Leolaia

Joined

• started 148 topics
• posted 16,160 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Leolaia

• 
  51

  I want to release the motherload

  by Anony Mous in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i have collected and assembled hundreds of letters, documents, publications, personal communications, e-mails from the branch etc.

  etc.. my original intent was to make some type of searchable database but my time has been taken over by more important things in life for me.

  i don't care about the jw's all that much anymore and who or what gets what information i don't really care.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Leolaia

  Avast.
• 
  21

  Sparlock entry at Uncyclopedia

  by IsaacJ22 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i created a brief entry at the uncyclopedia on sparlock.

  it can be found here at http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/sparlock.

  if you guys want to make it bigger, better, funnier, that could insure that the entry stays up.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Leolaia

  Jeffro....I agree. It seems btw a better candidate for inclusion is the video itself, rather than a character from the video. But even then, these are the only reliable sources I could find that mention the video and Sparlock:

  http://www.nettavisen.no/nyheter/article3427958.ece (This article, while mentioning the incorrect Simpsons rumors as "rumors", gives both critical views and the response by Norway branch spokesman Øystein Gaathaug . The article states that the video is " eagerly discussed in the discussion forums on the web and social media" and "critics say the video shows how the faith community encourages its members to scare children into obedience," and also states that the wizard character Sparlock has its own fan website).

  http://www.oa.no/nyheter/article6133962.ece (A similar article, with response by Øystein Gaathaug . Focuses on the reaction to the video by one ex-JW. Does not mention the name of the toy per se).

  Might change as the summer conventions progress and more news sites might take note of the video release.
• 
  51

  I want to release the motherload

  by Anony Mous in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i have collected and assembled hundreds of letters, documents, publications, personal communications, e-mails from the branch etc.

  etc.. my original intent was to make some type of searchable database but my time has been taken over by more important things in life for me.

  i don't care about the jw's all that much anymore and who or what gets what information i don't really care.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Leolaia

  I am getting a malware warning when I click on your link. Don't know if its a false positive or not.
• 
  70

  How many ex-jws poster here now believe in Hellfire, immortality of soul, trinity, etc;

  by booker-t in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i am just curious about this because although i agree with many of the posters here that the wt society is guilty of many horrible deeds, i still believe they are right when it comes to doctrinal things as i mention.

  especially hellfire.

  i just don't see how anybody that has studied the bible for many years like many of the ex-jws here can make an about face and go back to believing hellfire.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Leolaia

  binadub....Actually Alan came out to my house in California twice. First time in 2004 he came with frankiespeakin, and the second time I went out to dinner with him with my boyfriend. Great conversation was had.

  Because Mark's history is so tied with Egypt, and he was Peter's companion, along with the significant Jewish population there in the first century, I'm inclined to agree with historians who believe this was the Babylon Peter was likely writing from. Naturally, orthodox historians dispute that in favor of "Babylon" likely referring to Rome. Literal ancient Babylon was too far from Jerusalem imo.

  The traditions locating Mark in Egypt place him in Alexandria, not 130 miles to the south at the Babylon Fortress in Old Cairo, nor do they posit Peter as accompanying him in Egypt (and why would they have been at an imperial fort?). They rather claim that Mark went to Alexandria after he parted company with Peter (Epiphanius, Panarion 51.6.10), and the earliest sources claim that he wrote the gospel after Peter's death (Papias, cited in Historia Ecclesiastica 3.39.15; Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 3.1.2), and that he took the gospel he had just written to Egypt (Jerome, De Viris Illustribus, 8). The NT elsewhere refers to the presence of Mark in Rome on two occasions: (1) he accompanied Paul during his first imprisonment (Philemon 24, Colossians 4:10), and (2) he was summoned to go to Rome during Paul's second imprisonment (2 Timothy 4:11). So outside of 1 Peter we have very early sources that located Mark in Rome, a datum that was reproduced in later traditions as well. Outside of 1 Peter 5:13, the earliest clear reference to Peter's ministry in Rome was in Ignatius, Romans 4:3 (written in the early second century AD), which also hints that he was martyred with Paul as well. 1 Clement 5:3-7, written in Rome in the late first century AD, also mentions the martyrdom of Paul and Peter without being explicit as to the place. The Ascension of Isaiah (early second century AD) gives the earliest testimony of the tradition that Peter perished during the Neronian persecution (4:2-3), a claim later made by Tertullian (end of the second century AD) as well (De Praescriptione 36, Scorpiace 15). I am somewhat unsure of the historicity of the "Peter in Rome" tradition, but the references to "Babylon" and Mark in 1 Peter show that the epistle is an early witness to it (perhaps the earliest, depending on its date).

