Posts by Leolaia

63

Powerful questions to DEBUNK the flood of Noah's day

by Black Man in

jw
friends

just like in another thread a saw, the best way to deal with my jws is not debating or arguing, but instead posing questions for them to answer or not answer.

i want to come up with specific questions relating to the 'global flood' that completely debunk it.

what say you, jw.net?.

Leolaia

You and others in this site write as if you could have never been indoctrinated in the JW faith. You display erudition in your comments that makes it hard to believe that you could have ever been sold such conspicuosly fallacious argumentation as that of the WTS. Could I ask you for a very brief explanation of your background?

I was totally indoctrinated. I was raised a JW and believed mostly what was taught (some things, like their teaching on the resurrection, I privately didn't accept). I believed that Armageddon was around the corner and that it would come before the 1914 generation passed away. I remember in eighth grade my mom was driving me to therapy and I was reading the blue Evolution book and my mom asked me if I agreed with what it said, and I said "Totally", I found the argumentation very convincing. At the same time I had a strong intellectual inclination. All through eighth grade I was writing a commentary on Genesis to prove it was historical. In ninth grade I did a research paper in biology class refuting evolution. In tenth grade in English, I did a paper trying to prove that the Tower of Babel story was true. In eleventh grade, I wrote a research paper in physics class (for extra credit) that tried to prove the Bible was scientifically accurate (I am embarassed to think of it, and my teacher always railed against pseudoscience). Etc. Etc. I had some doubts all along and going to college, I was exposed to a lot of new information and my critical reasoning skills matured. But it was a gradual process of undoing the years of indoctrination.

Anyway, yeah I was indoctrinated, and then I began to figure things out for myself, and now I am a big believer in promoting critical thinking, not just about the Bible and religion but about other things as well (especially pseudoscience and pseudohistory).

67

The 1927-1946 "Messenger" CD by request!

by Atlantis in

from one of the friends here:.

nevada do you still have those messengers with rutherfords pictures?.

tx.

Leolaia

Thanks again, the old Souvenir Reports are an awesome resource of information.

7

WT study today - Eph 1:8-10 - the administration, Stage 2

by Hoffnung in

in todays wt study (wt 15/jul/2012 p.27 paras 3-4), the society advances ephesians 1:10, which refers to an adminstration, that gathers the things in the heaven and on the earth.

whereas the bible clearly identifies a double purpose of the adminstration, there is no reason to believe there are also 2 different time frames intended, however the wt explains it this way.

we are actualliy in the adminstration stage 2, according to the wt.

Leolaia

What a blatant way to smuggle a "second hope" (of the "great crowd" on earth) into an epistle that specifically states that "t here is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Ephesians 4:4-5). That "one hope" in the passage in question is "adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ ... in him we were chosen" (1:5, 11). There isn't any twofold division of salvation in the text, with the second phase pertaining to a different kind of election.

The article also gives an overliteral reading of oikonomia in order to emphasize their understanding of God's kingdom as a governmental administration, as a bureaucracy. The word does not necessarily lend itself to that meaning, though it is understandable that a bureaucratic organization like the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society might want to read it that way. The word is used in 1:10, 3:2, 3:9 to refer to God's arragement for salvation; it is an arranging of (1) appointed times for salvation, (2) God's grace, and (3) the mystery of God's purpose hidden from the ages. The sense is not bureucratic but rather pertains to God's planning for salvation, hence the passage in question refers to predestination twice: "he predestined us for adoption to sonship" (1:5), and " in him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will" (1:11). The household sense of oikonomia fits well with the idea of adoption to sonship; this was God's arrangement for adoption of the elect into his household. Not bureaucratic at all.

7

Who are the "glorious ones"?

by JWB in

who are the "glorious ones"?.

* 'doxas' (greek strongs #1391) 'glories'/'glorious beings' (the new greek english interlinear new testament), or 'angels'.. .

daring, self-willed, they do not tremble at *glorious ones but speak abusively, whereas angels, although they are greater in strength and power, do not bring against them an accusation in abusive terms, [not doing so] out of respect for jehovah.

