It has been hours since I posted [and reposted] my three simple questions. I am not expecting people to agree with me. However, I would appreciate people's responding. For example, in regard to my first question, someone could verify whether I am correct or incorrect by simply consulting a Bible concordance. Doing so would show if the word messiah even appears in the book of Isaiah.
Rapunzel
JoinedPosts by Rapunzel
-
34
Did the Bible really predict or say anything of substance?
by moshe ini often read comments like this about the bible here:.
well, the bible is the only source we have for guidance and direction.
if you read it you will know that such knowledge and wisdom could not have originated with man because more times than none, man acts in opposition to what is written in the bible.. it also foretells the future.
-
-
-
21
We are fiction(s).
by Narkissos inthis is the truth.
hidden in plain sight.. know thyself.. we were made in the image of god after all.. not only fiction, but also fiction.
biology and fiction.. not basically a "bad" thing to repent from.
-
-
Rapunzel
"...man is separated from the past (even from the past of a few seconds old) by two forces that go instantly to work and cooperate: the force of forgetting (which erases)) and the force of memory (which transforms)...Beyond the slender margin of the incontestable (there is no doubt that Napolean lost the battle of Waterloo), stretches an infinite realm: the realm of the approximate, the invented, the deformed, the simplistic, the exaggerated, the misconstrued, an infinite realm of nontruths that copulate, multiply like rats, and become immortal." Milan Kundera, - The Curtain [Le Rideau].
-
35
What Careers, Opportunities Did you Have to Sacrifice - to be a Witness ?
by flipper ini know this may be an annoying subject .
but if you did have to give up doing what you wanted in a career or opportunity - what was it ?
how controlling was the organization over you, and were you counseled by elders or higher ups to not pursue certain jobs, opportunities, college , etc - so that you stayed in the witnesses for awhile ; not doing what you wanted?
-
-
Rapunzel
Hi, Flipper - I guess that I was truly one of the "lucky ones," especially when I read the life stories of someone of the people on this board. They gave up higher education; good careers; family - many things and sacrificed everthing that they had to the "borg." I started studying on the sly in 1974 or 1975. I was, thankfully, the only Witness in my family. When they found out, my parents - two devout Roman Catholics - were justifiably enraged. In 1975, I graduated from high school and went to the university. I faded out in 1977 or 78 [my memory is not all that good, sorry]. Although I more or less floated through my first coulple of years at the uni, I never quit or dropped out of school. I came close to dropping out, but I did in fact stay in school. So, I can't say that I gave up higher education. In fact, I graduated from the university, and then went to graduate school. Of course, by the time I entered grad school, I was finished with the Witnesses for good.
What I regret the most is the turmoil that I caused my family. I was able to formally apologize to my dad for the hurt I caused him, but never had the chance to do so with my mom.
As you would say, flipper, "peace and out."
-
21
We are fiction(s).
by Narkissos inthis is the truth.
hidden in plain sight.. know thyself.. we were made in the image of god after all.. not only fiction, but also fiction.
biology and fiction.. not basically a "bad" thing to repent from.
-
-
Rapunzel
Narkissos - Of course, without a doubt, you realize that, in writing "Know thyself," you are quoting the ancient wisdom of the oracle at Delphi. As I remember, on the walls of the same cave were also written the words - "Nothing in excess." Does my memory serve me correctly?
Just curious, how did you first come to know of this sage counsel? Was it by reading L'Apologie de Raimond Sebond by Montaigne? Didn't Montaigne call this sage advice "paradoxical"? I think that he was correct in doing so. I think to know oneself is paradoxical in that it is truly "mission impossible." I find that even my old age [I just turned 50], I'm no closer to "knowing myself" than when I was a child. To paraphrase, arguably, the greatest American poet - Walt Whitman - after all the blah-blah-blah of life, I no closer to knowing myself than when I was first born. Probably, I shall die while remaining a mystery to myself.
-
21
We are fiction(s).
by Narkissos inthis is the truth.
hidden in plain sight.. know thyself.. we were made in the image of god after all.. not only fiction, but also fiction.
biology and fiction.. not basically a "bad" thing to repent from.
-
-
Rapunzel
Narkissos - Vous avez bien raison. Comme Derrida l'a dit: "Il n'y pas de hors-texte." Le probleme, c'est - comment traduire cette phrase en anglais? On dit souvent: "There is nothing outside the text. Ou bien, est-ce qu'on ferait bien de se servir de la traduction de Spivik, qui dit - "There is no outside-the-text"? In any case, I think Derrida was correct in his analysis. Our "reality" is composed almost entirely of narratives - of stories.
-
34
Did the Bible really predict or say anything of substance?
by moshe ini often read comments like this about the bible here:.
well, the bible is the only source we have for guidance and direction.
if you read it you will know that such knowledge and wisdom could not have originated with man because more times than none, man acts in opposition to what is written in the bible.. it also foretells the future.