  The usage of "Babylon" as a nickname or symbol for Rome was widely attested at the end of the first century AD and early second century AD, the same period during which 1 Peter was written (Revelation 14:8, 16:19, 17:5, 18:2, 10, 21; 4 Ezra 3:1-5:20, 10:19-48, 11:1-12:51, 15:43-63, 16:1-34; 2 Baruch 11:1, 67:7, 77:12, 17, 19, 79:1, 80:4; Sibylline Oracles 3:63-74, 303-313, 5:137-178). This was largely due to fact that like Babylon, Rome was the power that ruled over Judea and which eventually destroyed the Temple (on the same day of the year, in fact). As for as Revelation is concerned, Babylon "is the great city that is ruling (present tense) over the kings of the earth" (17:18), which could only refer to Rome. It is a city of great wealth and power at the hub of an international trade network (ch. 18), accessible by ship; the goods mentioned include articles of citron-wood that were prized by Rome's arisocracy, grain which Rome had shipped in from Egypt, and slaves shipped to the city like chattal. Again, the reference can only be to Rome. It is symbolized by a woman sitting on seven hills (17:9), and this is precisely how the goddess Dea Roma (the personification of Rome) was depicted on coinage and in statues at the time: as a woman sitting on the Septimontium, or seven hills, of Rome. Dea Roma was also claimed to have had a secret name and she was identified with the lupa "she-wolf" that nursed Remus and Romulus; similarly the harlot of Babylon had a secret name (17:5) and lupa also had the meaning of "prostitute". Babylon was depicted having already martyred many Christians (17:6), which corresponds to the Neronian persecution of AD 64. And Babylon had a series of five fallen kings (17:10) and one of the former kings would return to destroy the city with fire (17:11, 16; cf. 13:3); this corresponds to the Sebastenoi line of Roman emperors and expectations about Nero redivivus in pagan, Jewish, and Christian sources. The fifth book of the Sybilline Oracles (written between AD 70 and 132) also attested a version of the Nero redivivus myth and repeatedly referred to Rome as "Babylon" (lines 137-170, 394-399): "a great king of great Rome, a godlike man from Italy ... who played at theatricals with honey-sweet songs ... who will destroy many men and his wretched mother, he will flee from Babylon", "a great star will come from heaven to the wondrous sea and will burn the deep sea and Babylon itself and the land of Italy", "city of Latin land, as a widow you will sit by the banks and the river Tiber your consort will weep for you" (cf. Isaiah 47:2-9, Revelation 18:7 in reference to Babylon).

  Within the context of 1 Peter, the use of "Babylon" to refer to Rome is part of the author's allusion to the situation of the Babylonian exile. The epistle is loosely modelled on Jeremiah's "Letter to the Exiles" (Jeremiah 29), which was also imitated elsewhere (e.g. the "Letter of Jeremiah" in 1 Baruch 6). There Jeremiah advised the exiles to "build houses and settle down", "marry and have sons and daughers", and "seek the peace and prosperty of the city to which I have carried you into exile" (v. 5-7). He tells the exiles that Babylon is accorded a duration of time to hold supremacy over the earth (v. 10), during which God's people should live out their lives and be in submission to the king of Babylon: "B ow your neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon; serve him and his people, and you will live. ...Do not listen to the words of the prophets who say to you, 'You will not serve the king of Babylon,' for they are prophesying lies to you" (27:12-14). Implicit in this advice is the promise that Babylon's supremacy will eventually come to an end at the time of God's choosing, then God promises that " I will gather you from all the nations and places where I have banished you" (29:14). In imitation of this, the author of 1 Peter referred to his readers as " exiles scattered throughout the provinces " in Asia Minor (1:1), and advised them " to live out your time as foreigners here in reverent fear " (v. 17). Then in ch. 2 he continued:

  1 Peter 2:11-17: " Dear friends, I urge you, as foreigners and exiles, to abstain from sinful desires, which wage war against your soul. Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us. Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. ...Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as God's slaves . Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor".