Leolaia

Bauckham has a very long discussion of the phrase "slandering the glorious ones" (pp. 57-59). He agrees that the reference is to angels, indicated both by usage (in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in the Nag Hammadi gnostic texts) and context (catchword connections with v. 6, 7, 9). The main question is whether the author of Jude is referring to antinomianism (such as what is found in Paul), gnostic derogation of the created order (with the archons being nefarious beings), or something else. A full-blown gnostic understanding as delineated in Valentinianism or Sethianism would necessitate a much later date for the epistle, but it is not necessarily warranted that this is what the author is referring to. And it isn't simply the dismissal of the Torah but rather a libertine morality that the author is most interested in criticizing. It seems that the best understanding might be something in between these options that might accord well with a first century AD date: a proto-gnostic stream of antinomianism that not just rejected the Torah as something that enslaves which was promulgated by angels (which is what Paul taught), but also promoted full freedom from the moral principles in the Torah (which goes beyond what Paul teaches), while not yet conceiving of the more elaborated gnostic mythologies found in the second century. This might suggest that the author was Torah-observant like James the Just and Peter, unlike Paul, and although he does not have Paul specifically in view, he may not have been all that pleased with what Paul says about the Torah and the powers and authorities, but that is speculation. But it does fit well with the other indications that Jude was written by a Palestinian Jew in the first century (with an affinity to Essene literature).

BTW if you compare the two passages in Jude and 2 Peter it is very apparent in this instance that the author of 2 Peter used Jude and not vice versa. The very specific reference to the Assumption of Moses is removed and the thought is more muddled in 2 Peter.

119

What Its Like To Be A Gay Ex JW....

by str8?so is spaghetti..until you heat it up in

i guess its time to throw my little story out there.

i keep reading everyones stories and thinking how brave you have all been, coming out of the organisation and facing all the repercussions of doing so.. .

i only last august disassociated myself.

Leolaia

Wow, good to see ya str8. :D

26

As A Jehovah's Witness Did You Never Accept Or Believe Something They Taught?

by minimus in

jw
friends

i never believed that in 1975 or by the end of the 20th century, we would see the great tribulation occur.

some witnesses would listen to fred franz' talks where he clearly told his audience that 1975 was the end of 6000 years and the beginning of the jubilee....or something like that.. was there something that you never truly accepted that you were supposed to believe as a jehovah's witness?.

Leolaia

I never fully accepted their teaching that one perishes at death and in the resurrection God recreates you from his memory. That was no resurrection hope. Even in 3rd or 4th grade I questioned this in a book study. So I had my own private belief that when one dies, one's spirit goes back to God and he restores it in a resurrection. I thought the spirit wasn't conscious and just was one's life force, but it was individuated and unique and provided a continuity of existence.

Also in high school, I was gobsmacked to realize that the Society taught that the anointed went to heaven starting in 1918. I always thought they had been going to heaven since the first century. I was like...1918??? Where is that in the Bible????

63

Powerful questions to DEBUNK the flood of Noah's day

by Black Man in

jw
friends

just like in another thread a saw, the best way to deal with my jws is not debating or arguing, but instead posing questions for them to answer or not answer.

i want to come up with specific questions relating to the 'global flood' that completely debunk it.

what say you, jw.net?.

