Posts by Leolaia

114

The Bible-- Full of Errors And Inconsistencies?

by Recovery in

13 years ago

i noticed in the "magic" thread many former jw's no longer adhere to the bible as the unerring and accurate word of god.

if you feel this way, can you please list any specific reasons/arguments as to why not.

this thread isn't for debating purposes, but simply for listing.

13 years ago

Leolaia 13 years ago

So what’s going on here? Is Jesus deaf, senile, or just not listening?
...or did the author jumble his paragraphs up?

From Helmut Koester's classic work Ancient Christian Gospels (1990):

Another aspect of the question of the integrity of the extant text of this Gospel concerns the order of its chapters and sections. Major disorder exists in two instances. The first concerns the sequence of chapters 4-7. At the end of chapter 4, Jesus is in Galilee, at the beginning of chapter 5 he goes to Jeruslem, chapter 6:1 says, "And after this Jesus went to the other side of the Sea of Galilee," and 7:1 reports that Jesus left Jerusalem and went about in Galilee, because the Jews were seeking to kill him. Moreover, John 7 continues the discussion of the theme of judgement which had been initiated in chapter 5. If the order were chapters 4, 6, 5, 7, all these difficulties would be removed.
The second major disorder is apparent in John 14:30-31. At the conclusion of this first part of the farewell discourses Jesus says: "I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no power over me, but I do as the Father has commanded me, so that the world may know that I love the Father. Rise, let us go hence." But it only in 18:1 that this command is followed by an appropriate action: "When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples across the Kidron valley where there was a garden." In spite of the clear "Rise, let us go hence" in John 14:31, chapters 15-17 continue the farewell discourses. It has been suggested that chapters 15-17 are a later interpolation. But in language, style, and content these three chapters belong with 13-14. It is clear, therefore, that they are not in the right place. Chapters 15-16 may have followed John 13:34-35 because 15:1-17 is a commentary on the commandment to love each other, and 13:36-38 seems a good continuation of 16:31. This leaves John 17, the farewell prayer of Jesus. No satisfactory solution has been found for the placement of this chapter. Bultmann suggests to place it after 13:31a, i.e. after the designation of Judas and before the statement "Now is the Son of Man glorified". That John 17 was added after the displacement of chapters 15-16 had already occurred, is also possible because chapter 17 is characterized by a theological interpretation of Jesus' departure that differs markedly from the farewell discourses in chapters 13-16; its orientation is more explicitly Gnostic. (p. 249)

Link

494

Jesus wife fragment is a fake

by Christ Alone in

13 years ago

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/21/gospel-jesus-wife-forgery.

gospel of jesus's wife is fake, claims expertscholar says papyrus fragment believed to provide evidence that jesus was married is a modern forgery.

karen king from harvard university holds the papyrus fragment that has four words written in coptic, which are believed to prove jesus was married.

13 years ago

Leolaia 13 years ago

And it's funny how the arm chair atheist scholars here have OVERWHELMING evidence for disavowing the gospels. Yet, many experts still hold to their validity. Amazing.

What does disavowing the gospels mean? Scholars all agree they are "valid" ancient documents (not modern forgeries).

If you are talking about taking a critical approach towards reliability, how is that any different in principle from taking a critical approach towards the GJW's authenticity? Taking the gospels on faith as inerrant would be like taking the papyrus fragment on faith as completely genuine (and dismissing the contrary findings against authenticity as simply due to a bias against its validity).

Link

494

Jesus wife fragment is a fake

by Christ Alone in

13 years ago

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/21/gospel-jesus-wife-forgery.

gospel of jesus's wife is fake, claims expertscholar says papyrus fragment believed to provide evidence that jesus was married is a modern forgery.

karen king from harvard university holds the papyrus fragment that has four words written in coptic, which are believed to prove jesus was married.

13 years ago

Leolaia 13 years ago

Yup, I've come to the same conclusion a few days ago, adding to Watson's analysis:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/236766/3/So-Jesus-had-a-wife

Link

56

Rutherford's love letter to Hitler

by irondork in

13 years ago

has anyone ever thought to send a copy of rutherford's letter to hitler & declaration of facts to the holocaust museum in washington, d.c.?

they have and entire section dedicated to the jehovah's witness in that museum.

i would hate for tourists to visit the museum and not get the whole story.. i would also assume there are jw displays at other holocaust museums around the world.

11 years ago

Leolaia 13 years ago

Thanks for pointing that out glenster, I hadn't seen that reference before.

"The Jews are money-lovers, granted; but they are not pig-headed wild beasts".