  The situation of the letter is one of persecution of Christians by authorities (1:6-7, 2:21-24, 3:9-18, 4:1, 12-15), and the author promises that the present state of affairs will soon come to an end (1:5, 2:12, 4:7), with the implication of judgment against those in power who did not fear God (4:17). The reference to Babylon in 5:13 imo forms part of the author's comparison with the situation of the Babylonian exile (involving not just living among pagans in a diaspora but submitting to the authority of the king of Babylon) and thus has reference to the power whose provinces (named in 1:1) the letter's recipients found themselves exiled in, and whose emperor and governors the Christians should submit themselves to, i.e. Rome.
• 
  78

  God particle is 'found': Scientists at Cern expected to announce on Wednesday

  by cantleave in

  1. social
  2. current

  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2167188/god-particle-scientists-cern-expected-announce-higgs-boson-particle-discovered-wednesday.html.

  scientists 'will say they are 99.99% certain' the particle has been foundleading physicists have been invited to event - sparking speculation that higgs boson particle has been found'god particle' gives particles that make up atoms their mass.

  by rob cooper.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Leolaia

  I soooo much want to hear Brian Cox gush about the discovery.
• 
  78

  Cheery new Awake! cover - should make it easy to place...

  by cedars in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Leolaia

  Cool cover. I missed the movie 2012. Or, wait, is this a promo for some other up-coming movie???
• 
  70

  How many ex-jws poster here now believe in Hellfire, immortality of soul, trinity, etc;

  by booker-t in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i am just curious about this because although i agree with many of the posters here that the wt society is guilty of many horrible deeds, i still believe they are right when it comes to doctrinal things as i mention.

  especially hellfire.

  i just don't see how anybody that has studied the bible for many years like many of the ex-jws here can make an about face and go back to believing hellfire.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Leolaia

  To me the Trinity is a guaranteed product of religious evolution. I think given enough time and data a religion will always head towards monotheism and eventually a Tri-God.

  Well, that's an interesting thought, but I strongly disagree that religious development is so deterministic. And the trajectory of reduction from a maximally differentiated system (polytheism with large pantheons) to a minimally differentiated one leads imo not to trinitarianism (which maintains distinction within unity) but to the full monotheism characteristic of modern Judaism.

  Genesis 18's mysterious use of the word "they" in verse 9 seems like an early stepping stone in the evolution towards a Trinity Creator.

  But its really just an ordinary expression in biblical Hebrew.

  Genesis 18:6-9: " So Abraham hurried into the tent to Sarah. 'Quick,' he said, 'get three seahsof the finest flour and knead it and bake some bread'. Then he ran to the herd and selected a choice, tender calf and gave it to a servant, who hurried to prepare it. H e then brought some curds and milk and the calf that had been prepared, and set these before them. While they ate, he stood near them under a tree. ' Where is your wife Sarah?' they asked him".

  Genesis 24:55-57: " Her brother and her mother replied, 'Let the young woman remain with us ten days or so; then you may go'. But he said to them, 'Do not detain me, now that Yahweh has granted success to my journey. Send me on my way so I may go to my master'. Then they said, 'Let’s call the young woman and ask her about it' ".

  Genesis 26:32: "That day Isaac's servants came and told him about the well they had dug. They said, 'We've found water!' ".

  There are probably a hundred other examples of this in the OT. Nothing mysterious.

  The creative process as per the Torah is a group effort and requires speaking in unison.

  This is very ordinary...there is nothing different in the way speech is attributed to the three men visiting Abraham than elsewhere in the OT when groups of people are involved.

  This is why I am so interested in Genesis 18:9 because the three entities are actually speaking in unison. 2 Kings 18 doesn't seem to have anyone speaking in unison.

  Of course it does...

  2 Kings 18:22: "But if you (pl.) say to me, 'We are depending on Yahweh our God' — isn't he the one whose high places and altars Hezekiah removed?"

  2 Kings 18:26: " Then Eliakim son of Hilkiah, and Shebna and Joah (pl.) said to the field commander, 'Please speak to your servants in Aramaic, since we understand it. Don't speak to us in Hebrew in the hearing of the people on the wall".

  I don't think Genesis 18:9 is just a vague way of describing a group question, I think it's a "telepathic" link.

  And that is a good illustration of how theology draws on biblical interpretation. But the idea that there is a telepathic link is not something actually contained in the text.

  The mention of Asherah in 1 Kings 18:19 is of interest to me because of the recent findings that there used to be a "God marriage" between Yahweh and Asherah in Bible times and they were worshipped as a couple. Separating the traits of God into more than one entity always yielded corruption which is why polytheism was punishable by death for so long.

