It's fascinating how everybody draws water from the same well over and over and it tastes different every time :)
Eisegesis
of course, there are many crackpot theories about all sorts of things.
we hear about them,look into them and laugh.however, once in a great while, somebody presents a cogent and feasible thesis backed up by scholarship and history.watch this video presentation and present your rebuttal (or agreement) for discussion.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uqg8w7ezuq&t=268s.
It's fascinating how everybody draws water from the same well over and over and it tastes different every time :)
Eisegesis
of course, there are many crackpot theories about all sorts of things.
we hear about them,look into them and laugh.however, once in a great while, somebody presents a cogent and feasible thesis backed up by scholarship and history.watch this video presentation and present your rebuttal (or agreement) for discussion.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uqg8w7ezuq&t=268s.
Question: Before I invest time watching the video, in what way is this not just another crazy conspiracy theory?
Reply: I'd say it comes down to Occam's Razor. It's a simpler explanation for Jesus Christ which matches the known facts.
of course, there are many crackpot theories about all sorts of things.
we hear about them,look into them and laugh.however, once in a great while, somebody presents a cogent and feasible thesis backed up by scholarship and history.watch this video presentation and present your rebuttal (or agreement) for discussion.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uqg8w7ezuq&t=268s.
Another view:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar's_Messiah?fbclid=IwAR1jTfvcN69SjeQE6cn0IiqWRTKmHtj_Svgvpg20HioSzaLyaFYi1PGDXeA
______________
Wiki:
"Caesar’s Messiah is a 2005 book by Joseph Atwill, which argues that the New Testament Gospels were written as wartime propaganda by scholars connected to the Roman imperial court of the Flavian emperors: Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian. According to Atwill, their primary purpose in creating the religion was to control the spread of Judaism and moderate its political virulence. The Jewish nationalist Zealots had been defeated in the First Jewish–Roman War of 70 AD, but Judaism remained an influential movement throughout the Mediterranean region. Atwill argues that the biblical character Jesus Christ is a typological representation of the Roman Emperor Titus.
Atwill's theory contradicts the mainstream historical view,[1] which is that while the Gospels include many mythical or legendary elements, these are religious elaborations added to the biography of a historical Jesus who did live in 1st-century Roman Palestine (Judea),[2][3][4][5][6][7][8] was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[9][10][11]
of course, there are many crackpot theories about all sorts of things.
we hear about them,look into them and laugh.however, once in a great while, somebody presents a cogent and feasible thesis backed up by scholarship and history.watch this video presentation and present your rebuttal (or agreement) for discussion.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uqg8w7ezuq&t=268s.
Of course, there are many crackpot theories about all sorts of things. We hear about them,
look into them and laugh.
However, once in a great while, somebody presents a cogent and feasible thesis backed up by scholarship and history.
Watch this video presentation and present your rebuttal (or agreement) for discussion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UqG8w7ezUQ&t=268s
first things first!let us define our terms: doctrine and dogma.doctrine: a codification of beliefs, taught principles, or positions.
dogma a set of principles laid down by an authority (in this case, the governing body, acting as the faithful slave of christ) as incontrovertibly true.
_____in the catholic church, dogma never changes but doctrines have over time.this sets me to wondering.
Maria Russell has been attributed by the Watchtower as having asserted that the
Faithful and Wise Servant ss the doctrine of empowerment (she included herself with her husband for the logically mystical reason the two are one.)
Russell kept the money, the property, the power and made all decisions.
Rutherford made all the decisions as he transformed the shell of leadership into yes-men of his selection.
Knorr and his bosom companion F. Franz made all the decisions until lunacy and a brain tumor sputtered to a halt.
Franz (having failed utterly at his 1975 fiasco) was voted up into the GB leadership--BUT--after a committee coup wherein the power was diluted into a voting group.
Fast forward through eruptions of GB apostacy (Ray Franz) and the purge.
Modern times have brought the spooks out of the dark old house of GB-dom into the artificial light of studio broadcasting.
They've taken a scythe to so many tenderly held beliefs, it is like Gettysburg after Sherman.
