Posts by slimboyfat

86

Free Speech - Jordan Peterson Debate Live 9:30 EST Saturday

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

slimboyfat

It seems to me it's not so much that Jordan Peterson must use certain words, but rather that he should avoid using words that are offensive to the people he is talking to. In avoiding offensive terms of address there is not necessarily a compulsion to use a particular alternative.

In many situations we can get away with not using pronouns, instead simply using names, gestures, or even "you at the back". I very much doubt anyone is getting into trouble simply for avoiding pronouns.

The problem probably begins when someone asks to be addressed in a certain way and this guy says no, and what's more I'll address you instead in precisely the way that you find offensive.

So it's not about being forced to use certain words. It's about Jordan Peterson insisting on his "right" to use words to describe other people that they find offensive.

If we agree that black people shouldn't be addressed using the N word or women shouldn't be addressed with sexists names like, pet, doll, honey, or whatever. Then it seems pretty reasonable that transgender people be allowed to insist that they not be addressed using language that they find distressing. I know I would find it unpleasant to be addressed as a woman. Jordan Peterson claims he wouldn't care, but that just makes him either pretty strange or a liar as far I can see. In either case it doesn't matter, most people would find it distressing to be addressed by the wrong gender in spite of pleas to discontinue.

The onus is on Jordan Peterson to explain why it would be wrong to address a black person with the N word, or a woman as "doll" or other sexist terms, but that it's okay, in fact it is his "right", to address someone as he and him and his, who does not feel themselves to be a man.

We have a president of the United States who is intimidating the press, encouraged violence in the campaign, is stigmatising minority groups, and threatened to put political opponents in jail. Any sense of proportion at this moment would allocate no time whatever to mister storm in a teacup Peterson.

Interesting bohm points out he's making money and gaining a following by means of this storm in a teacup.

8

Do the dubs know apostate language like fade, etc....

by Iamallcool in

jw
friends

the inactive sister used the word "faded" today and i am wondering if she has been on this site or not?

.

slimboyfat

The JW rough equivalent term is "drifting out of the truth".

15

Jehovah's Witnesses Crime Against Grammar

by Simon in

jw
friends

so this is really starting to grate on me the more i think about it because it's just wrong grammatically.. one of my friends always refers to me used to being "a jehovah witness" which used to grate whenever she said it but now it seems more correct.. think about it this way: bruce springsteen has fans.

they are fans of bruce springsteen or, bruce springsteen's fans.

but each of them isn't a bruce springsteen's fan.

slimboyfat

Hovis biscuit, where I grew up.

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

slimboyfat

This thread is back.

I am gong to an event on the 13th of December about how God might have directed evolution. This might help work out the meaning of it all. If so I'll report back what I find.

86

Free Speech - Jordan Peterson Debate Live 9:30 EST Saturday

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

slimboyfat

I think the key part of the argument was was Jordan Peterson said he didn't care what people called him and that it wouldn't bother him if people referred to him habitually as she and her. I just don't find that believeable. Imagine all his colleagues and students and acquaintances referred to him as a woman no matter what he said to try convince them to stop. Of course most men would find that uncomfortable bullying or worse. It would be enough to drive some people crazy. So why did he lie about that? I guess it's because he has to pretend that would be okay in order to be consistent in his position. But if you have to lie in order to make your position appear reasonable then something has gone wrong.

86

Free Speech - Jordan Peterson Debate Live 9:30 EST Saturday

by cofty in

professor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?

) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.

in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.

slimboyfat

"Jacques Derrida was the most dangerous person who lived in the twentieth century".

Ha! At least he recognises Derrida's importance, I suppose, which is more than some. Truly we live in a Derridean epoch.

One could say, what is really happening is that we are waking up from the platonic slumber western civilisation has been inhabiting for the last nearly two thousand years or so. Which you might think anti-Christians would welcome, discarding the reality/appearance distinction, the ideal, and the world beyond this world.

12

Excellent use of language in comments on this site compared with WT publications

by Deltawave in

i think it's great.

when i read posts on here i have to use a dictionary because of the high level of intellectual words yet, when i read a wtbts publication, i have to ignore all the bad grammar and punctuation!

.

slimboyfat

This truly is a happifying report, vivacious and efficacious, and in no way vexatious.