  This seems to presume the Deuteronomistic view of history that posits monotheism first and polytheism as a later corruption; the historical evidence rather shows that it was the reserve. The earliest stage had El and Asherah as a couple, then Yahweh was identified with El leading logically to the status of Asherah as a consort of Yahweh, and then finally Asherah was phased out with her attributes being absorbed by Yahweh (and surviving in some traditions as a hypostasis of God). Even the Deuteronomistic History presents the pre-exilic period as a time of continuous idolatry and polytheism, punctuated by the brief aniconic reforms of Hezekiah and Josiah. Prior to Josiah's reform, Asherah was even worshipped at the Jerusalem Temple (2 Kings 23:6-7), which indirectly shows how mainstream and institutional her status as consort of Yahweh was in the seventh century BC.
• 
  70

  How many ex-jws poster here now believe in Hellfire, immortality of soul, trinity, etc;

  by booker-t in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i am just curious about this because although i agree with many of the posters here that the wt society is guilty of many horrible deeds, i still believe they are right when it comes to doctrinal things as i mention.

  especially hellfire.

  i just don't see how anybody that has studied the bible for many years like many of the ex-jws here can make an about face and go back to believing hellfire.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Leolaia

  Hi panhandlegirl...I should do a post on the different writings contained in Enochic literature; it really is interesting. 1 Enoch (which includes such writings as the Book of Watchers, the Book of Parables, the Book of Luminaries, the Animal Apocalypse, the Apocalypse of Weeks, the Epistle of Enoch, a fragment of the Book of Noah, and which at one time included the Book of Giants) is such an important book for understanding the pre-Christian origin of many of the ideas that appear in the NT, such as demons and demon possession, the state of the dead, Gehenna and post-mortem punishment of the dead, judgment day, the Son of Man and the messiah, the idea of a millennium, Tartarus, archangels, and so much more. All of these are ideas that, although not found in the OT (or not quite in the same form), were not invented by Christians but were part of the Judaism that Christianity grew from. The difference between rabbinical Judaism and Christianity imo reflects in part the difference between two major sects in Second Temple Judaism: Pharisaism and Essenism. Enochic books (and indeed much of the pseudepigrapha) represent the kind of Judaism that Essenism grew out of as well as (non-Qumranic) Essenism itself; the movements of John the Baptist and Jesus of Nazareth, meanwhile, may be situated within first century Essenism. That is partly why Enochic ideas are so prominent in the NT and why at least one book, Jude (ascribed to the brother of Jesus), utilizes it at length. The book of Daniel, composed of an Aramaic apocalypse and a younger Hebrew apocalypse, dates to around the same time as such Enochic writings as the Book of Watchers, the Animal Apocalypse, and the Apocalypse of Weeks, and both have many ideas in common. Daniel was accepted as scripture by the Pharisees and the Essenes and dates to a time prior to the genesis of both sects (it may have originated in the Hasidean movement that drew on both Enochic Judaism and priestly proto-Sadducee Judaism). There is a lot in this picture that is unclear and subject to debate, but that is what makes the history of Second Temple Judaism and the origin of the different sects within it so interesting.

  I was just an observer at the SBL (Society of Biblical Literature) meeting....and here are the papers presented at the Daniel session (from the program book):

  Book of Daniel
  11/21/2011
  9:00 AM to 11:30 AM
  Room: Sierra K - Marriott Marquis

  Theme: New Directions in the Study of Daniel
  This is the debut session of The Book of Daniel consultation.

  Neal Walls, Wake Forest University, Presiding

  Michael Segal, Hebrew University of Jerusalem

  Reconsidering the Theological Background of Daniel 7 in Light of Innerbiblical Interpretation

  The apocalyptic vision of Daniel 7, which plays a pivotal role within the Book of Daniel, has influenced both Early Christian and Jewish literature. The rich symbolism of the four beasts, and of the Ancient of Days and the One like a Human Being, have been discussed by both early interpreters and critical scholars. Most recent studies have focused on extrabiblical parallels, including Mesopotamian and Canaanite mythology. While these influences are highly significant, this paper will emphasize the reuse of earlier biblical traditions in Daniel 7, including Deuteronomy 32:8–9, the division of the nations to the sons of God; Psalm 82, a courtroom scene involving the divine retinue, which culminates with the inheritance of the nations; and Psalm 68:5, in which YHWH is described as riding on the clouds. In light of these passages, it will be suggested that the apocalyptic vision in Daniel 7 describes an eschatological redistribution of all of the nations and their lands, reversing the division described in Deut 32:8–9, and enacting the court scene of Psalm 82, according to which YHWH will inherit all of the nations. This line of interpretation sheds new light on Daniel 7 itself, as well as on the process of literary development of the entire book.

  Amy Merrill Willis, Lynchburg College

  The Plans of God in Jeremiah and Daniel's Historical Reviews

  Daniel's use of Jeremiah's 70 years prophecy has been the subject of much attention, yet Jeremiah appears in Daniel in other ways. This paper will examine the vocabulary and thinking of the divine plan in Jeremiah and how it may be at work in Daniel's depiction of God and kings in the historical reviews. To this end, the connection between Jeremiah's deuteronomistic theology and Daniel's apocalyptic construction of history will be considered outside of the context of Daniel 9.