The "responsibility" of ownership of power has been magically unplugged from GB members for purposes of shielding them from a direct lawsuit.
Like Santa himself, the GB have "helpers".
Lawyers run this engine and the inmates of the sanitarium await sacred pronouncements like the press watching for white smoke at a new Pope's appointment.
I would say this: DOGMA in this religion is as slippery as KY jelly and used for the same purpose.
first things first!let us define our terms: doctrine and dogma.doctrine: a codification of beliefs, taught principles, or positions.
dogma a set of principles laid down by an authority (in this case, the governing body, acting as the faithful slave of christ) as incontrovertibly true.
_____in the catholic church, dogma never changes but doctrines have over time.this sets me to wondering.
Nice catch on that one!
Yes. If anything is bedrock--it is that.
first things first!let us define our terms: doctrine and dogma.doctrine: a codification of beliefs, taught principles, or positions.
dogma a set of principles laid down by an authority (in this case, the governing body, acting as the faithful slave of christ) as incontrovertibly true.
_____in the catholic church, dogma never changes but doctrines have over time.this sets me to wondering.
First things first!
Let us define our terms: Doctrine and Dogma.
Doctrine: a codification of beliefs, taught principles, or positions.
Dogma a set of principles laid down by an authority (in this case, the Governing Body, acting as the Faithful Slave of Christ) as incontrovertibly true.
_____
In the Catholic Church, Dogma never changes but Doctrines have over time.
This sets me to wondering. Would the Governing Body admit to holding any incontrovertible Dogma? Or is it all up for grabs?
The Governing Body has often had to state the obvious but with a sense of discovery.
"We are not infallible" is one such statement. It doesn't count as humility inasmuch as it is the most provable assertion in the world.
The issue of Blood transfusion has been incrementally fuzzed into confusion over time and the loosey-goosey double talk might suggest personal conscience might one day be the bottom line.
Voting, Conscientious objections, homosexuality, abortion, tight pants--you can put whatever you like on this list---is it Dogma or Doctrine?
What do JW's hold to be incontrovertible?
"despite the millions of books and magazines sold by charles taze russell and his tower publishing company, and the hundreds of thousands of tracts and other literature distributed free by zwtts between the mid-1870s and 1900, only around 2600 persons bothered attending the watch tower society's local memorial celebrations in 1899. a significant percentage of those 2600 persons were russell's "colporteurs", who earned their livings selling russell's literature for a profit.
charles taze russell was absolutely correct when he proclaimed for decades that zwtts was not a religion -- it was a business.
"_____"zion's watch tower magazine was not owned by zion's watch tower tract society, but rather was a "for-profit" business owned personally by charles taze russell and his tower publishing company, and that the "growing debt" which was "burdening" the work of zwtts was owed to charles taze russell, himself.
Orphan Crow
The link works fine for me. Your device may have some sort of filtering heuristic triggered by the address, however.
the spookiest questions about god are profound when we take one step back and examine who/what such a god would be... j-u-s-t before creating the universe.... .
before anything was created: god wouldn't have been "the creator".
with nobody around wouldn't be supreme being (superior to who/ what?
"There is a shorthand we use when we teach evolution. What we say is, 'Evolution adapts creatures to their environment."
That is NOT what it does. Evolution adapts creatures to the environment of their Ancestors."
When whatever was true for the ancestors is no longer true for the Modern descendants, those inherited coping and adapting tendencies, intuitions, interior 'truths' become a mismatch, a dissonance, and our strongest instincts and gut feelings will work against us much to our chagrin.
Eternal 'truths', mythologies, legends, and tradition got our ancestors through tough times enabled futures generations (us) to arrive.
But the more modernity changes our landscape from our ancestors, the more misleading those gut instincts will be."
The question becomes, "Should we treat our traditions and ancient wisdom that carry over into this day as God-given and learn from them?--NO! If ever there was a time not to do that--it is now."
Quotes by evolutionary biologist, Bret Weinstein
the spookiest questions about god are profound when we take one step back and examine who/what such a god would be... j-u-s-t before creating the universe.... .
before anything was created: god wouldn't have been "the creator".
with nobody around wouldn't be supreme being (superior to who/ what?