PetrW

Joined

• started 0 topics
• posted 138 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by PetrW

• 
  28

  The pushing berween the K of N and K of S

  by Kosonen in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the brics summit was big this year.

  new member states were added.

  interesting that they call themselves the global south.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PetrW

  @EP

  EP: If Josephus recorded some of those events correctly in his histories after they happened, what of it? Does that negate that the prophecies were recorded in Daniel chapter 11? Not at all.

  PW: The problem I see is that we rely on extra-biblical commentaries. It's the same as in another discussion when you deny the possibility of drawing from extra-biblical sources that Noah & Co. didn't live for hundreds of years.

  I don't underestimate those sources, but I don't overestimate them either. I think your biblical thinking, unnecessarily heavily influenced by human traditions.
• 
  28

  The pushing berween the K of N and K of S

  by Kosonen in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the brics summit was big this year.

  new member states were added.

  interesting that they call themselves the global south.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PetrW

  @EP

  Yes, the story of John the Baptist is a familiar one. But what I wanted to emphasize is that he has acquired an extraordinary ability to see the symbols in the Law that are - as it were - "behind" the text. He saw the Spirit and not the letter of the Law. And I find something similar missing in the interpretations of Daniel. The interpretation of the first half of chapter 11 - as you accurately describe - is then based on historical sources like Josephus Flavius or the Maccabees and other extra-biblical literature. We can then say that the first half of Daniel 11 is interpreted by Josephus and not by the Bible.

  This - in my opinion - needs to be changed. I've lived to see that for about 1700 years, a certain Hyppolitus of Rome and variants on his interpretation sufficed as a commentator on Daniel for Christians, but I don't want to live to see that for another 1700 years, it stays that way. It's time for a change! ✌️😁😁

  On a more serious note: as you write I see it complicated => I'm trying to figure out the state of affairs and it's not good. The interpretation of Daniel will be and is easy if Jesus would give you a hint. I struggle to hear how He would say: Have you not read there and there and this and that.... But so far I know of no one who has been given that honor. Not even the false prophets who would know there or elsewhere and for us to go there are none or even few. No one wants to be a false prophet today either, humanity has become lazy...😎😁
• 
  7

  IT'S OFFICIAL: Unbelief in WTBTS/JW's renders ANYONE as being anti-Christ

  by BoogerMan in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it-1 p. 127 - "they may also claim to serve god but reject (don't serve) his representatives, his visible organization.

  such ones willfully abandoning the christian congregation (the org) thereby become part of the “antichrist.”" .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PetrW

  The book "Insight", we were all excited to see what wisdom there would be... A few years later, in my process of "dropping out", I once, sort of started looking on the CD, in the electronic version of "Insight", using a simple year search, for all the references to literature that the JWs had used. I typed in 192 and all the references with those numbers came up, of course there were other numbers for something else, but that's obvious to everyone. Well, the result was - I don't remember exactly - but most of the literature cited in this dictionary was from the years between, I don't really know, but late 19th century and early 20th century for sure. Of course, that's not necessarily entirely wrong - some of the more reputable works on biblical studies began to appear in the early 19th century - typically: Gesenius and his Hebrew-Aramaic Dictionary.

  Although I don't remember all the details, it's been 20 years or more, then the entry, "Madness" and the justification for Nebuchadnezzar's alleged mental illness, is truly phenomenal. The JWs are not afraid - what they are not afraid of, they are probably downright proud of the fact that professional authorities agree with them when they refer to an 1818 French medical dictionary to describe "lycanthropy". Yes, 1818. Medicine hasn't changed since the end of the Napoleonic Wars.

  Thus, you refer to reputable university professors who affirm the geocentric model of the universe...one only needs to look it up, in manuscripts, from the 1400s or 1600s.

