Posts by PetrW

25

Were any congregation '' special privileges'' ever taken away from you?

by RULES & REGULATIONS in

if you don't measure up to the watchtower society ''high standards''... you might lose some ''special privileges'' .

miss meetings...lose ''privileges''.

don't meet the monthly 10 hour ''field service'' ...lose ''privileges''.

PetrW

Rattigan350: I got counselled

God is a God of order, brother!

55

Trinity Statements in the Dead Sea Scrolls

by Sea Breeze in

dr. ken johnson has identified several statements in the dead sea scrolls that predict that god would visit the earth as a man... as the messiah.

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljrfvytjhve&ab_channel=kenjohnson%28biblefacts%29 .

My attitude is perhaps best expressed by the text: He who has seen me has seen the Father* (Jn 14:9) because by this I am looking at the texts, "I and the Father are one" or "The Father is greater than I". Jesus is Lord, and in that name is salvation. Nothing more is needed. No need for Trinitarian metaphysics, but no need for the magical incantations of JWs-theology regarding the name Jehovah 😊

SB: Jesus is not Jehovah. They are constituted differently. Jesus is body soul and spirit. That means he fits the biblical definition of a man. But, Jehovah is Spirit ONLY. He doesn't have a body or soul. But since he and Jesus share the SAME ESSENCE, there is only ONE God here, not two.

PW: interesting reasoning, but I see a major, almost insurmountable obstacle that if I claim that Jesus and the Father are one God, then there is a risk that I am claiming that Jesus did not die for us. God, or more accurately: part of God, would have died too. So here we have a one-third (the body died) dead God and a two-thirds living God. But there is no such doctrine in the NT. It works with the simple concept that Jesus, the Son of God and therefore God by origin, died and was resurrected by God, the Father, who has no beginning and no end. He is for ever and ever...

SB: Jesus has a name above EVERY name ..... that includes Jehovah. Jehovah isn't slighted by the fact that the name of Jesus is higher than the name of Jehovah, because it's still him. And because of this, it is at the name of JESUS that every knee in earth AND heaven will bend.

PW: In my opinion, the OT already offers a simple and reliable interpretation: Ex 23:20-21 20 "Behold, I am going to send an angel before you to guard you along the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. 21 "Be on your guard before him and obey his voice; do not be rebellious toward him, for he will not pardon your transgression, since My name is in him."

*I have never seen Jesus yet, I only know he is in a place I can't go yet 😊

55

Trinity Statements in the Dead Sea Scrolls

by Sea Breeze in

dr. ken johnson has identified several statements in the dead sea scrolls that predict that god would visit the earth as a man... as the messiah.

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljrfvytjhve&ab_channel=kenjohnson%28biblefacts%29 .

PetrW

Sea Breeze: This explains why he at times spoke as a man and at other times spoke as God..... because he was both, not just one of the other.

J 8:17-18: 17Even in your Law it has been written that the testimony of two people is true. 18I am He who testifies about Myself, and the Father who sent Me testifies about Me.”

***

My comment: here Jesus even compares God to a human witness. But the point is that he is expressing the idea that they are two and at the same time two distinct beings...

28

The pushing berween the K of N and K of S

by Kosonen in

jw
friends

the brics summit was big this year.

new member states were added.

interesting that they call themselves the global south.

PetrW

@EP to Daniel 11

*

Hippolytus of Rome: Commentary on Daniel (S. 167, pdf)

https://www.pergrazia.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/0205_hippolytus_commentary-on-daniel_2010.pdf

47.6. But Scripture says, “And the kings shall speak lies to one another at one table.” 6 For Ptolemy desired the kingdom of Alexander and ate with him at his table, but he thought evil and did not have agreement with him. And so Scripture was fulfilled. 47.7. And at this point Ptolemy, having come to Egypt and having levied a great army, came to the country when Alexander had gone to Cilicia. For it happened at that time that Tarsus and Mallus 7 were thrown into confusion. He wished to repress them and came against them in haste, having left his own wife Cleopatra there.

EP:

“As regards these two kings, their heart will be inclined to do what is bad, and they will sit at one table speaking lies to each other. But nothing will succeed, because the end is yet for the time appointed."

(The two major Roman empire-descended/Christendom kingdoms today who oppose each other are both UN member nations (US/UK and Russia) "sitting at the table speaking lies to each other".)

*

The problem with modern variants, historicizing interpretations of Daniel and chapter 11 in the 21st century is that from a certain point in the narrative they have to begin to "fast-forward" to today's times, rather than the documented Hyppolytus at the beginning of the 3rd century.

