Posts by peacefulpete

27

Anyone know of specific subliminal pictures?

by cognac in

the only one i know about is the big jesus in the revelation book.. know of any specific other ones?

i want to show hubby....

peacefulpete

Instead of a poodle skirt it's a Pluto skirt.......Apollo skirt?

349

Who really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?

by Godlyman in

if anyone were to come up to you claiming that they are the faithful and discreet slave, how would you go about proving them to be false, based upon scripture?.

estephan.

The only reason to pursue this question is to deconstruct the WT's chronology for those who may still be impressed with their "calculations". The house of cards chronology is foundational to their claim to be "The" FDS.

There I brought it back on topic.

349

Who really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?

by Godlyman in

if anyone were to come up to you claiming that they are the faithful and discreet slave, how would you go about proving them to be false, based upon scripture?.

estephan.

peacefulpete

Jeffro......IMO the point in discussion is whether a precise start and end date are required. I'm suggesting, as do many commentators, the 70 year motif was flexible and simply implied a lifetime of disfavor. With this perspective, knocking yourself out proposing dozens of dates, as countless literalists have done, is tilting at windmills. There would be no issue allowing that simpler explanation if it were not for the WT's pathological need for secret hidden chronology that uses a specific date to start its convoluted eisegetical take on Dan 4.

20

JWs near of losing their status a religious organization in Norway

by Festus in

last spring norweigian state refused to give public contribution to jws (religious organisations can apply that in norway and previously wtbs has been granted that).

the decision was caused because of practise of disfellowshpiping.. now there is a new twist.. 25.10.2022 authorites in norway send a letter to wtbs and told them that they have four weeks to fix that practise.

if they don't do that they will loose their status as a religiouse organisation.. intrestingly jws did not "understand" what authorites meant by that and requested more time.. how can they not understand?

peacefulpete

I meant when they "win". not will.

5

Parable as an example of Editorial Fatigue.

by peacefulpete in

16 the first appeared, saying, ‘[d]master, your [e]mina has made ten minas more.’ 17 and he said to him, ‘well done, good slave, because you have been faithful in a very little thing, you are to be in authority over ten cities.’ 18 the second came, saying, ‘your [f]mina, [g]master, has made five minas.’ 19 and he said to him also, ‘and you are to be over five cities.’ 20 another came, saying, ‘master, here is your mina, which i kept put away in a handkerchief; 21 for i was afraid of you, because you are an exacting man; you take up what you did not lay down and reap what you did not sow.’ 22 he *said to him, ‘[h]by your own words i will judge you, you worthless slave.

23 then why did you not put my money in the bank, and having come, i would have collected it with interest?’ 24 then he said to the bystanders, ‘take the mina away from him and give it to the one who has the ten minas.’ 25 and they said to him, ‘master, he has ten minas already.’ 26 i tell you that to everyone who has, more shall be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away.

luke....‘take the mina away from him and give it to the one who has the ten minas.

peacefulpete

TD. ...It's possibly related to what's called Luke's great omission. For some reason Luke ignores everything in Mark 6:45-8:10 and Matts version of that section. Most often its suggested the copy of (what later came to be called) G.of Mark the writer of Luke had in front of him did not have that section, whereas the version Matt had did. The text was in flux. The style and terminology of that section of Mark seem to betray another hand. However, it's noticed the first Markan feeding story (5000) ends with hopping in a boat crossing the sea (again) to Bethsaida. (6:45)

Luke ignores or doesn't know about the second feeding story (4000) as it is part of the omission section. IOW Luke opens his feeding story with a detail from the first verse of the section he omits from Mark.

IMO, as I hold the Farrer hypothesis to be very persuasive, I have to think either the writer of Luke did see Mark 6:45 in his copy and awkwardly used Bethsaida to open his feeding story as a result or it's a later gloss by some well intentioned editor. I'm torn on which is more probable. The writer of Luke might not have liked the section in Mark for theological reasons as it has Jesus failing to completely heal, be a ghost walking on water, using spit to heal and felt the second feeding story was a doublet. I'm leaning to Luke's objecting to the section on the grounds that it explains ,kinda, the Bethsaida reference and I'm of the view that he had Matt's version in front of him that includes that section of Mark. In which case he was ignoring not just Mark but Matt.

Intriguingly Matt does not copy Mark in in saying Bethsaida at verse 45.