  *

  I still wonder how apt the parable of the buried talent and the JWs is. They don't take advantage of the opportunities they have: time, money and people. "Bible students" don't have a complete commentary on the Bible even after 150 years. A demonstration of intellectual desperation was already described by R. Franz: when they wanted to compile an encyclopedia, the elders of the congregation started sending him clippings or excerpts from the Watchtower for each entry. No, these people were not and are not stupid. Under good leadership, with good motivation, time and money, a lot of work can be done. But that would require abandoning the dogmatism that only a small group of people have and can be right. That's why the reference to the medical dictionary from 1818 for a non-existent mental disorder remains with them to this day... so far it seems like a missed opportunity. I am not making a negative prognosis for the future: salvation history knows the case of Nineveh. So they still have time...
• 
  55

  Trinity Statements in the Dead Sea Scrolls

  by Sea Breeze in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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 .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PetrW

  @SB

  I then based my decision to move forward with Jesus on the scripture where he said, "All power has been given me in Heaven and Earth."

  PW: I agree with you I stayed in this position. As I wrote, I consider the Trinity to be superfluous to my faith (see Ockham's Razor).

  But I, too, have seen a shift: I have stopped waging "battles" against Trinitarians. Rather, I have been pointing out the historical development of non-Trinitarianism*, especially in the 16th and 17th centuries, and that non-Trinitarians are not just and only JWs.

  I don't then use being a non-trinitarian as a theological "stick" on others just because they don't profess exactly what I do. On the other hand, I also don't see the threat of ending up in the lake of fire if I don't confess the Trinity. I increase my chances of getting into the lake of fire by other activities...

  * my wife and I even drove through a few have in Europe where anti-Trinitarians have left some mark to this day...
  
• 
  28

  The pushing berween the K of N and K of S

  by Kosonen in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the brics summit was big this year.

  new member states were added.

  interesting that they call themselves the global south.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PetrW

  @EP

  when Daniel recorded the angel's words, for instance that one beast stood for the king of Greece or that another one stood for a certain king, Daniel wasn't making historicized interpretations that lead to nowhere. The angel certainly wasn't manifesting exegetical arbitrariness.
  

  PW: I think that's the biggest problem: Daniel received this information from an angel, or, it was communicated to him "in the language of angels" (1 Cor. 13:1). Technically, it was Hebrew or Aramaic, but the main problem is the method of communication. The angelic language is, in my opinion, highly symbolic speech and without "translation" into "human language", the information remains almost incomprehensible.

  My explanation is as I have already written to you: Daniel's texts do not contain any precise time points, any time milestones, just the beginning of the narrative and the information that it refers to the end. So if the angel explains, for example, in Dan 8:20-21 what the ram (Medes and Persians) and the goat (Greek) mean, he also states that the vision refers to the end of time (Dan 8:19).

  So I am faced with the problem of how to connect the events of the time of Alexander of Macedon and the year 2023...

  I see the solution to this problem in trying to put myself in the position of the angel and his understanding of time. If it is also true for him that a day is like 1000 years and 1000 years like a day, then I also assume that he can talk about the Persians or Alexander of Macedon and link the two together. No past or present in human understanding plays much of a role there. If a Persian was swinging a sword in antiquity, then a "Persian" at the end of time will be swinging, say, a laser sword. From the position of an angel, time, motive, and the fact that Satan owns the world is most likely a completely identical situation.

  Abstract and timeless thought operations with symbols that must correspond to God's intention, which we have difficulty reconstructing, exclude, in my opinion, the possibility of learning the language of angels*. The book of Daniel will remain sealed without God's help.
  

  *In my opinion, for example, John the Baptist (in modern terms one would say: he had a genius ability) interpreted the Scriptures in exactly this way. How else would he have thought of "washing" people with water? That the Law is a shadow of things to come... he got the symbolism of the Law exactly right.
  