From the 9 October 1935 issue of the Golden Age (p. 25). That perfectly sums up the mixed attitude the Society expressed towards Jews at the time.

Link

114

The Bible-- Full of Errors And Inconsistencies?

by Recovery in

13 years ago

i noticed in the "magic" thread many former jw's no longer adhere to the bible as the unerring and accurate word of god.

if you feel this way, can you please list any specific reasons/arguments as to why not.

this thread isn't for debating purposes, but simply for listing.

13 years ago

Leolaia 13 years ago

I do not see anything in Ezekiel's prophecies about Tyre that say Nebuchadnezzar would enrich himself with its wealth and completely devastate it and throw its ruins into the sea. Can you please point out where exactly this is stated and then later changed?

Quoting v. 7-14:

7 “For this is what Lord Yahweh says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great assembly of troops. 8 He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you. 9 He will direct the blows of his battering rams against your walls and demolish your towers with his weapons. 10 His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust. Your walls will tremble at the noise of the warhorses, wagons and chariots when he enters your gates as those who enter a breached city. 11 The hooves of his horses will trample all your streets; he will kill your people with the sword, and your strong pillars will fall to the ground. 12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. 13 I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. 14 I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I Yahweh have spoken, declares Lord Yahweh.

I know that thirdwitness claimed that the plural in v. 12-14 must refer back to the plural "many nations" in v. 3 and that the reference must be to much later unrelated attacks on Tyre by other nations. This has an apologetic aim to save the prophecy from disconfirmation. But this ignores the fact that v. 12-14 describes the conclusion to the campaign by Nebuchadnezzar related in v. 7-11 (after entering through the gates the soldiers then plunder and loot and city, tear down walls, demolish houses, and throw the rubble into the sea). The antecendent is rather the plural "those who enter [the city]" (kimbô'ê) in v. 10: the men enter the city, then plunder the wealth, then break down walls, then throw the rubble into the sea. The expectation that Tyre would be demolished and never rebuilt clearly pertains to this campaign of Nebuchadnezzar's. There is only one single campaign described in the text.

The reference to "many nations" in v. 3 does not legitimize a reading of the text that divides up the single campaign narrated in v. 7-14 into several different campagins centuries apart by different nations. "Many nations" does not mean that Ezekiel is talking about many different attacks of Tyre by different nations. How many different desolation events are narrated in the lament? Just one. Why does Ezekiel refer to "many nations"? Because "all the nations round about" were vassals of Nebuchadnezzar (Jeremiah 25:10-12, 27:7, 28:10-11; cf. BM 21946), and the king augmented his army with their military forces (cf. Jeremiah 35:11, 2 Kings 24:1-2). Thus Ezekiel earlier said, concerning the siege of Jerusalem and the defeat of Jehoiachin: "Then the nations came against him, those from regions round about. They spread their net for him and he was trapped in their pit. With hooks they pulled him into a cage and brought him to the king of Babylon. They put him in prison so his roar was heard no longer on the mountains of Israel" (Ezekiel 19:8-9). The reference to the plural "nations" does not mean that Jehoiachin was deported to Babylon multiple times by each nation but that the client nations of Nebuchadnezzar were all involved in this event. This event was the siege of Jerusalem in 597 BC, an event rather parallel to the siege of Tyre in the use of military forces. Similarly, the following reference to Nebuchadnezzar's expected attack on Egypt refers to his army as including those from the (plural) nations: "I will put an end to the hoardes of Egypt by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon. He and his army -- the ruthless ones of the nations— will be brought in to destroy the land" (Ezekiel 30:10-11). And regarding Tyre: "I am going to bring foreignersagainst you, the most ruthless ofthe nations, they will draw their swords against your beauty and wisdom and pierce your shining splendor" (Ezekiel 28:7). Again, the reference is to Nebuchadnezzar's multinational military force, just as the Babylonian king sent Syrians in Jeremiah 35:11 and Chaldeans, Arameans, Moabites, and Ammonites in 2 Kings 24:1-2. Compare with the military force of "Babylonians, Chaldeans, Pekod and Shoa and Koa, and all the Assyrians with them" in Ezekiel 23:23.

And this is exactly what the context indicates as well. The goyîm rabbîm "many nations" in v. 3 has its consequent in qahal w e `am rab "a great assembly of people" (v. 7) that Nebuchadnezzar brings as his troops. The LXX translates this as "a gathering of very many nations" (sunagògès ethnòn pollòn sphodra).

Link

52

So, Jesus had a wife.....

by oldlightnewshite in

13 years ago

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><![endif].

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-gb</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"times new roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:en-us;} </style> <![endif].

