Thank you for your comments. For me, this puts Korah in a different light. He seemed to be far more concerned with the plight of the common people than Moses and his pals.
Posts by DT
-
10Korah's Parable
by DT ini was doing some research when i found korah's parable on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/korah.
korah incited all the people against moses, arguing that it was impossible to endure the laws instituted by the latter.
he told them the following parable: "a widow, the mother of two young daughters, had a field.
-
-
-
10
Korah's Parable
by DT ini was doing some research when i found korah's parable on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/korah.
korah incited all the people against moses, arguing that it was impossible to endure the laws instituted by the latter.
he told them the following parable: "a widow, the mother of two young daughters, had a field.
-
-
DT
I was doing some research when I found Korah's Parable on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korah
Korah incited all the people against Moses, arguing that it was impossible to endure the laws instituted by the latter. He told them the following parable: "A widow, the mother of two young daughters, had a field. When she came to plow it, Moses told her not to plow it with an ox and an ass together (Deut. xxii. 10); when she came to sow it, Moses told her not to sow it with mingled seeds (Lev. xix. 19). At the time of harvest she had to leave unreaped the parts of the field prescribed by the Law, while from the harvested grain she had to give the priest the share due to him. The woman sold the field and with the proceeds bought two sheep. But the first-born of these she was obliged to give to Aaron the priest; and at the time of shearing he required the first of the fleece also (Deut. xviii. 4). The widow said: 'I can not bear this man's demands any longer. It will be better for me to slaughter the sheep and eat them.' But Aaron came for the shoulder, the two cheeks, and the maw (ib. verse 3). The widow then vehemently cried out: 'If thou persistest in thy demand, I declare them devoted to the Lord.' Aaron replied: 'In that case the whole belongs to me' (Num. xviii. 14), whereupon he took away the meat, leaving the widow and her two daughters wholly unprovided for" (Num. R. xviii. 2-3; Tan., ?ora?, 4-6).
I just thought it was interesting and was wondering what you thought about it. I may mention it in a writing project I'm working on so I might not share many of my thoughts until I'm finished with it.
-
22
Refuting Robin Collins argument for fine-tuning
by bohm ini have lately tried to rethink my position on gods existence and tried to be more critical of the atheistic position.
this has partly been spurned by my impression objections to theistic arguments often rely on the same errors atheist accuse theists of, for instance using the shotgun-method (i.e.
picking 3 faults with all premises in the arguments) or building conclusion on a web of arguments and, when considering a particular argument, supporting it by other parts of the web or simply not addressing the argument very well.. as part of this i came across collins 1999 article on fine-tuning.
-
-
DT
You have made some interesting and thought provoking observations.
"we already know that minds often produce finetuned devices, such as Swiss watches. Postulating God-a supermind-as the explanation of the fine-tuning, therefore, is a natural extrapolation from of what we already observe minds to do. In contrast, it is difficult to see how the atheistic many-universes hypothesis could be considered a natural extrapolation from what we observe"
I'm not sure that is a valid argument. Once something is observed, it is reasonable to conclude that there are likely other examples of that same type of object. A person who grows up on an island wouldn't be wrong to conclude that there may be other islands or landmasses, even if he never observed them. We know that there are many landmasses, planets, solar systems, galaxies and clusters of galaxies. Concluding that there may be other universes is a natural extrapolation.
Postulating a God who is outside space and time is entirely without precedent. It is not a natural extrapolation. It seems that Collins would rather accept the reality of an imagined concept that has never been observed, than entertain the idea that there could be other examples of an object that has been observed, our universe.
-
36
Another reason why 1914 is WRONG
by EdenOne ineven if 607 had been the actual date of the destruction of jerusalem .... 1914 would still be wrong.
when the wts says that "7 times" equals 2 x 3,5 times of revelation = 2 x 1260 days = 2520 days > one day / one year rule = 2520 years.. now, 2520 / 7 times means that one "time" has 360 "days".
this corresponds to the lunar year.
-
-
DT
A possible objection that a JW might come up with is that a time is 360 days while a year is 365.25 days. I was under that impression when I was a Witness. Actually a time just stands for a period of time. It could be a year, a month, a day or some other time period. I can't see any indication that the times mentioned would even have to be years. It would make a lot more sense if Nebuchadnezer was insane for seven days or seven months instead of seven years. Otherwise, it seems pretty strange that he could be gone from his throne for that long without it being mentioned in historical records or without his Kingdom being taken over by someone else.
If you accept that it was actually years, it would only make sense that the kind of year be consistent. You could use years of 360 days for both if you allow for extra leap months. Since seven periods of 360 days differs from seven solar years by more than a month. You would have to add one or two extra months for either 2,550 or 2,580 days. 3 and a 1/2 times might equal 1,260 days, but it could also equal 1,290 days if there is a leap month, a time period that is also mentioned in the Bible. 7 times, however, would have to have at least one leap month.
There is a precedent for the Bible to mention the number of days in a period of times when it is important, since you wouldn't know otherwise. Since the Bible doesn't mention the number of days in the seven times, it is reasonable to conclude that it doesn't matter.