Leolaia

I'd not like to frame it that way, Recovery. I don't see myself as "refuting" the accuracy of "the Bible". A historian who critically examines what Berossus or Herodotus wrote does not aim to "refute" those ancient writers but rather assesses not just their accuracy but also their methods of composition, artfulness, ideological motives, and cultural context. There will be things that in objective examination will not be accurate, which might be invented or slanted, but that doesn't mean the book is itself refuted and can be dispensed with as an ancient source. All sources are slanted, inaccurate, etc. Ancient writers were not historians in the modern sense and they wrote from their own cultural point of view. Myth, folklore, and history were not carefully distinguished and narratives became better, more interesting stories through storytelling. A writer has the traditions at their disposal (which themselves draw on years of oral storytelling) and then crafts them in his or her own way in writing. I think the problem rather arises when as a religious text one demands that the stories are literally, unimpeachably true. Then the kind of normal literary examination of the text that one might do in the case of the Iliad or the Mahabharata becomes viewed as "attacking" or "trying to refute" the text. Rather, what is refuted in this instance, is the interpretation of the Flood myth that the Society (and YECs) proposes that makes historically and scientifically falsifiable claims. Then, yes, one could refute that. But the myth itself is ... a myth. I don't think it is without historical basis either. If you trace the history of the storytelling of this particular myth, from biblical to the Akkadian to the original Sumerian story, one could see that indeed the story likely preserves a memory of certain major floods that occurred in Mesopotamia in the Ubaid and Early Dynastic periods. But those memories have merged with certain folkloric archetypes that are not historical. But to take that ancient story, which was rooted in a very different cosmological and historical understanding of the world than we have now, and to take it as the basis for believing that it accurately relates a global flooding disaster in the recent past (bearing upon the scientific facts of the world as we currently understand them) is to stretch the story farther than it was intended to go.

I have written a lot on the Bible and looking at it from a critical perspective, including matters pertaining to historical accuracy. For instance, I consider the book of Jonah as a satirical story with certain social aims (in other words, it's akin to a parable). It's actually very funny satire; it would totally miss the point of the story to insist on it as literal history.

63

Powerful questions to DEBUNK the flood of Noah's day

by Black Man in

jw
friends

just like in another thread a saw, the best way to deal with my jws is not debating or arguing, but instead posing questions for them to answer or not answer.

i want to come up with specific questions relating to the 'global flood' that completely debunk it.

what say you, jw.net?.

Leolaia

Even better are those who say that the Flood both carved out the Grand Canyon AND laid down layers of sedimentary rock, and not realize the contradiction there.

63

Powerful questions to DEBUNK the flood of Noah's day

by Black Man in

jw
friends

just like in another thread a saw, the best way to deal with my jws is not debating or arguing, but instead posing questions for them to answer or not answer.

i want to come up with specific questions relating to the 'global flood' that completely debunk it.

what say you, jw.net?.

Leolaia

The amazing thing is when you meet scientists and engineers (usually in the physical sciences) who still believe in the literal Biblical Flood, despite the overwhelming conclusive evidence....

Yeah, exactly. I was talking about that sort of thing in another thread the other day. Perhaps those scientists and engineers could form an organization like "Scientists and Engineers for Noachian Flood Truth", would that mean 1) they represent what most scientists and engineers believe on the subject, and 2) Because they are experts in science and engineering, their opinion about the Flood has a cachet of credibility superior to the "official story" of earth's history?

3

What Is The True Source Of The Unnumbered Great Crowd?

by wannabe in

what is the true source of the unnumbered great crowd?.

does it make any sense, to believe that a great unnumbered crowd that no man could number, could come out of the great tribulation predicted by the son of god, jesus christ?

now, i myself, when it comes to mathematics, am certainly no rocket-scientist, but how intelligent do you have to be, to know that kind of number, could never possibly come out of a numbered population, of say, some, eight billion.

Leolaia

Does it make any sense, to believe that a great unnumbered crowd that no man could number, could come out of the great tribulation predicted by the Son of God, Jesus Christ? Now, I myself, when it comes to mathematics, am certainly no rocket-scientist, but how intelligent do you have to be, to know that kind of number, could never possibly come out of a numbered population, of say, some, eight Billion. Which is approximately the population of our earth today. But, double that amount, or even triple it; that is still a number the Census Takers could track, is it not? Was there the time enough left to build this Worlds population to that extent.

It's exactly the same thing with God's promise to Abraham to make his descendents as numerous as the sand of the sea. The reference to the great crowd is an allusion to this promise — which according to Paul was fulfilled in the Church. That is why census-taking of the whole population was frowned upon in the OT, although there were military censuses of a portion of the population designated as warriors. And that is exactly what is found in ch. 7: a military census of the 144,000 with a portion sealed from each tribe, while the entire body of Christians martyred in the great tribulation is innumerable although their true number is known to God (as ch. 6 indicates).