-
-
Rapunzel
Dear BTS - I notice that you quite conveniently "side step" all of the points that I brought up in regard to the Isaiah passage in question; you focus solely on my concluding statement. Of course, it is your perogative to do so. Just the same, I would gladly "stand corrected" if you [or anyone else, for that matter] could show me where I am wrong. For example:
1.) Could you [or anyone else] please show me only one single instance, in the entire book of Isaiah, where the author uses the term messiah? After all, it is a Hebrew word whose Greek equivalent is christos. It seems to me that if the author recording the book of Isaiah had intended his [or her?] portrait of the "suffering servant" to refer to the messiah, then surely he/she would have explicitly come out and said it forthright. I mean, after all, why be so coy about? As a follower of God, and concerned about the welfare of the Jewish people, surely the prophet would have sought to aid the people in recognizing the Messiah who would come - what? - some five hundred years later. Surely, the prophet would have realized that social conditions would drastically change with the passing of a half millenium [after all, he/she was a prophet]. Therefore, the prophet could surely apprehend the utter importance of the people being able to recognize the Messiah when he came onto the scene.
Or am I mistaken? Does the word, messiah, indeed appear in the book of Isaiah? The book of Isaiah is certainly one of the longest in the Jewish bible. Isaiah has long been recognized as one of the major prophets. Does not the term "messiah" appear in Isaiah? If not, why not?
2.) And can anyone explain why the prophet explicitly identifies the "suffering servant" with Israel earlier in the text, on at least two occasions? Why would the prophet explicitly state that the suffering servant was Israel, and then pull the old "switcher-roo" by ever so slyly implying that this self-same suffering servant could now symbolize the Messiah? Why "switch horses in midstream" as it were? Did the prophet get "new light" on the matter?
And why would the prophet offer a portrait of the messiah that was so contrary to the expectations of the Jewish people. The Israelites decidedly did NOT exect their messiah to be "suffering" or a "servant." They were expecting a mighty warrior/king who would deliver them from Babylonian [and then later] Roman bondage. If the prophet had realized that the messiah would not arrive in the form that the Jews were expecting him to arrive, woould it not only have been fair for the prophet to offer a warning to the Jews, so that they would be prepared?
3.) And finally, can BTS [or anyone] explain the prophet's usage of the past tense in describing the servant's suffering? Why use the past tense to describe future events? Could this not be construed as an attempt to confuse matters and obstuct comprehension? Why not use the future tense to narrate future events?
Again, as I said, I will gladly stand corrected, if someone can show me/explain to me where I am wrong. I'm just asking for honest dialogue. My questions are simple enough, I believe. Does anybody care to offer a response?
-
34
Did the Bible really predict or say anything of substance?
by moshe ini often read comments like this about the bible here:.
well, the bible is the only source we have for guidance and direction.
if you read it you will know that such knowledge and wisdom could not have originated with man because more times than none, man acts in opposition to what is written in the bible.. it also foretells the future.
-
-
Rapunzel
Passages such as Isaiah 52:13 - 53:18 have traditionally been misinterpreted by Christians. The passage in question from Isaiah does not refer to the messiah at all; it refers explicitly to the people of Israel. In Isaiah 41:8 and 49:3, the prophet unequivocally identifies "my servant" as Israel. In Isaiah 49:3, the prophet writes - "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will be glorified. How much cleared can it be?
The answer to the question posed in this thread's titleis - "No, the Bible never predicted anything of substance." Isaiah and the other prophets were not seers gazing into a magical crystal ball. They were absolutely unconcerned with people living in future generations and eras. The prophets were addressing people living in their own time.
To return to the Isaiah passage in qustion, there is not the slightest indication -or hint,or suggestion - whatsoever that the author is speaking of a future messiah. To begin with,the term messiah does not even appear once in the text. Nowhere in the book of Isaiah does the word messiah even appear!
Secondly, the sufferings of this "servant" are said to be in the past; they are narrated in the past tense, not the future tense. Why wold the author employ the past tense to describe a future event
It is extremely significant that no Jewish interpreter ever thought that this particular passage in Isaiah was indicating what the awaited Messiah would be like, or what the expected Messiah would do. Nowhere in Jewish exegesis is this passage understood as relating at all to the Messiah.
This passage - as it is interpreted by Christians - is an exemplar, a prime example, of how some Christians [by no means all] distort, warp and pervert the Jewish scriptures due to their biased beliefs about sin, punishment and redemption. Some Christians start off with twisted notions of sin, sacrifice, and redemption. They, then, "scrounge around" in the Jewish scrptures, and upon finding passages like the one in Isaiah, they wrench them out of context. They "retrofit" Jewish scriptures to suit their biased perspective.
