babel). (De 32:7-8) As such, (I'm thinking) the demons could only trespass when they had a legitimate reason (such as some idolatrous practice, etc).

In the case of the demoniac, Jesus was about to take away their reason for trespassing. So they ask to be sent into the swine, something they think Jesus might agree to (considering the Law), but from their standpoint allows them to stay in the area.

From Jesus' standpoint, he knows the Law Covenant is about to be superceded and that the barriers differentiating the Jews from the nations are soon to be removed. (Eph 2:14-16) So it makes no matter regarding sending the demons out of the country. (Mk 5:9-10) From Jesus' standpoint, a source of Jewish disobedience to the Law is removed.

But like I said, "my speculation."

46

Please how do someone become an Anointed Christian in Watchtower Organization.

by bola in

jw
friends

please how do someone become an anointed christian in watchtower organization.

i informed my elders in my congo that i am an anointed christian..

Bobcat

If you are interested, here is a collection of research I posted regarding the use of the term "anoint" in the NT. It is surprising how the NT usage differs from WT usage.

And regarding the following of Jesus' instructions on the Lord's Evening Meal, this post (and thread) shows that there is quite a difference between NT practice and WT practice. Some have seen some similarities between WT practice and a black mass. There are a growing number of JWs who hold the Memorial privately because of what they see as heavy handed WT efforts to prevent JWs from following Jesus' simple command about partaking.