13 years ago

Leolaia 13 years ago

The latest analysis, sounds right on the money:

http://www.gospels.net/gjw/GJW%28Bernhard_9-24-2012%29.pdf

Link

114

The Bible-- Full of Errors And Inconsistencies?

by Recovery in

13 years ago

i noticed in the "magic" thread many former jw's no longer adhere to the bible as the unerring and accurate word of god.

if you feel this way, can you please list any specific reasons/arguments as to why not.

this thread isn't for debating purposes, but simply for listing.

13 years ago

Leolaia 13 years ago

I noticed in the "Magic" thread many former JW's no longer adhere to the Bible as the unerring and accurate word of God. If you feel this way, can you please list any specific reasons/arguments as to why not. This thread isn't for debating purposes, but simply for listing. Having a collection of expositions all together in one thread will be a lot less time consuming. Thanks in advance to all who will take time to participate.

It is a "meta" belief about the Bible that it is unerring, but that's a belief that is demonstrably wrong.

The prophet Ezekiel even admitted that his prophecies about Tyre were not fulfilled. He said that Nebuchadnezzar would not only conquer the city and enrich himself with its wealth, but that he would raze it and wipe the island clean by throwing its ruins into the sea. And not just that, Ezekiel said that Tyre would never be rebuilt. Well, that was the prediction he made while the war was going on. When the war ended, Ezekiel had to revise things and say, "Yes, yes, Nebuchadnezzar did not take wealth from Tyre, so he's going to attack Egypt instead and take the wealth from there". And so Ezekiel claimed that he would conquer Egypt and exile the population and raze the cities, such that the land would be empty for forty years. That also didn't happen. Nebuchadnezzar's campaign against Egypt was a bust and the reign of Amasis was a very prosperous time for the Egypt. Many everyday documents and monuments prove that the prophesied forty-year desolation never happened. Life continued uninterrupted. And even if we want to claim that Ezekiel's predictions were later fulfilled by Alexander the Great (which is NOT what Ezekiel said), he was still wrong. Tyre was rebuilt many times and still exists today; the island city is today part of a peninsula and there is a thriving urban city exactly where the old island kingdom used to be.

Link

56

Rutherford's love letter to Hitler

by irondork in

13 years ago

has anyone ever thought to send a copy of rutherford's letter to hitler & declaration of facts to the holocaust museum in washington, d.c.?

they have and entire section dedicated to the jehovah's witness in that museum.

i would hate for tourists to visit the museum and not get the whole story.. i would also assume there are jw displays at other holocaust museums around the world.

11 years ago

Leolaia 13 years ago

Re Garbe:

He noted the use of "anti-Jewish slogans" in the document, which was written less than three months after the boycott of Jewish stores in Germany, [14] but said the Witnesses were not guilty of antisemitism. [15] Yet Garbe said the Declaration's description of the Anglo-American empire as "the most oppressive empire on earth" did undermine the religion's claims to political neutrality. [14]

The document takes a position on the boycott issue; it is critical of Catholics and Jews in America who "insult" the government of Germany by mounting a counter-boycott against Germany. I can't understand how the references to "commercial Jews" in that document at that particular historical moment can be anti-Jewish but not antisemitic, especially considering how the German Declaration made an explicit reference to the counter-boycott. Similarly the Hitler letter expressed agreement with the principles ("just principles") in the Nazi Platform that included fighting the Jewish commercialist spirit at home and abroad. The statement about the boycott seems to me to express a solidarity with this principle ("the announced principle").

Anyway I haven't read Garbe (or at least not recently) so I cannot comment on what he says specifically.

It's interesting that the historian no.2, James Penton is the only one who scathingly accuses the JWs of being anti-semitic and he was an ex-jehovah's witness. So, like many of us on this discussion board, hardly unbiased.

Regardless of whether he is biased or not (and it is fair to say that he is), the Society did make statements at the time that were antisemitic (in terms of economic antisemitism, punitive supercessionism, blaming Jews for their own persecution, etc.).