But to reiterate, in Isaiah 41:8 and Isaiah 49:3, the text explicitly states the "suffering servant" is Israel itself, specifically Israel brought into Babylonian exile. No Jewish interpreter prior to the Christian era would have possibly construed this passage as pertaining to the Messiah. From the very beginning,certain Christian commentators - with their type/antitype/prototype nonsense - have allowed their prejudices and biases to run wild, thus warping their comprehension of the Jewish scriptures.
The Jewish scriptures, and the Christian scriptures, were written by - and addressed to - people living a long time ago. There is no prophecy in the Bible at all. In fact, all of the "prophecy" recorded in the Bible was written after the described events took place.
-
12
Jehovah's Witnesses Grow by 'Devious' Methods
by DT ini thought this was an interesting news article.. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/969459.html.
it discusses the work of jehovah's witnesses in israel..
-
-
Rapunzel
There are currently just over seven million [7,000,000] people in the modern state of Israel. Israel's population is very diverse and heterodox. The political views of the people range from ultra-conservative "hawks" to leftist, liberal "doves." In regard to religion, viewpoints range from secular/agnostic/atheist, to Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox/Hasidic. There are also Christian and Moslem Israelis.
The opinions voiced in the article above are from the ultra-Orthodox viewpoint. However, the ultra-Orthodox are an extremely small minority in Israeli society. Also, it is necessary to place the viewpoints expressed in the article in a much larger context. Many Jews, irrespective of their religious and/or political stance, resent it when Christians attempt to convert them. For Jews, being a Jew is far different than being a Christian is for Christians. Even for secular Jews, Jewish identity involves, entails, much more than does Christian identity for Christians. Jewish identity involves a very profound level of awareness. Moreover, from a sheer numerical, or statistical, point of view, Jews are a small minority world-wide. There are over one billion Christians, and just about as many Moslems on Earth. There are very few Jews in comparison to Christians and Moslems. Many Jews view resistanace to religious conversion as literally a matter of life and death. Because there are so many Christians and Moslems, there is little or no need for them to feel threatened or intimidated by people who seek to convert them. But the situation is different for Jews. They are right to feel threatened because there are so few Jews in the world, relatively speaking.
I should say that I am neither an Israeli, nor a Jew, nor a Zionist. Although there is sometimes a certain overlap in these three terms, they are not equivalent to each other. Not all Israelis are Jews, and not all Jews are Zionists. Not all Zionists are Jews. And, of course, not all Jews are Israelis.
In short, modern Isaeli society is extremely complex, like all modern societies. Even though it is a small nation in geographic terms, there are profound regional differences. For example, Jerusalem is very different than Tel Aviv, or Haifa, or Jaffa, or Hebron etc. As for the Witnesses in Israel, the situation is complex for many historical and cultural reasons. There are many different attitudes towards the Witnesses in Israel. It behooves Witnesses to be aware of, and sensitive to, the cultural realities of the various societies in which they operate. In the case of Israel, there are a very solid historical and cultural explanations for the hostility that they encounter. In fact, the problem is not limited to Witnesses. All Christian evangelists should be sensitive to the situation of the soceties that they visit.
-
12
Jehovah's Witnesses Grow by 'Devious' Methods
by DT ini thought this was an interesting news article.. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/969459.html.
it discusses the work of jehovah's witnesses in israel..
-
-
Rapunzel
Satanus: To categorize all Israelis as a "cultic biblical group" is outrageous, absolutely disgusting and ignorant. Don't you know that most Israelis are secular Jews. They have a modern, progressive world view. There are Jewish, Christian and Moslem Israelis. As for Jewish Israelis, the Orthodox Jews are a small minority. In fact, Israeli society is quite complex. And, as I said, most of Israeli society is secular.
Perhaps, in your ignorance, you bhave confused the terms Israeli and Israelite. You obviously have no command of English. In English, we don't say- "They both don't respect others' religions." We say: "Neither group respects others' religions."
-
27
JWs drink too much and the women are floozies
by easyreader1970 ini posted this over at paradise cafe but i thought i would share it with you folks as well:
we had the special two day assembly this past weekend.
most of presentation was fairly tame.
-
-
Rapunzel
Fadeout - Your post reminds me of an old - and not particularly funny - joke that goes way back to when young guys would argue with their parents about hair length. In other words, this joke goe back to the "hippy" and "beatnik" days.
A teenage guy asks his dad to buy him a car. His dad replies: "Sure, but first you have to get a haircut! You look like a girl!" The kid retorts that it is a well-known fact that Jesus had long hair. To which the father responds: "Yes, Jesus did have long hair. And he walked everywhere that he went!"
I told you the joke was not especially funny.