  Matthias Henze, Rice University

  Daniel's First Readers: "Hazon Gabriel" and "2 Baruch"

  This paper will examine the reception of Daniel by its earliest readers using texts from Qumran, "Hazon Gabriel", and 2 Baruch.

  Stefan Beyerle, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität Greifswald

  "Apocalypse Against Empire": Anathea Portier-Young’s Book in the Context of Recent Scholarship

  Anathea Portier-Young’s book on "Apocalypse Against Empire" combines a thorough analysis of the historical backgrounds of apocalyptic writings with questions and conclusions concerning a theological interpretation of "Apocalypses." By focusing on the earlier apocalyptic compositions, like the Book of Daniel and some significant parts of 1 Enoch, Portier-Young highlights a historical context that primarily has the Jewish revolt against Antiochus IV in view. Therefore, "Resistance Theology" in those apocalypses considers the relationship between Hellenism and Judaism. This paper provides a review of the monograph within the context of recent publications.

  John Collins, Yale University, Respondent (25 min)
  Discussion (25 min)
• 
  70

  How many ex-jws poster here now believe in Hellfire, immortality of soul, trinity, etc;

  by booker-t in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i am just curious about this because although i agree with many of the posters here that the wt society is guilty of many horrible deeds, i still believe they are right when it comes to doctrinal things as i mention.

  especially hellfire.

  i just don't see how anybody that has studied the bible for many years like many of the ex-jws here can make an about face and go back to believing hellfire.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Leolaia

  Hello sabastious....Here is my take on this subject. I believe it is anachronistic and eisegetical to use the much later Christian doctrine of the Trinity as the exegetical key to understanding the OT concept of God. The writers of the various books of the OT did not hold a belief that was not developed until hundreds of years later. However there is also validity in at least some of the parallels you point to. And this is the thing: the notion of the Trinity did not spring up out of nowhere. It developed to a great extent through OT interpretation. And it isn't that it exists in the OT waiting to be discovered; it is that some of the ideas that specifically contributed to the development of trinitarian thinking derive in part from the OT itself. One of these concepts is the idea of plurality within God. Christians of the second century AD were very interested in this notion because it had the promise of resolving the tension between monotheism and the idea that the Son and the Father were both God while being distinct from each other. But the concept ultimately was a by-product of the development of monotheism itself. The movement from polytheism to henotheism to monotheism conflated deities together (not just in Israel but throughout the ANE), reducing pantheons from many gods to, ultimately, one single God. The identification of Yahweh with El (the god of the patriarchs) is one such conflation attested in the OT. When the stage of monotheism is reached, all divine attributes reside in a single deity but sometimes they were hypostasized or personified; this produces a plurality whether metaphorical (in the case of personification) or ontological (in the case of hypostatization). The most well-known example of this is personified Wisdom from Proverbs 8, and this text was highly influential source material in the development of both christology and the Trinity. Other attributes include the presence of God (< the Shekinah), the voice of God, the face of God, the name of God, the glory of God, and the word of God; each of these were also hypostasized and/or personified in later literature. Mark Smith in his book The Early History of God has a chapter on how some of the feminine attributes were transferred from Asherah to Yahweh when worship of the goddess (who became Yahweh's consort when Yahweh was conflated with El) was phased out, especially following the reforms of Josiah (pp. 108-147); similar hypostatizations existed in other West Semitic cults of the period, e.g. Astarte as the "name of Baal" and Tannit as the "face of Baal". In early Christianity, the Holy Spirit was the recipient of the attributes and feminine hypostatization ultimately traceable to the goddess (cf. for instance the reference to "my mother the Holy Spirit" in the Gospel of the Hebrews, which draws on a motif cognate to the heavenly woman myth found in Revelation 12). Orthodox rabbinical Judaism eschewed hypostatizations and labeled the "two powers in heaven" concept as a heresy; this represents true monotheism with its emphasis on the oneness of God. What was orthodox in Judaism became called "modalism" in Christianity, and the church fathers decided that modalism was a heresy precisely because it dissolved the distinctions needed by Christians to distinguish the Son from the Father (on this, see Daniel Boyarin's 2004 article in the Kugel festschrift).