If Jesus comes at the end of the 23rd century, the role of the UN, or Russia, for example, can be left out in the interpretation of Daniel. But again, this will have to be "pushed" deeper into the text of chapter 11 and the rest updated to the circumstances of the past 21st, 22nd and part of the 23rd century...

What am I saying? I mean to suggest that historicizing interpretations lead nowhere - they are more a manifestation of exegetical arbitrariness, often unwittingly taken in large part from Hyppolytus of Rome in particular. They are very popular, and I have encountered virtually no text in which anyone has expressed - from the beginning - their own biblical reasoning without having to draw on Hyppolytus of Rome or its subvarieties. So far, everyone has needed those Antiochians, Ptolemies, Cleopatra, or Romans.

Okay, the critique has been made. So, who's the king of the north and the king of the south?

Since the "bar" of claims for interpretation of Daniel is set very low by Hyppolytus, I'm not trying to make a big deal. So just briefly:

I count 10 kings of the North and only two kings of the South. Therefore, I see the main thrust of the interpretation in those passages in Daniel and Revelation where it talks about the 10 fingers or 10 horns and the final battles between the 10 horns (Dan 7:24 ff).

All geographical remarks and relationships are symbolic in nature, the meaning of which derives from biblical realities: e.g., Egypt - existed in biblical times, but in eschatology, this symbol plays the role of a competitor to God's people. It is a symbol for an organized, hostile, and murderous system, the same as Sodom (see Rev. 11:8).

Details later.

25

Were any congregation '' special privileges'' ever taken away from you?

by RULES & REGULATIONS in

if you don't measure up to the watchtower society ''high standards''... you might lose some ''special privileges'' .

miss meetings...lose ''privileges''.

don't meet the monthly 10 hour ''field service'' ...lose ''privileges''.

PetrW

I think the most serious problem in taking away "privileges" is the banning of teaching from women. It's a controversial topic in general, but with JWs, it takes on a sharper edge.

For a long time, I thought that the elders in the congregation who gave the Sunday lecture were making it up in its entirety. It wasn't until later that I found out they were getting the "skeleton" from the org and "wrapping" that with verbal "filler". Since most of them couldn't do that, even years later their intellectual ability hadn't improved, then instead of thoughts, they read long passages from the Bible. As if the listeners couldn't read it for themselves. The problem on the part of these "readers" was especially pronounced in those cases where, for example, a teacher of his children was among the listeners. A woman could teach his children, and even had a university degree to do so, but to read a written text filled with verbal "cotton wool" and boring recitations of long Bible passages, the woman was not cut out for it. Sarcastically, in retrospect, I would say that an elder in the JWs-congregation can be anyone who can pass driving school in that country and have a driver's license...

6

Acts 15

by peacefulpete in

acts 15. the pericope has been long interpreted by the catholic church as a proof text for a central authority.

churches like the wt repeat this claim.

however, reading the text without this coloring reveals something very different.. the story starts with paul and barnabas going to the antioch church and there they encounter pharisee christians from jerusalem (15:24) contradicting the doctrine held by the antioch church.

PetrW

@PP

I agree with you that the NT-text is reconstructed. Disputes over the verbiage of the NT-text, therefore, should be conducted with very moderate intensity. It even strikes me that the Christians of the time did not preserve any text carved in stone or engraved on some metal plate. We have, for example, a very interesting text from the time of Augustus (Res gestae divi Augusti) still extant, and even bilingual. There are very many Latin tomb inscriptions, various Greek votive texts. If any of you have visited Ephesus in Turkey as tourists, there is still something engraved on every stone there. And that's from before or at the time when there were demonstrably Christians there. And from Paul or others, nothing... The island of Patmos, nothing. And maybe, for Christianity, it's a more important place than Jerusalem.

On the other hand: it is claimed that Christians, instead of carving something in stone or digging into bronze slabs or pressing it into clay and then drying it or burning it, preferred other tactics. Speed. They used non-durable materials (see 2 Tim. 4:31 - Paul is probably writing from Rome to bring him a cloak, papyri and parchment from Troas, a place several hundred miles away. Wasn't there a coat and a few sheets of papyrus or a piece of leather for Paul in all of Rome? I suppose not. Then it shows the socio-economic status of one of the leaders of Christianity when it seemed more profitable for him to have his things brought to him than to beg from the locals... respect, Paul!) and spread the message quickly.