• 
  28

  The pushing berween the K of N and K of S

  by Kosonen in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the brics summit was big this year.

  new member states were added.

  interesting that they call themselves the global south.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PetrW

  @Ray Frantz

  I agree with you that this is a very difficult chapter. I see the main problem there is that no time frames are given. It is possible to infer length from the fact that one king succeeds another, but that doesn't rule out the possibility that changes could have taken place very quickly. Or: some events could have lasted longer, others shorter.

  The only clue in most of Daniel's visions, is in the resemblance to a definite end. This would then mean that, for example, chapter 11 does not take up, say, 2500 years, but perhaps only a few decades, because it is supposed to end before a generation passes. If it were to take 2500 years, as EasyPrompt suggests, it would be such a super-overlapping generation 😎... But, these are just my thoughts, I'm not making it dogma.

  More on Revelation: I think only an interpretation of Revelation that allows for general, timeless validity is correct. That interpretation must apply to either the 5th or 23rd century.

  Example: if I argue that the two-horned beast, are - I'm deliberately overstating this now - the Berlin Philharmonic, then they didn't exist in the 5th century, and no one knows if they will in the 23rd century. The two-horned animal could be, for example, the Paris Philharmonic..😊😎

  To me, the answer is hidden/revealed in the text of Revelation and especially in the New Testament. Staying with the two-horned animal, if it is identified as a false prophet, then it is good to look at who and under what circumstances was identified as a false prophet, false witness or antichrist (see for example Matt 7:15 or 2 Peter 2:1)

  This leads to looking for the equivalent in the NT. I assume that the two horned animal is a symbol for the two high priests who form the horns and who condemned Christ, that the "body" is the Sanhedrin, that the eyes and ears of the animal, were the Pharisees who were constantly watching what the tribe was doing on the Sabbath or listening to Jesus speak. They were also the "feet" of the animal because they were constantly following him.

  Knowing how such a two-horned animal treated Christ and the apostles, and the warning that false prophets would also come out of Christians, it is easy to understand that it doesn't matter what denomination, it will take the "flesh" of the two-horned animal. If in the 5th century, it was Catholics, then in the 23rd century it may be JWs. Who knows? 😁
  

  The bottom line is that it's not names that are being sought, but roles and relationships. After all, as in the Sanhedrin they weren't all bad (see Joseph of Arimathea), it's not for us to make judgements. By what judgment do you judge...😎

  That's how I think of it.
• 
  28

  The pushing berween the K of N and K of S

  by Kosonen in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  the brics summit was big this year.

  new member states were added.

  interesting that they call themselves the global south.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PetrW

  @SB

  I haven't studied the consensus/difference between you and Hyppolite in detail. Only: when I read what all those Antiochus, Ptolemaic, or various Cleopatras were doing, I knew where the wind was blowing from.

  I think there's still a lot of Hyppolite in you.
• 
  55

  Trinity Statements in the Dead Sea Scrolls

  by Sea Breeze in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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 .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PetrW

  @SB

  I am in no way disputing that Trinitarian doctrine is very well thought out. Medieval scholasticism and especially Thomism - what I have had the opportunity to read of Thomas Aquinas - represents the pinnacle of reflection on Trinitarian dogma. But.

  To me, it is a theological construct. Same as 1914 and therefore, unnecessary.

  The anti-Trinitarianism of the JWs is historically adopted and in its least correct form - they do not worship Christ.

  Classical antitrinitarianism of the 16th and 17th centuries, which began in Italy, tried to rationally approximate the Bible and therefore worshipped Christ. So I'm just repeating that. Most of them, at that time, were deeply religious (although Catholics/Protestants often labeled them as atheists or agnostics) and sought to know everything that could be known rationally about God, also by reason. You can't discover by reason how Jesus walked on water or how he turned water into wine. But, it is possible to argue against 3 in 1...
• 
  25

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

  by RULES & REGULATIONS in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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''.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PetrW

  Rattigan350: I got counselled

  God is a God of order, brother!
  
• 
  55

  Trinity Statements in the Dead Sea Scrolls

  by Sea Breeze in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  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 .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PetrW

  @SB

  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 😊