  I think it is possible that Genesis 1:26 may be understood in this light. It has a background in earlier polytheistic creation myths in the ANE which presume a plurality of gods; the ninth century BC Ashur creation narrative portrays the Annunaki saying to the each other "Let us create mankind" when they decide to create the first humans, and the Enuma Elish similarly presents the gods as making a decision to create people (Tablet VI). There is the old tradition of other divine beings present during the creation of the earth in Job 38:4-7. But P was no polytheist or even much of a henotheist; he ascribes to God alone the work of creation and he does not elsewhere mention the existence of other divine beings. So while he uses a traditional formulation the meaning is quite different. Throughout the entire narrative, God uses the jussive to issue commands to the external cosmos in order to design it: "let there be light" (v. 3), "let there be a firmament" (v. 6), "let the water under the sky be gathered into one place" (v. 9), "let the land produce vegetation" (v. 11), "let there be lights in the firmament of the sky" (v. 14), "let the water teem with living creatures" (v. 20), "let the birds increase on the earth" (v. 23), "let the land produce living creatures" (v. 24). But in v. 26 the addressee of the divine command is not the external universe but himself, so it is directed internally which makes it cohortative. I think the plural is retained because what is created is specified as being both (1) in the "image" and "likeness" of God, and (2) a plurality: " Then God (sing., not pl.) said, 'Let us (pl., not sing.) make man (sing., not pl.) in our (pl. not sing.) image, in our (pl., not sing.) likeness, so that they (pl., not. sing.) may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground'. And so God (sing., not pl.) created man (sing., not pl.) in his (sing., not pl.) own image, in the image of God (sing., not pl.) he (sing., not pl.) created them (pl., not sing.); male and female he (sing., not pl.) created them (pl., not sing)" (v. 26-27). Man is really a plurality of male and female, and this is in the image and likeness of God, so the plurality (a distinction of male and female) extends to God as well. This reading may be justified by the fact that the shifting between singular and plural in this passage occurs both in references to God and references to man, and outside of v. 26-27 God is strictly singular. This raises the possibility that it is the feminine aspect that is the addressee of the command, in line with the conception of divine Wisdom in Proverbs 8, who during creation was "at his [God's] side as a master workman, rejoicing always in his presence" (v. 30-31). But that is one possible reading... it is the one that makes the most sense to me. Its main weakness is that there isn't any real strong evidence elsewhere that P really had such a concept of God, although his conception is certainly abstract and as mentioned above he avoids referring to the existence of angels and divine beings. As a strength, it is notable that Genesis 1:26 was later interpreted as referring to divine Wisdom in such Jewish sources as Wisdom 9:1-2, 2 Enoch 30:8, and the Hellenistic Synagogal Prayer 7.34.6 (R. Hanina in Genesis Rabba 8:3-4 claimed that God was speaking to the ministering angels). As for J which has the plural in 3:22 and 11:7, it has a more henotheistic and anthropomorphic conception (cf. the parallelism between ke'lohîm "like the gods/God" and ke'achad mimmennû "like one of us" in 3:5, 22 and other divine beings mentioned in 3:24 and 6:2), so the usage there may reflect the notion of the divine assembly (1 Kings 22:19-23, Job 1:6, 2:1, Psalm 29:1, 82:1-6, 89:6-7, Isaiah 14:13, Ezekiel 28:14), as the plural in Isaiah 6:1-8 might as well.

  JE's story of the three visitors in Genesis 18, and the two visitors in ch. 19, is another interesting and much discussed text. The early church fathers found a reference to the Trinity in the story, but is it really there? There are certainly a variety of other readings which imo better conform to the meaning of the text. To me, the story construes the three visitors as Yahweh and two subordinates, or messengers (= angels in post-exilic Judaism). In v. 22, the two (termed mal'akîm "messengers" in 19:1, 15) are distinguished from Yahweh, who stays behind while they journey to the Cities of the Plain. As you point out, in the description of their conversation with their hosts the plural is used in v. 9 and the singular is used in the next verse (v. 10). But this doesn't presume some mystical telepathic link between the three; it is rather normal Hebrew diction. First of all, the shift from the plural to the singular (an individuated member of the plural) is very common in narratives; the singular can have the sense of "one of them". There are a number of examples of this in the OT. Here is one concerning the birth of Perez and Zerah: " When the time came for her to give birth, there were twin boys (pl.) in her womb. As she was giving birth, one of them (lit. "he") put out his hand; so the midwife took a scarlet thread and tied it on his wrist and said, 'This one came out first' " (38:27-28). And this is another example: "When Jehu went out to his fellow officers (pl.), one of them (lit. "he") asked him, 'Is everything all right?' " (2 Kings 9:11). A third example can be found in Daniel 12:5-6. So in Genesis 18, v. 10 marks the shift from the group to the individuated member who is the one speaking, who is later identified as Yahweh (v. 13); many translations thus render the "he" in v. 10 as "one" or "one of them" (NIV, NRSV, NAB, NET, GNT, etc.). Second of all, reports of conversations between groups of people can easily have shifts between singular and plural. There is a good parallel in the story of the three Assyrian officials visiting Jerusalem in 2 Kings 18. They meet with three delegates of Hezekiah, and one of them (the Rabshakeh) is set apart from the other two as the leader of the group. The account shifts back and forth between singular and plural in much the same way as in Genesis 18. So the three Judeans speak as a group to the Rabshakeh singling him out from "your (sing.) servants" (v. 26), and the Rabshakeh replies to "them" (pl.) using the singular: "Has my master sent me to your (sing.) master and to you (sing.)?" (v. 27). Then later in the same verse he uses the plural. Similarly, in Genesis 19, when one of the two angels speaks individually Lot, Lot addresses "them" (pl.) using the singular (v. 17-19). So the language in Genesis 18 is not really that unusual, but it is understandable how the story later became grist for the theological mill.