I would love to try to get a JW to explain why two different types of years are used in the same prophecy. I think this could be more effective than concentrating on the 607 verses 587 debate.
-
-
-
DT
I would take the cash and pay some bills. Then I would probably buy some silver.
-
25
Are The Governing Body Being Set Up To Take A Fall?
by DT inthe governing body's decision to declare themselves the faithful and discreet slave appears pretty arrogant and presumptuous.
since most of us regard the governing body as arrogant and presumptuous, it's easy to conclude that is the reason that they did this.. what if something else is going on?.
remember when steven unthank was able to get the faithful and discreet slave charged in australia for failing to comply with the working with children act?
-
-
DT
The Governing Body's decision to declare themselves the Faithful And Discreet Slave appears pretty arrogant and presumptuous. Since most of us regard the Governing Body as arrogant and presumptuous, it's easy to conclude that is the reason that they did this.
What if something else is going on?
Remember when Steven Unthank was able to get the Faithful And Discreet Slave charged in Australia for failing to comply with the Working With Children Act? It was argued that the FDS was just a theological arrangement. It was a silly argument but at least it served to isolate individuals from legal liability.
Now the Governing Body seems to be doing the reverse by identifying the FDS with a single, identifiable group of people. This appears to be an incredibly stupid move considering that the FDS was recently formally charged in Australia.
Recently there was a new letter to the elders about handling child abuse. That letter surprised many of us because it insisted on the Society taking responsibility for decisions about child abuse. In terms of legal liability, this may be good for the elders, but bad for the Watchtower Society. However, the recent claim by the Governing Body serves to shift this legal liability to their shoulders.
I consider it possible that the Governing Body really is this stupid, but it could also be the case that they are being pressured or influenced to make these changes.
Consider these two scenarios and consider which would be more likely to succeed. A group of disgruntled people at Bethel revolts and tries to establish their own following. Or this group frightens the Governing Body into asserting their authority and then sticks them with the legal liability for the Society's many problems?
Most Witnesses are so brainwashed that they would be unlikely to follow any group that revolts and breaks away, even if they have legitimate grievances.
However, if the Governing Body (or a portion of the Governing Body) can be made to seem like the group that revolts by overturning fundamental doctrine and tradition, it would hardly make a difference for most Witnesses if they are replaced. It would probably be viewed as Jehovah cleansing the organization. There is already a precedent for Governing Body members being disgraced and removed.
Most Witnesses believe what is in the Watchtower. If the Watchtower says that Governing Body members have been replaced because they have rebelled against God's anointed representatives on earth, then most Witnesses will probably accept it without question. If these disgraced GB members later go to prison, then you might even see Witnesses rejoice that they are being punished for their apostasy.
I'm just speculating. I don't have any inside information. I welcome your comments.
-
7
Have The Governing Body Rebelled Against The "Anointed Of Jehovah"? (Questions For Those Still In)
by DT init has been the understanding for decades that jehovah was using the group of anointed on earth to provide for his sheep.
they even changed the baptism questions to indicate acceptance of this arrangement.
many have been disfellowshipped (aka spiritually executed) for failing to fully support this arrangement.
-
-
DT
Bump
-
6
How will the present-day "anointed" react to their demotion?
by Room 215 ini wonder how they will respond to their demotion to parity with the "other sheep" as mere "domestics" in god's house.
and what about the appontment of a 47 yeard-old to the governing boday?
in my neck of the woods, the word of any forty-something who began partaking would fuel the gossip mill for weeks!
-
-
DT
It will be interesting to see how they react considering how many of them are "mentally unstable".
-
11
So Are Baptisms Before The FDS Change Valid Or Not?
by DT inthe baptism questions since 1985 involve agreeing to be associated with god's spirit directed organization.
it was taught that god directed the organization through the anointed remnant on earth who were know as the faithful and discreet slave.
it was claimed that getting baptized involved agreeing to follow the direction of this anointed group.. now, the governing body claims the be the faithful and discreet slave.
-
-
DT
"Valid in what sense?
Ultimately it's their game, they make the rules."
Good question. I guess the important factor is whether they consider it valid. They reject baptisms in other churches, so why not reject baptisms from when the entire organization was following a group that is now rejected as having no authority. If they feel there is a difference, I would like to hear what it is.
It's true that they make the rules, I just think they should have to explain what the rules are.
-
11
So Are Baptisms Before The FDS Change Valid Or Not?
by DT inthe baptism questions since 1985 involve agreeing to be associated with god's spirit directed organization.
it was taught that god directed the organization through the anointed remnant on earth who were know as the faithful and discreet slave.
it was claimed that getting baptized involved agreeing to follow the direction of this anointed group.. now, the governing body claims the be the faithful and discreet slave.
-
-
DT
"The pledge was to the Org, not to the FDS. Internal workings are irrelevant."
It was to God's spirit directed organization. It was taught that it was spirit directed through the anointed remnant. This implied acceptance of the anointed as the group that God was using. In my opinion, changing this changes everything.