43

Why Is YHWH Used Regularly In OT and NEVER in NT?

by minimus in

jw
friends

and if the name jehovah is that important why is it that jesus christ never use that name in a record of scriptures?.

slimboyfat

I agree with lots of what you say. Just now and again you throw in a comment like "there are no Christian copies of the LXX" which throws me. And certainly there are Greek versions of the OT that are not LXX. Any book of textual criticism makes this clear.

In particular I agree we shouldn't lose sight of the big picture and the main issue of whether JWs have misrepresented the history and significance of the divine name.

I only intended to interject two main points in the discussion with my initial post:

1) I think there is something unique about the Tetragrammaton compared to the other names used of God in the Hebrew Bible. You say unique is not the right word, that it is holy. Okay then it is holy. Whichever word we use there was something special about it, I would suggest.

2) the earliest fragments of the LXX that survive and preserve parts of the text with the divine name use various forms of the divine name. None of the earliest fragments use KYRIOS. The earliest copies that use KYRIOS (or in fact the nomina sacra form KS) are from the second century CE.

You might say that, these facts notwithstanding, JWs are still wrong in various ways about the divine name. It's a discussion we could have. Personally I think there is a much stronger claim for the divine name in the original NT than many allow for. But since we can't even agree on the basic facts such as the two I made initially, and repeated above, there's not much point moving on to the wider discussion.

I respect your faith and your experience and obvious knowledge of the subject.

43

Why Is YHWH Used Regularly In OT and NEVER in NT?

by minimus in

jw
friends

and if the name jehovah is that important why is it that jesus christ never use that name in a record of scriptures?.

slimboyfat

From this I gathered you were saying that the PR 458 is the fragment “that leaves spaces...from the third century, probably Christian.” My mistake if I didn’t understand you, but the only copy of the Septuagint “that leaves spaces” for YHWH is PR 458. PR 458 contains only portions of Deuteronomy, not Genesis, and originates from about 200 years before the birth of Christ.

I was talking about PBerlin 17213 which is a copy of the LXX from the third century CE that leaves spaces where the divine name should appear. There is not agreement among scholars whether this is a fragment of a Jewish or Christian manuscript.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5202483561365504/why-yhwh-used-regularly-ot-never-nt?page=4&size=10#/5164350358683648

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_Berlin_17213

As far as I know this is the only copy of the LXX that deliberately leaves spaces where the divine name should stand. (And here Tov disputes this example, arguing the space is just a break in the text) I think there are examples of blank spaces instead of the Tetragrammaton in Hebrew of the DSS, but not in the LXX.

43

Why Is YHWH Used Regularly In OT and NEVER in NT?

by minimus in

jw
friends

and if the name jehovah is that important why is it that jesus christ never use that name in a record of scriptures?.

slimboyfat

You write that “the earliest copies of the LXX used various forms of YHWH” though you nowagree that the earliest example in the Rylands fragment does not.

What I am saying (as the scholars have said, and the photograph shows) is that PRylands 458 does not contain either YHWH or KYRIOS because the manuscript is not extant in that part of the text where the divine name appears.

Jewish fragments of the LXX can be divided into three groups with respect to the divine name:

1) fragments of the LXX that do not preserve parts of the text with the divine name.

2) fragments of the LXX that do preserve examples of the divine name in various forms.

3) fragments of the LXX that preserve KYRIOS in place of the divine name.

There are many fragments that fall into category 1) and PRylands 458 is one of those. There are around 7 fragments that fall into category 2) including the famous Fouad 266, the Minor Prophets scroll(s) and others. There are no fragments that fall into category 3) because there are no Jewish copies of the LXX that substitute KYRIOS for the divine name.

I don't know what more to say about your claim that Christian copies of the LXX don't exist. It's not how scholars present the data, including Jewish scholars such as Emanuel Tov and Robert Kraft. For example Robert Kraft's whole website is based on the notion of comparing Jewish and Christian scribal practices in their copies of the LXX. If you were correct that there are no Christian copies of the LXX then his whole project would not make sense. Or the many textbooks that discuss Christian copies of the LXX.

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//earlylxx/jewishpap.html#jewishmss

It is true that Jews translated and circulated the LXX. But the text as it comes down to us was preserved through Christian scribes. The modern text of the LXX and translations of it are based on the Christian copies of the fourth century and later. There are no complete Jewish copies of the LXX extant. There are only fragments, such as PRylands 458 and others we have been discussing.