  Incidentally, I think there possibly was an older, pre-Yahwistic tradition that stands behind the story....one that concerns a visit to the patriarch by three gods. There is a similar story in Canaanite myth of the god Kothar-wa-Hasis visiting the formerly childless sage Danel (likely the same figure from antiquity mentioned in Ezekiel 14:14, 20, 28:3) to present his young son Aqhat (= Actaeon from Boeotian myth) with a bow, and Danel and his wife Dantiy slaughtered a lamb and prepared a feast for their divine guest (KTU 1.17). Ovid preserved a pair of stories from Greek mythology with strong similarities to ch. 18-19 of Genesis. First the three gods Zeus, Hermes (son of Zeus, the "messenger"), and Poseidon (brother of Zeus), disguised as men, visited an elderly childless Boeotian named Hyrieus who welcomes them with hospitality and gives them a feast. After the meal, the three gods told him that he would became father to a son, and nine months later the giant Orion was born to him from the ground ( Fasti 5.493; cf. Antoninus Liberalis, Metamorphoses 25, Pseudo-Hyginus, Fabulae 195 , Astronomica 2.34). Then on another occasion Zeus and Hermes, again disguised as ordinary men, visit a town in Tyana seeking a place to sleep to sleep for the night, and they found "all the doors bolted and no word of kindness given, so wicked were the people of that land"; finally they found shelter at the home of Philemon and Baucis, who paid them hospitality while not realizing they were gods. Then the gods told the couple that they must flee, for they had come to destroy the town, and they instructed the couple to flee to the nearby mountains and not look back until they reached the top, and they then destroyed the city with a flood (Metamorphoses, 611-724). The story is also alluded to in the NT; the people of Lycaonia identified Paul and Barnabas as Zeus and Hermes, declaring: " The gods have come down to us in human form" (Acts 14:11-13).

  The parallels imo are strong enough to suggest the possibility that the Hebrew stories drew on similar folklore, in this case localized in Hebron concerning the traditional ancestor of the Israelite and Edomite peoples (Hebron had an Edomite and Judean population), and there are further possible links. The town of Hebron, with its Abraham-linked sites of Mamre and Machpelah, was an longstanding sacred center in pre-Israelite/Canaanite times (going back to the third millennium BC) with a cult centered on the ancient terebinths, associated also with the Abraham tradition (Genesis 13:18, 14:13, 18:1, 23:1). Even as late as Byzantine times, Hebron was the site of an annual summer festival called Terebinthus that venerated the tree, Abraham, and the three visitors (Sozomen, Historia Ecclesiastica 2.4-54). Hermes and Dionysius were two of the gods (syncretized to native Semitic gods) worshipped by the Edomites of Hebron during this period (Hebron was the center of the viticulture industry of district). The terebinth veneration likely stemmed from the pre-exilic Asherah cult, considering that the Hebrew word for terebinth, 'elah, is identical to the word for "goddess" and was a common epithet for Asherah. According to Josephus, the terebinth at Mamre was considered the most ancient tree in the world and its name was Ogyges (Antiquitates 1.186, Bellum Judaicae 4.533). Curiously, this is the same name of the founder of Boeotia in Greek mythology (who survived the Flood with his wife Thebes), and it is generally recognized that the name is of West Semitic origin (from 'agag "to burn, flame", which was used as a common Amalekite name in the OT). Michael Astour found a very high concentration of West Semitic (Phoenician?) names associated with cities, rivers, and mythological figures of Boeotia, suggesting historical links with the Levant. The connection is explicit in Boeotian legend: the mythical Cadmus (< qedmosh "east"), who founded the Boeotian city of Thebes (< tebah "ark", named after the wife of Ogyges) after slaying the dragon whose blood formed the river Ismenos (< the Phoenician god Eshmun) a.k.a. Ladon (= the name of the dragon slain by Heracles < the dragon Lotan/Leviathan), was a Phoenician who settled in Greece and introduced the Phoenician alphabet. There was certainly contact between Mycenaean Greeks and West Semitic peoples in the period following the LBA collapse when the Sea Peoples settled in the Levant including the Peleshet (= Philistines), the Ekwesh (= the Achaeans), and the Danuna (= the Danaeans, cf. the tribe of Dan adjecent to Philistia). This increases the possibility that the Boeotian legend about the visit of Zeus, Hermes, and Poseidon to Hyrieus is not just coincidentally similar to the Hebron tradition but in fact has a West Semitic origin (or....was the influence in the other direction?). Is it also coincidental that Hermes was venerated in Roman-era Hebron and Hermes was a messenger god? The Boeotian myth of the giant Orion (possibly derived from 'or "light" and cf. the Ugaritic name Aryn), the son of Hyrieus, also has a strong similarity with the story of Danel and Aqhat (which also probably inspired the myth of Actaeon), and the birth of Orion from the ground bears at least a superficial similarity with the metaphor in Isaiah 51:1-2 of the offspring of Abraham and Sarah being hewn from rock (another site at Hebron, the cave of Machpelah, was also associated with the Abraham tradition). And there was a robust tradition of the three giants of Hebron, attested in Joshua 15:14 and elsewhere. So even though there was no clear connection between any of these various motifs (e.g. the Ogyges of Boeotia probably had no connection with the Ogyges of Hebron other than sharing the same name), taken together there may be enough to suggest that behind the text lies a rich traditional background to the Abraham stories set in Hebron. Of course, this is tangential to interpretation of the text, which should be on its own terms.