So John, writing on papyrus, sent Revelation to seven congregations. He made seven copies. Although he could have carved a few lines in the rock: I was here, your John. Or: In the reign of Caesar (text broken), I was here and saw the Revelation. John the Evangelist. And again, nothing. Or no one has found anything yet.

If I evaluate the evidence individually and in its overall context, I find that there is very little, almost imperceptible difference between your conclusion (very simplistically!) that there is a great risk that the NT text, is not what it was and not removing the risk that for centuries, people were being fooled and kept in ignorance.

Against this is the fact that late finds like Codex Sinaticus or the Dead Sea Scrolls, prove the "tenacity" of the text, that the differences are in grammar, and respecting this limitation, one can say without much concern that the text as it stands today, is very likely what was written, as the original.

So how do I decide? Since the evidence is almost equivalent, the difference that prevails is personal belief. And I lean in favor of what we have is 99.99% what the prophets or apostles wrote. I'm not ashamed of that. Yes, it's a risk. But the others are not without risk either.

32

Do you play the LOTTERY?

by Fisherman in

jw view gambling as a sin and sadly people get addicted to gambling causing them financial and health problems.

but is playing a couple of bucks a week on some lottery tickets actually gambling?

what do you have to lose?

PetrW

It happened a long time ago, 30 or more years ago... My grandfather wasn't JWs. But he liked to bet, regularly, a small amount every week. He also regularly watched the neighboring country's TV program. He once saw, when the local TV was broadcasting their regular lottery draw programme, that they drew exactly his 6 or 7 numbers. The prize was - in terms of several million dollars - a gigantic sum. But he bet those numbers here, not in a neighboring country...

Moral: if you win first prize, you don't have to win anything at all.

65

In Response to Anony Mous regarding the 144,000 and other questions...

by EasyPrompt in

still, you hold onto false teachings of the wtbts which are only there for the enrichment of its chiefs.. as pointed out, the rest of the book of revelation is figurative, yet you hold that the number 144,000 is literal.

the wtbts currently says that this number is limited to those running the wtbts and that anyone claiming to be part of it outside that self-selecting group could be mentally ill.. by what reasoning (not from wtbts origin) do you believe only 144,000 people will be ‘saved’, and how do you know who is part of this self-selected group, given virtually no other religious denomination does even remotely believe in the literalism of revelation.

do they have to be jws?

PetrW

@Kosonen

Hi, Kosonen,

I'm also glad to see that someone is searching and thinking about the Bible. That's why every post like yours always gets my like 😊 even if I don't fully identify with it, I still think it's meaningful for both sides (for the one who writes it to form his opinions and for the one who reads it to clarify his).

Now to Daniel: as you point out, the book is inaccessible, shrouded in mystery. The book of Revelation is open to scrutiny, and even what is written there can somehow be applied to life...

So I started with Revelation. In Daniel, I just did a kind of probing, exploratory drilling 😊 For example, as you mention "the abomination that shall be set in a holy place", it's quite difficult (for me) to put the context of Daniel with the statements of Jesus, who warned of "the abomination of desolation" in his discourse to the apostles. What I write below is actually a description of a failure (I feel that way), because despite the search, more questions than answers arose. That is: which text from Daniel did Jesus mean, which βδέλυγμα was it? Three passages come to mind: Dan 9:27 or 11:31 or 12:11. According to the context of the word βδέλυγμα as used by the Septuagint in the Mosaic Law, this is what I looked for and roughly understood: the term is used for a religious-moral description of anything that is abominable before God: it is any contact with carrion, human excrement, and refers to forbidden types of food from certain animals (see, e.g., Lev 11:10 ff).

The sacrifice of lame sacrificial or otherwise unfit animals is considered an abomination (Deut 17:1 cf. 23:19). Also abominable are sexual contacts outside of intimacy between a woman and a man (homosexuality, sexual relations with animals, etc. Lev. 18:22-29; Lev. 20:13) or the attempt to induce such sexual practices: by confusing and wearing male and female clothing of the opposite sex (Deut. 22:5). Idols also become abominations (Deut 7:25-26; 17:4), especially magical practices (Deut 18:9-12) and the burning of children as sacrifices to pagan gods (Deut 13:31). The big issue then is honesty in business dealings: any double weights or measuring objects are also an abomination (Deut 25:16).

From these findings, the following picture can be drawn: an abomination is directly some human action that provokes in others (humans or God) a strong revulsion escalating to mortal hatred (see Deut 17:4-5). Thus, for example, homosexuality, magic, divination, burning one's own children, or some single act (contact with something unclean) is considered an abomination. Objects can also be an abomination - typically idols, which, in conjunction with idolatry, "complete" the abominable act.