"Be it known once and for all that those profiteering, conscienceless, selfish men who call themselves Jews, and who control the greater portion of the finances of the world, will never be the rulers in this new earth. God would not risk such selfish men with such an important position" (Golden Age, 23 February 1927, p. 343). "Jesus was telling in parabolic phrase what was coming upon the Jewish nation. A few years after His crucifixion the Jews were cast away and the Gentiles, represented by the pauper, came into God's favor. Thus we see that the Jewish nation, represented by 'the rich man', ceased to exist and, as a nation, went to hell" (GA, 15 October 1930, p. 58). "It is noted that Judah and the land of Israel had commercial intercourse with Tyre, and doubtless from Tyre the Jews learned how to cheat their fellow man....The Jews were evicted from Palestine and 'their house left unto them desolate' because they rejected Christ Jesus, the beloved and anointed King of Jehovah. To this day the Jews have not repented of this wrongful act committed by their forefathers" (Vindication, Vol. 2, 1932, pp. 70, 257-258). "Even to this day the Jews are the greatest merchants in the earth, and it is selfish gain that leads them in that course and causes them to ignore Jehovah and his Word. The turning away of the Jews from Jehovah and the turning to the Devil brought great violence upon themselves as well as upon others" (Watchtower, 15 December 1933, p. 373). "The Jews have always been opposed to Christ Jesus the King...The international bankers are backing the League of Nations with their money. Many of the strong men in that financial power are called Jews but they are not Jews in fact. It is true that they are descendents of Hebrew stock, but the word 'Jew' or 'Judean' properly means one who serves and praises Jehovah God; which the international bankers do not. They have made gold their god" (GA, 23 May 1934, pp. 520-521). "The people now on earth and which are called Jews are a commercial people. Among them are some of the richest and most avaricious men the word has ever known. Some of the chief men in Big Business are called Jews. Many of these people are very arrogant, self important and extremely selfish" (Favored People, 1934, p. 5). "Amongst her instruments that she uses are ultraselfish men called 'Jews', who look only for personal gain, and who therefore readily yield to and join with the Hierarchy in any unrighteous schemes" (Enemies, 1937, p. 281).

At the same time, they were also critical of antisemitic violence and antisemitic propaganda, including the Protocols of Zion, which they denounced as forgeries (Golden Age, 4 January 1933 pp. 209-210; 11 September 1935, p. 775-776, 9 October 1935, p. 6). So it wasn't a one-sided thing. I think Rutherford played into popular antisemitic sentiment when backpedalling from earlier Russellite Zionism and later when responding to accusations that JWs were Zionists and propped up by Jews, while also condemning antisemitism (particularly overt hatred, discrimination, persecution, and racial antisemitism). And those condemnations were forceful. But that does not negate the fact that other statements were prejudiced.

Link

56

Rutherford's love letter to Hitler

by irondork in

13 years ago

has anyone ever thought to send a copy of rutherford's letter to hitler & declaration of facts to the holocaust museum in washington, d.c.?

they have and entire section dedicated to the jehovah's witness in that museum.

i would hate for tourists to visit the museum and not get the whole story.. i would also assume there are jw displays at other holocaust museums around the world.

11 years ago

Leolaia 13 years ago

Okay, so here is Rutherford's booklet The Crisis, published in 1933:

And here is Rep. McFadden's testimony during the hearings for H.R. 7986 (in March 1934):

Virtually the same word for word.

Link

52

So, Jesus had a wife.....

by oldlightnewshite in

13 years ago

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><![endif].

[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-gb</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!

[endif][if gte mso 10]> <style> /* style definitions */ table.msonormaltable {mso-style-name:"table normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"times new roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:en-us;} </style> <![endif].

13 years ago

Leolaia 13 years ago

Possibly old...could have been a blank piece of ancient papyrus (it's not parchment), though some scholars have said though that the papyrus looks too fresh. The ink has not yet been tested scientifically.

Stephen Emmel, a professor of Coptology at the University of Muenster who was on the international advisory panel that reviewed the 2006 discovery of the Gospel of Judas, said the text accurately quotes Jesus as saying “my wife.” But he questioned whether the document was authentic.
“There’s something about this fragment in its appearance and also in the grammar of the Coptic that strikes me as being not completely convincing somehow,” he said in an interview on the sidelines of the conference.
Another participant at the congress, Alin Suciu, a papyrologist at the University of Hamburg, was more blunt.
“I would say it’s a forgery. The script doesn’t look authentic” when compared to other samples of Coptic papyrus script dated to the 4th century, he said.

The use made of GThom in the GJW is highly unusual. It is a very tiny scrap of what should be a larger text, but virtually every word and phrase is lifted out of GThom. There are genuine gnostic tracts that are dependent on GThom or have literary parallels, but not with such density. They always have much original material. At the very least, this shows that it was composed in Coptic and not in Greek, which Karen King originally thought, and the method of composition does not even require the forger to have even understood the language (and there seems to be a big goof in the last word in line 6). All he or she needed was an interlinear of the GThom and simply replace a few prefixes or suffixes as needed. And one of the mere 8 extant lines in the fragment agrees with the line break in the Nag Hammadi manuscript. That means a dependence on specifically that manuscript, if it isn't a coincidence. Which would then mean that the fragment is a modern production.

Link