  Dogpatch....Umm, I guess if you want to, but I think it might be better to write a better focused piece; that was kind of written informally as a response to a post. But I'm swamped at the moment...might be good to keep in mind to do later. :)

  binadub....There may be some evidence that the valley of Hinnom was used to dump refuse (I vaguely recall something in Nehemiah) but what is questioned is the claim that it was perpetually on fire and was used to cremate corpses (which really wasn't the Jewish way of disposing of the dead in post-exilic times). This claim lacks historical backing and seems to historicize features that really originated in apocalyptic eschatology. The association of fire with the valley is explained by its use in pre-exilic times as the Tophet in the Molech cult, as you note. What I would specifically question is the claim that Gehenna was strictly a metonym of the condition of the dead. This just isn't the case in the available sources, where it has geographical reference: (1) the earliest reference in the Book of Watchers (which is very interested in the geography of the hidden places in the world) locates it as a valley close to the holy mountain (Zion), (2) the slightly later mention in the Animal Apocalypse locates it as a valley to the south of the Temple, (3) the reference to Gehenna in 4 Ezra states it lies "opposite" to Paradise, (4) although not named specifically as Gehenna, the place of the torture of the dead in 2 Enoch 10 is located in third heaven across from Paradise (cf. 2 Corinthians 2:2-4), and (5) Justin Martyr (among others) refers to Gehenna as a "place" (topos). This draws on the older Canaanite/Israelite notion that the slopes of the sacred mountain of God lead all the way down to the underworld at its base. One example was the land of Bashan below Mount Hermon. The "valley of the Rephaim" near Mount Zion is another, and the valley of Hinnom was indeed used as a necropolis (Ketef Hinnom). There was certainly a move away from literal localization (as can be seen in the reference in 2 Enoch), but the concept at its root was one that localized the place of eschatological punishment at the valley of Hinnom (just as the place of punishment of the disobedient angels in the Book of Watchers was in the area around Abel-Main at the base of Mount Hermon). These references, by the way, falsify the claim that Gehenna nowhere appeared in the Pseudepigrapha (it appears conceptually twice in 1 Enoch and one by name in 4 Ezra).
• 
  5

  World earthquake map captures every rumble since 1898; What are implications for Watchtower's False Prophesies about Last Days?

  by Scott77 in

  1. social
  2. current

  the map shows 203,186 earthquakes of magnitude 4.0 or greater up to 2003. please, see this link below,http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/world-earthquake-map-captures-every-rumble-since-1898.

  world earthquake map captures every rumble since 1898the map shows 203,186 earthquakes of magnitude 4.0 or greater up to 2003.by andrea mustain, ouramazingplanetfri, jun 29 2012 at 9:56 am est.

  quakes through the ages: more than 100 years of earthquakes glow on a world map.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Leolaia

  Here you can get the image in high res:

  http://www.flickr.com/photos/idvsolutions/7439877658/in/photostream/