Mark 6:45 Immediately Jesus made His disciples get into the boat and go ahead of Him to the other side to Bethsaida, while He Himself was sending the crowd away.

Matt 14:22 Immediately He [a]made the disciples get into the boat and go ahead of Him to the other side, while He sent the crowds away.

We may never know.

20

JWs near of losing their status a religious organization in Norway

by Festus in

last spring norweigian state refused to give public contribution to jws (religious organisations can apply that in norway and previously wtbs has been granted that).

the decision was caused because of practise of disfellowshpiping.. now there is a new twist.. 25.10.2022 authorites in norway send a letter to wtbs and told them that they have four weeks to fix that practise.

if they don't do that they will loose their status as a religiouse organisation.. intrestingly jws did not "understand" what authorites meant by that and requested more time.. how can they not understand?

peacefulpete

…membership growth and success in the courts have been touted as evidence of God’s favor for so long, there’s gotta be at least some cognitive dissonance by now…

So are "persecution" and "demonic machinations" , so they have both covered. They have proof of blessing when they lose and when they will.

349

Who really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?

by Godlyman in

if anyone were to come up to you claiming that they are the faithful and discreet slave, how would you go about proving them to be false, based upon scripture?.

estephan.

peacefulpete

Once again, I don't know if you are pulling my leg or not but the text's meaning is not dependent upon a translation. The writer is clearly saying Yahweh's anger, denouncement, punishment etc had not ended. It's often assumed his concern was the temple not having been rebuilt as that is what immediately follows.

16Therefore the LORD says this: “I will return to Jerusalem with compassion; My house will be built in it,” declares the LORD of armies, “and a measuring line will be stretched over Jerusalem.”’ 17Again, proclaim, saying, ‘This is what the LORD of armies says: “My cities will again overflow with prosperity, and the LORD will again comfort Zion and again choose Jerusalem.”’

There is no way to misinterpret that. In the mind of Zechariah the "70 years" was just now closing and the reversal of God's disfavor was imminent. It's also quite possible the writer of proto-Zechariah was embittered that while Babylon was technically no longer their master the Achaemenid Empire was. And perhaps to his dismay few wanted to leave their homes and businesses to go to a land they had never seen to start over. Even getting priests to go was a struggle.

But as long as you are obsessed with Babylon, what was supposed to happen at the end of the 70 years?

Jeremiah 25: 12But when seventy years are complete, I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation, the land of the Chaldeans, for their guilt, declares the LORD, and I will make it an everlasting desolation.

Even students of the Bible know that did not happen. Babylon did not suffer destruction, according to Daniel it fell without so much as the gates damaged.

1

Editorial Fatigue

by peacefulpete in

the parable of the faithful slave vs wicked slave (appearing in matt 24 and luke 12, aka double tradition) has consumed a whole lot of bandwidth here.

setting that particular parable aside for the moment lets look at the parallel parable of the talents/minas in (matt 25:14-30 and luke 19:11-27, also double tradition, not found in mark).

mattews version:.

peacefulpete

Wow this duplicate thread appeared a day and half late. Very sorry it can be removed by a moderator or Simon.

1

Editorial Fatigue

by peacefulpete in

the parable of the faithful slave vs wicked slave (appearing in matt 24 and luke 12, aka double tradition) has consumed a whole lot of bandwidth here.

setting that particular parable aside for the moment lets look at the parallel parable of the talents/minas in (matt 25:14-30 and luke 19:11-27, also double tradition, not found in mark).

mattews version:.

peacefulpete

The parable of the faithful slave vs wicked slave (appearing in Matt 24 and Luke 12, aka double tradition) has consumed a whole lot of bandwidth here. Setting that particular parable aside for the moment lets look at the parallel parable of the talents/minas in (Matt 25:14-30 and Luke 19:11-27, also double tradition, not found in Mark)

Mattews version:

14 “For it is just like a man about to go on a journey, who called his own slaves and entrusted his possessions to them. 15 To one he gave five [a]talents, to another, two, and to another, one, each according to his own ability; and he went on his journey. 16 Immediately the one who had received the five talents went and traded with them, and gained five more talents. 17 In the same manner the one who had received the two talents gained two more. 18 But he who received the one talent went away, and dug a hole in the ground and hid his [b]master’s money.19 “Now after a long time the master of those slaves *came and *settled accounts with them. 20 The one who had received the five talents came up and brought five more talents, saying, ‘Master, you entrusted five talents to me. See, I have gained five more talents.’ 21 His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your [c]master.’22 “Also the one who had received the two talents came up and said, ‘Master, you entrusted two talents to me. See, I have gained two more talents.’ 23 His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’24 “And the one also who had received the one talent came up and said, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. 25 And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground. See, you have what is yours.’26 “But his master answered and said to him, ‘You wicked, lazy slave, you knew that I reap where I did not sow and gather where I scattered no seed. 27 Then you ought to have put my money [d]in the bank, and on my arrival I would have received my money back with interest. 28 Therefore take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.’29 “For to everyone who has, more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. 30 Throw out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Luke's version:

12 So He said, “A nobleman went to a distant country to receive a kingdom for himself, and then return. 13 And he called ten of his slaves, and gave them ten [a]minas and said to them, ‘Do business with this [b]until I come back.’ 14 But his citizens hated him and sent [c]a delegation after him, saying, ‘We do not want this man to reign over us.’ 15 When he returned, after receiving the kingdom, he ordered that these slaves, to whom he had given the money, be called to him so that he might know what business they had done. 16 The first appeared, saying, ‘[d]Master, your [e]mina has made ten minas more.’ 17 And he said to him, ‘Well done, good slave, because you have been faithful in a very little thing, you are to be in authority over ten cities.’ 18 The second came, saying, ‘Your [f]mina, [g]master, has made five minas.’ 19 And he said to him also, ‘And you are to be over five cities.’ 20 Another came, saying, ‘Master, here is your mina, which I kept put away in a handkerchief; 21 for I was afraid of you, because you are an exacting man; you take up what you did not lay down and reap what you did not sow.’ 22 He *said to him, ‘[h]By your own words I will judge you, you worthless slave. Did you know that I am an exacting man, taking up what I did not lay down and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Then why did you not put my money in the bank, and having come, I would have collected it with interest?’ 24 Then he said to the bystanders, ‘Take the mina away from him and give it to the one who has the ten minas.’ 25 And they said to him, ‘Master, he has ten minas already.’ 26 I tell you that to everyone who has, more shall be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away. 27 But these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them in my presence.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This parable is an example of editorial fatigue. The writer of Luke obviously has Matt's expansion of Mark 13:34 in front of him when revising this parable but he has made some changes to his source material. The first obvious change is to alter Matt's 3 servants to 10. The trust money also changes. The unit of money aside, (60 minas to a talent) in Matt each gets according to ability 5,2 and 1. Whereas in Luke each of the ten gets 1. The conclusion is also different in that in Matt the first servant made 5 more from the 5 (total 10) and gets rewarded with authority over "many things" and the second made 2 more with the 2 (total 4) and also rewarded with "many things", whereas in Luke (who had 10 servants now reverts to agree with Matt in having only 3 in the summary) the first made 10 more with his 1 (11 total) and is rewarded with 10 cities the second made 5 more with his one (6 total) and receives 5 cities. And another has not not done anything.

So while Luke made changes to Matt he retained certain elements that make his version rather awkward in comparison. Why 10 servants but only 3 get mention? The conclusion is also telling:

Luke....‘Take the mina away from him and give it to the one who has the ten minas

Matt.....take away the talent from him, and give it to the one who has the ten talents.

Here Luke has copied Matt (his source) without noticing this causes a problem due to his changes. The reward of ten monetary units makes less sense in Luke as he has the first slave have 11 and gets 10 cities as a reward. It is only in Matt that the first slave gets rewarded with 10 units of money.

Again this an example of editorial fatigue. Luke, for his own reasons, makes changes to his source Matt but by the end has reverted to more closely follow Matt even though this makes his reading less coherent.

There are many examples like this.

Goodacre did a nice article on this: https://markgoodacre.org/fatigue.pdf

349

Who really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?

by Godlyman in

if anyone were to come up to you claiming that they are the faithful and discreet slave, how would you go about proving them to be false, based upon scripture?.

estephan.

peacefulpete

I never know if I'm being put on or if the person on the other side of the screen really believes what they are posting. But either way whenever reading the texts to learn becomes dismissed as "immaterial" I know it is time to leave.