Idols, as imitations of something real (either existing entities: the statue of an animal) or non-existent (false gods), are, in their essence, very similar to, for example, false weights, which someone deliberately made indistinguishable from the real ones, in order to steal from another and gain dishonest gain for himself (see Proverbs 11:1). Some items may not be directly objectionable (e.g., dresses or lame sacrificial animals), but when combined with sexualized behavior and actions-for example, if a man puts on a woman's dress-the entire activity, like the sacrifice of lame animals, is considered an abomination.

If I transfer this to the eschatological statement of Jesus, who quoted one (which one? ) passage from the book of Daniel: that in the context of βδέλυγμα we might expect some very sophisticated action which - if we didn't know that it was an "abomination" and the one doing so took care to cover it all up, so that we would first regard the action as normal, normal, and only later discover that it was a fraud or deception (as in the use of false weights and measures). The one who acts heinously will seek to weaken, refute, or otherwise deny the reasons that would point to his pathological actions. If we know what is abomination in God, it is easier to see that the person in question, often acts in direct association with something that is itself abominable, or so that through his abominable activity, his "instruments" become abominable as well. I associate this with the Antichrist, the man of lawlessness, the beast with two horns.

In the New Testament, the word "abomination" βδέλυγμα (apart from Mt 24:15; Mk 13:14) occurs in Luke 16:15 and in Rev 17:4-5 (about Babylon the Great) and Rev 21:27. (In the context of Luke 16:15, it is the seeming, hypocritical righteousness of the Pharisees that seems to serve God but at the same time serves mammon cf. Rom. 2:22) This description is also common to Babylon the Great, the harlot, who is described in Rev. 17:5 as "the mother of...the abominations of the earth."

*

What I have described is really just a probe into the book of Daniel. And it reaffirms to me how complicated this thing is. I haven't gotten into the next one yet. Therefore, I have no more to respond or react to. But thanks again for your time.

I will hopefully finish a few comments on my view of the identity of Babylon the Great, and perhaps then it will be clearer what positions I am starting from.

**

p.s. yesterday's bell. I come out and there's two JWs. They said that two of their members visited me (yes, sometime a month ago) and talked to me. I didn't tell them anything about my past. I told them in response to their questions about how I view the present and future that I think there is a symbolic darkness here. That the evidence that says it's over, that it's difficult to evaluate, and it may be true, but it may as well be just one historical stage again. The ambiguity of the situation around us does not, in my opinion, absolve us from the commitment that we must, above all, keep changing ourselves if we want to be called Christians. They liked it and sent another couple. And I, as the bell rang, got up from the computer with this web-site open and went to talk to the other side of the barricade😊 😊 and talked again about eschatology and what I write here, telling them too...

Then at home everyone laughed at me for telling her who I was, because they will, from now on, keep bothering us. But I told them that although it was such a funny thing, the fun-factor was there, but on the other hand, although I have no missionary ambitions, my humble intention was to show them now, or maybe in the future I want to show them, that it is possible to be outside the organized church and still read the Bible and do something with yourself. That churches are good, but not necessary. Kind of a modest goal: look, you have a strong organization behind you and I have no one. And yet we can talk at the same eye level... 😊 😊 😊

43

Who are the 144K Male Jewish Virgins in Revelation 7?

by Sea Breeze in

no mystery here.

they are all male jewish virgins, just like scripture says.

so, why all the muck and fuss?

PetrW

@SB

As a side note on the creation of the state of Israel: according to a book by Pawel Sudoplatow (who was head of the subversion and intelligence department of the Russian NKVD/KGB in the 1940s and 1950s), the decision to create the state of Israel was made by negotiations between the three powers: the USA, England and the USSR sometime around 1943. The Russians proposed Crimea. It was a cold political calculation, because during WWII they were trying to raise money from wealthy Jewish groups - in return for a promise that the Russians would support the creation of a Jewish state. So Israel could have been in Russia. Then after the war, the US and England, broke their agreements with the USSR and supported a Palestinian version of a Jewish state. Again, the Russians were tactical because they (correctly) believed that if they did not prevent the creation of Israel in Palestine, then the anti-British, anti-Israel, Arab states would become natural allies of the USSR.

My point is that the creation of Israel in 1948 (at the start of the Cold War) was more the result of power struggles than God directing Stalin's tactics. To see in Stalin, some kind of modern Cyrus the Great liberating the Jews, I don't know ... ???

