Paul and Jesus

by Slappy 38 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  JosephMalik

  Sylvia,

  The answer is even simpler and has been discussed long ago, over 100 years ago in fact. Gill in his comenetary of this text said:

  Ver. 31. And these [are] the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, &c.] In the land that was afterwards called the land of Edom; for this laud was not so called when these kings began to reign: for, according to Bishop Cumberland {f}, and those that follow him {g}, these were Horite kings, who, after their defeat by Chedorlaomer, #Ge 14:5,6; in order to secure themselves the better from such a calamity for the future, set up a kingdom, and which appears, by the following account, to be elective; and so Maimonides {h} observes, that not one of these kings were of Edom: and these were,

  before there reigned any king over the children of Israel; and there being no kings over Israel until many years after the times of Moses, hence some have thought these words are inserted by some other writer after him; but there is no need to suppose that; for Moses knew, from foregoing prophecies and promises, that kings would arise out of them and reign over them, #Ge 17:6 35:11; and this he was so certain of, that he himself, by divine direction, gave laws and rules to the children of Israel respecting their future kings, #De 17:14-20; besides Moses himself was king in Jeshurun or Israel, #De 33:5, so that it is the same as if he had said, these are the kings that reigned in Edom, before this time.

  {f} Orig. Gent. Antiq. p. 1-24.
  {g} Bedford in his Scripture Chronology, and the Authors of the Universal History.
  {h} Morch Nevochim, par. 3. c. 50. p. 510.
• 

  snowbird

  Joseph, thank you for that reference.

  It is with a prayerful heart that I have begun to rexamine the Scriptures again for the first time, and I am humbled by the great minds that have wrestled with the supposed conundrums of Holy Writ.

  By the way, I've been meaning to ask you this: Is your late wife related to C. T. Russell?

  Sylvia
• 

  JosephMalik

  Is your late wife related to C. T. Russell?

  Sylvia,

  No, but her father was in the movement back in the colporter days. Keep examining the text. There is so much still in it to be revealed. For a book studied as heavily as this one it is amazing that so little is really known. Just correcting errors and misconceptions about it is a massive task.

  Joseph
• 

  snowbird

  Keep examining the text. There is so much still in it to be revealed. For a book studied as heavily as this one it is amazing that so little is really known.

  That's the truth.

  Sylvia
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Another thought here. You were quoting from Deuteronomy which is a most disturbing book. It is disturbing because the WTS and even Jewish Scholars attribute Moses as the author. The last chapter of that book (witten by "Moses') describes Moses as the most meek/humble man who ever lived, the only who had personally seen God. "Moses" wrote that book, according to scholars. Moses was "meek?" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  Books can have epilogues in order to bring closure, and epilogues don't have to be written by the author of the rest of the work, especially if the author has died. The last chapter of Deuteronomy may hint at who the writer was, namely Joshua. Also, your meekness reference is not from the last chapter of Deuteronomy. You build your "unassailable logic" and ridicule on faulty facts.

  BTS
• 

  snowbird

  From The Message Bible:

  Numbers 12:1 -2 Miriam and Aaron talked against Moses behind his back because of his Cushite wife (he had married a Cushite woman). They said, "Is it only through Moses that God speaks? Doesn't he also speak through us?"

  God overheard their talk.

  3 -8 Now the man Moses was a quietly humble man, more so than anyone living on Earth. God broke in suddenly on Moses and Aaron and Miriam saying, "Come out, you three, to the Tent of Meeting." The three went out. God descended in a Pillar of Cloud and stood at the entrance to the Tent. He called Aaron and Miriam to him. When they stepped out, he said,
  
  Listen carefully to what I'm telling you.
  If there is a prophet of God among you,
  I make myself known to him in visions,
  I speak to him in dreams.
  But I don't do it that way with my servant Moses; he has the run of my entire house;
  I speak to him intimately, in person,
  in plain talk without riddles:
  He ponders the very form of God .
  So why did you show no reverence or respect
  in speaking against my servant, against Moses?

  9 The anger of God blazed out against them. And then he left.

  Sylvia
• 

  Pistoff

  since leaving the witnesses several years ago, my beliefs about the apostle Paul and Jesus have gone through many changes.
  It is my opinion that when people are part of a Christian religion, they suspend any alarm bells about the huge difference in philosophy between Paul and Jesus. Jesus was an itinerant preacher, most likely cynic. By any of today's standards, he would be considered a street bum or hippie with a following. He was outside of the mainstream of religious thought of his day; what Jesus taught has to be considered within the context of the religious and political settings of his day.
  The apostle Paul, on the other hand, was an empire builder. Consider for a moment that Paul hardly ever discusses any, I repeat any, of Jesus actual teachings. He is much more focused on the role of Jesus as the Christ, and establishing rules for congregations. In fact, the pastoral letters are really not regarded as written by the apostle Paul himself, but by those of the apostle Paul's school of thought.
  
  If we think that today it is difficult to know the truth of the matter even with cell phones, pictures that can be uploaded within seconds, and an unheard-of ability to check facts within minutes, how can we put much stock in the oral history of people who were invested in Jesus being the Christ?
  
  The Gospels about Jesus Christ were written 40 to 50 years after his death, a span of time that makes it very difficult for us to believe that oral histories about Jesus can be accurate.
  Consider this: the apostle Paul never, never mentions the miracles of Jesus; the miracles of Jesus are considered a cornerstone of evidence that Jesus was the son of God. Certainly Paul would have referred to them as evidence of Jesus being the son of God. But he does not.
  
  This suggests to me that any rational person must question the oral history about Jesus Christ; if the miracles of Jesus were not known until after the apostle Paul wrote his epistles this is very strong evidence that they did not happen.
  
  If the miracles of Jesus are not true, then what else about Jesus is not true? Do the teachings of Jesus have value when they stand on their own? Is it necessary for the teachings of Jesus to have merit only if we believe he was the son of God, or will punish the wicked, or will return and destroy this earth?
• 

  Farkel

  pisstoff,

  Well put. I said much of the same, but you said it better.

  Joseph,

  : before there reigned any king over the children of Israel; and there being no kings over Israel until many years after the times of Moses, hence some have thought these words are inserted by some other writer after him; but there is no need to suppose that; for Moses knew, from foregoing prophecies and promises, that kings would arise out of them and reign over them, #Ge 17:6 35:11; and this he was so certain of, that he himself, by divine direction, gave laws and rules to the children of Israel respecting their future kings, #De 17:14-20; besides Moses himself was king in Jeshurun or Israel, #De 33:5, so that it is the same as if he had said, these are the kings that reigned in Edom, before this time.

  I find it hard to believe that a man of your great intelligence and humble search for truth regards an obvious anachronism as evidence of divine inspiration. How did Moses "know" there would be future kings of Israel when Jehovah himself was their Divine leader in the Exodus? How did Moses "know" that Jehovah would turn over the job to someone else? Who could Jehovah "turn over the job" to that would even come close to His own performance as "King"? You are using an obvious anachronism to declare that Moses was directed by God to predict the future, and not only do that, but to dilute and nullify that prediction by declaring it as happening in the past, instead of the future!

  Farkel
• 

  JosephMalik

  obvious anachronism as evidence of divine inspiration.

  Farkle,

  How do you know this was an obvious anachronism? Where is the proof for your scepticism? How do you know what really happened back then? Were you there? Who appointed you as judge in such matters? At least it was a researched comment not just an skeptics opinion like yours. I am not here looking for followers since it is each individuals responsibility to do their own research like this and decide what is right or wrong. There is a world of information out there outside of the Watchtower.

  Joseph