How many ex-jws poster here now believe in Hellfire, immortality of soul, trinity, etc; (page 4)

designs

Can a person make a proper assessment and assumption about Judaism without having participated in Judaism.

Sure, the leading scholars of Second Temple Judaism (such as George Nicklesburg, James VanderKam, Emmanuel Tov, Gabriele Boccaccini, Hanan Eshel, Esther Eshel, John J. Collins, Florentino García Martínez, Eibert Tigchelaar, Adela Yarbro Collins, Michael Knibb, Daniel Boyarin, Lawrence Schiffman, James Davila, Peter Flint, William Adler, Shemaryahu Talmon, Emile Puech, Paolo Sacchi, Marinus de Jonge, Esther Chazon, Rainer Albertz, Matthew Black, etc.) include both Jews and non-Jews. There are no fault lines between scholars that correspond to past or present participation in Judaism. I don't believe the religious background of the scholar has much bearing on the quality of one's scholarship as compared to one's knowledge of ancient languages, comprehension of the relevant religious literature, and a thorough understanding of the history and culture of the period. It should not be forgotten either that the Judaism of the Second Temple period was quite different from the Judaism of today; in like manner the Christianity of today differs considerably from the Christianity that existed in the fourth century AD.

designs

Interesting, I remember the discussions on the jw-evangelical board and the 'wall' that Bowman and Hoffstetter hit in trying to comprehend and articulate Judaism and jewish positions, they would default to the pauline position of the 'veil' hanging on Jews and Judaism.

Leolaia

Well, that's ridiculous of them (and of course "evangelicals" may hold supercessionist views on Judaism)....and a far cry of the kind of debate and discussion in scholarship of the Second Temple period. I attended the session on the book of Daniel at last year's SBL (with John Collins, Michael Segal, Stefan Beyerle, and others), and the discussion was very stimulating.

Rocky_Girl

Hell: No (unless you are refering to my years as a JW)

Trinity: No

Immortal Soul: Maybe... I have no idea what awaits me after I die. I would like to think that my unique spirit would not be gone forever, but if it does, in fact, disappear, I will not know. No harm, no foul.

sabastious

The Trinity. This is a constructed doctrine

Hello Leolaia, I really enjoy reading your work here. I see the trinity as something that was a pretty solid doctrine by the time of the creation of the Torah. Genesis 1 states a plural "let us make man in our image" which is saying that there is not only more than one entity speaking, but also that they are speaking in unison. This grouping of consciousness could be refered to as the creative voice of God. Again, in Genesis 11 we have this entity speaking in unison while creating languages for humans to speak.

In Genesis 18:1-15 we are shown a group of three men who approach Abraham at a place called the trees of Mamre. He instructs his wife to make them three meals and they all eat. In verse 9 the whole group of three asks a question. Then in very next verse it tells of only a single entity speaking of the three. To me this is part of the education of the Torah. That God is a group of three that have some sort of telepathic link between them.

Bronze age pottery shards found at the site may indicate that the cultic shrine was in use from 2600-2000 BCE. Mamre, in the biblical account, was the site where Abraham came to set up his tents to camp, built an altar, and was brought divine tidings, in the guise of three angels, of Sarah's pregnancy, while elsewhereit is called 'the Terebinths of Mamre the Amorite'. Mamre being the name of one of the three Amorite chiefs who joined forces with those of Abraham in pursuit of Chedorlaomer to save Lot. (Gen. 14:13,24) The discrepancy is often explained as reflecting the discordance between the different scribal traditions behind the composition of the Pentateuch, the former relating to the Yahwist, the latter to the Elohist recension, according to the documentary hypothesis of modern scholarship.

^ For some reason this wikipedia article states that the account in Genesis 18 was "three angels" when it clearly says in verse 13 that one of them is the Lord.

If these three were called the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit it would match up nicely at the end of Matthew were it states that followers of Christ should baptize " in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit ." Notice that the verse uses the non plural word "name." It could be said that it's refering to the wholeness of God which was what was being shown to us in Genesis 18 all along: that God is three and one. To me the trinity is a very core doctrine that explains the nature of God as a family unit. It helps me understand why our species is all about seeking connections between each other. We all want to be part of a unit and so that's what I think Genesis is saying when it says we are made in their image. The image of the unity of love.

-Sab

XBEHERE

I am not sure to be honest and this is a good question. One of the things I have been toying with is the diety of Jesus. I simply don't agree with the org. that Jesus is simply an angel and first born son of god. While I still like the bible its mostly for the principles of kindness and love that are promoted within it. Doctrinally I think you can make it prove whatever you want it to with some careful thought and cross references. I have done this and I have come to the conclusion that Jesus is more than what the WT says he is. They also have managed to change meanings of some verses with some substitutions and omissions of their own, the same things they have accused other translators of doing.

Other than this I havent really given most of their doctrines much thought

designs

sab- Your comments remind me very much of what Bowman and Hoffstetter attempted. If you can find 'The Complete Book Of Jewish Knowledge' by Ausubel read the section on 'Monotheism'.

Balaamsass

Hellfire- No

Trinity- No, but define

Immortality of soul- Define

The older I get the more I have learned: "I don't know, what I don't know". I pray and read the Bible still, but I realize I spent 50 years at a fools game. I get a hoot out of reading other ideas. I enjoy some of the history Channel stuff, with the Rabbi, Christian scholars and Ancient Astro-nuts. I realize I will die with unanswered questions. Some concepts and knowledge are simply beyond my abilities to understand or know.

I love my dog, he is affectionate, funny, gentle, and I would never do anything to hurt him. I can't always protect him from his own stupid actions. He likes to go to the back fence and socialize with the neighbor dog....so what would the two dogs cook up on the subject of "people" and the universe? What kind of a religion would dogs cook-up? Whatever it was..I would never get angry and destroy him for it unless it was to form a "pack" to harm other animals.

His crazy Dog religion would probably make me laugh.

QueenWitch

hellfire - no, not literally. I believe that hellfire was a made up thing by the folks back then that didn't understand the earth's literal fiery core. Watch the documentary Gates of Hell for food for thought.

Trinity - as father son and holy ghost, no. I believe in the concept of the triple Goddess (maiden, mother, crone) and triple God (child, warrior, sage). These are stages of our life.

Immortality of soul - if soul is defined as our essence then yes. our essence is energy and energy can not be created or destroyed, it just changes form. once our essence leaves our physical body it returns to the universe. in what form, I don't know.

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

Share this