65

In Response to Anony Mous regarding the 144,000 and other questions...

by EasyPrompt in

still, you hold onto false teachings of the wtbts which are only there for the enrichment of its chiefs.. as pointed out, the rest of the book of revelation is figurative, yet you hold that the number 144,000 is literal.

the wtbts currently says that this number is limited to those running the wtbts and that anyone claiming to be part of it outside that self-selecting group could be mentally ill.. by what reasoning (not from wtbts origin) do you believe only 144,000 people will be ‘saved’, and how do you know who is part of this self-selected group, given virtually no other religious denomination does even remotely believe in the literalism of revelation.

do they have to be jws?

PetrW

@Hi Kosonen,

On the question of chronology, we are in full agreement. Surely the Beast will not be here for 100+ years. It is explicitly stated to be 42 months (Rev. 17:8).

Now the question of the identity of the Beast of chapters 13 and 17.

I think they are one and the same Beast based on these Bible passages: The dragon, Satan, is described in Rev. 12:3 as a seven-headed beast, with ten horns, wearing ten diadems on his head. In Rev. 13:1, the beast is described in much the same way: only the 10 diadems are on ten horns. But since it is explained in Daniel and Revelation that both the horns and the heads signify kings, the difference is a refinement rather than a reason for the difference. An important statement is then made in Rev. 13:4, where it is said that the Dragon gave the Beast his power. In Rev. 13:11 another two-horned beast appears, again speaking as a dragon, and in Rev. 13:12 it is stated that he exercises power, the first beast. Then in Rev. 13:14 it is said that this beast, will make an image of the first beast, which had the wound of the sword, but began to live again. In Rev. 14:9 or 14:11 the Beast and his image, or the "mark" of Rev. 13:16-19 is still spoken of. According to Rev. 15:2 there are to be overcomers over the Beast and the image of the Beast made by the two-horned beast, and finally in Rev. 16:2 there is a description of when the first bowl is poured out on those who have the mark of the Beast and worship his image. And the 5th bowl, according to Rev. 16:11, is poured out on the throne of the Beast. The reaction is that out of the mouth of the Dragon, the Beast, and the false prophet, came three unclean spirits. The number here is numerically limited and besides the Dragon, there is only the first, the seven-headed Beast and then, the two-horned beast.

The beast of Rev. 17:3 is described as having seven heads and ten horns. In Rev. 17:8 the Beast is to come out of the abyss, which brings me back to Rev. 11:8, the basic time sequence is given: first the two witnesses (1260 days) and then the Beast killing the two witnesses after it comes out of the abyss and works for 42 months. In Rev. 17:11, this Beast is the last, for he goes into perdition.

And the end result, in Rev 19:19-20, is the Beast and the false prophet are taken captive and it is specifically stated that the two, are cast into the lake of fire. In Rev. 20:2 the Dragon, Satan, is bound and cast into the abyss and Rev. 20:4 describes the resurrection of those who did not worship the Beast and his image and receive the mark. After the 1000 years are over, then Satan is released from the abyss (prison) and because Satan does not take a second chance, he is cast into the lake of fire where the Beast and the false prophet are (Rev. 20:10).

*

The seven-headed Beast is variously described, but derives its form from the Dragon. It is explicitly stated that the Beast, with the Dragon and the False Prophet, as it three entities. The Beast comes up out of the sea (from the abyss = deep sea Rev. 17:8) and wages war with the faithful - killing the two witnesses (Rev. 11:8) and triumphing over the saints (Rev. 13:7).

**

Personally, I think the Beast is one because it is well documented. Most commentators agree that this seven-headed Beast is the Antichrist. I find the Antichrist question more difficult than whether there are two Beasts according to JWs-theology. Rather, I understand the two-horned beast, with horns like a lamb (Rev 13:11) because of its designation as a "false prophet" (see Matt 7:15: beware of false prophets who come in sheep's clothing...) to be the Antichrist. The apostle John, in his letters, then identifies the antichrists with the false prophets (1 John 4:1-3), and like the two-horned beast (Rev. 13:14), the antichrists also go astray (2 John 1:7).

Traditional exegesis (as far back as Irenaeus of Lyons) sees the Antichrist in the seven-headed Beast. But I am more inclined to believe that the real Antichrist is the false prophet...

***

Later, I want to look at the issue of the Beast and the false prophet through the "lens" of the destruction of Babylon the Great and the identity of Babylon the Great, as this also - in my opinion - helps to clarify roles and relationships. I have written something on the identity of Babylon for about a year now, but I need to finish it...