Posts by peacefulpete

5

Musings About...Spirit Beings

by titch in

folks: this topic might seem a little "out there in left field.

" but it might be something to think about, or perhaps it's something that you have wondered about in the past.

i know that i sometimes wondered about it, , even when i was "in" the jw organization.

peacefulpete

Ok, I shot too much from the hip on that last post. The 1 Cor Pauline discussion has been a topic I rehashed some years ago. I repeated a position I held but now question.

In short Paul seems to be arguing about different types of flesh: man, bird, fish, and finally the ultimate type of flesh is an incorruptible type that Christians get to go to heaven with. The lines about 'sown natural raised spiritual' have been most often interpreted to mean 'spirit' but it doesn't really flow from the argument. The word can simply mean of divine or heavenly nature. Similarly, the "flesh and blood cannot enter heaven" may have had a nuanced meaning, merely insisting the usual corruptible human form cannot go. If this is correct, Paul seems to be saying they will have incorruptible glorious but yet physical bodies after a yet future resurrection.

However at Philippians 1:21 For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain. 22 But if I live on in the flesh, this will mean fruit from my labor; yet what I shall choose I 4cannot tell. 23 5For I am hard-pressed between the two, having a ldesire to depart and be with Christ, which is mfar better. 24 Nevertheless to remain in the flesh is more needful for you.

He seems to be rather forcefully suggesting if he was to die he would depart and be with Christ separated from his flesh.

Maybe this all illustrates the confusion.

5

Musings About...Spirit Beings

by titch in

folks: this topic might seem a little "out there in left field.

" but it might be something to think about, or perhaps it's something that you have wondered about in the past.

i know that i sometimes wondered about it, , even when i was "in" the jw organization.

peacefulpete

Early "Jewish" belief in the OT had no problem assuming God and other heavenly beings had physical bodies. They had abilities beyond ours, but they had tangible bodies. Later years this seemed unsophisticated and was denied, but never clarified. Irenaeus for example still insisted the corporeal nature of God as of essential theological importance, image of God, son in image of Father etc.

Regarding human destiny, the Jewish faith evolved over time from having a vague, rather hopeless concept of 'shades', (basically the essence of the person) having a quasi-existence in sheol to a more tangible Persian concept of resurrection of the body, a renewed original body. It was even thought by some the original clothes would be restored. (Humorously the Talmud declares that the bodies of those not buried in Israel will have to tunnel their way there). The Greek influences introduced a more refined immortal soul concept and with it more complex competing conceptions. Some branches of Judaism believed in reincarnation. (Mark 8:27,28 cf. Matt 16:13,14 Matt alters the meaning) The resulting melting pot of ideas produced a variety of beliefs among the Jews of the first century with no consensus felt needed.

Are souls reunited with the body at a future resurrection? is the body subsequently taken to heaven/hell? can the soul be split among different bodies to complete the cleansing process? Is life after death as a spirit form an exchange of bodies or merely a freeing of the soul?

This last question of whether the soul is the body or it requires a body to inhabit, has produced thousands of pages of inquiry. Simply said most writers, including Paul are just not absolutely clear.

Paul seems to be, IMO, straddling theological concepts. He believes a body is necessary, assumedly for sensory perception, and imagines a transformation of one body into another Christlike one. Then it will be reunited/exchanged with a physical body in the resurrection of the just. Others held that the physical body must be discarded and replaced with one made from heavenly materials and that is the final form.

Even more fundamental is the question of what "soul stuff" is made of. Again there is no clear answer. Is the soul itself made up of heavenly material or earthly? Is it immaterial, made of nothing but yet somehow self contained?

Bottom line is there was no limit to the creativity of fertile minds of theologians. When someone like Paul was pressured by Corinthians to explain it, he offered what he saw as logical. We are still trying to figure out what he meant.

16

Article & Documentary on the Divine name

by Blotty in

video documentary and academic article on the divine name:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljpgxsyiqtc&ab_channel=johnwyatthttps://www.academia.edu/14029315/the_name_of_god_y_eh_ow_ah_which_is_pronounced_as_it_is_written_i_eh_ou_ah_simplified_edition?email_work_card=title this does not prove gods name was present in the nt, however some points do lead us to that conclusion simply by process of elimination.

peacefulpete

The film was a backdoor WT production. Everyone involved was a JW. It's full of inaccuracies, misdirection and omissions. Comments like that at 8:50 give away the production agenda. "unbiblical worship of Jesus".

Simply said, there is no conspiracy to conceal the tetragramaton.

Interestingly the video identifies the 'Yah' in the Amunhotep III inscription as "Jehovah". Setting aside the leap in pronunciation, the inscription is describing a people and region south of the land of Cannan. This is one of the many lines of evidence supporting the Kennite Hypothesis that posits Yahweh as being worshipped in Edom/Moab as the storm deity there before his cult being imported north to Israel/Judah.

61

Why are so many Jehovah’s Witnesses Angry and Rude?

by Vanderhoven7 in

why do you think many jws are hostile and rude?

or is that just my imagination?.

mark jones writes: the vast majority of jehovah’s witnesses are nice people.

peacefulpete

Having doubts and wanting to air them isn't the same as being willing to be insulted and berated. There are many paths toward exiting, some are more meandering. It might be constructive to keep believing JWs posting and let them hear opposing views presented calmly.

12

things shelved, not looked into because of group think

by enoughisenough in

here are some things i never really believed the jw taught...i just didn't really examine it closely.

i shelved it, so to speak, thinking no one is perfect and they know more than me...if i ever thought about it at all.. i never believed that only jws would be spared at armageddon.

i never believed the where in james, you went to the elders to confess being spiritually sick-always thought that referred to a real illness.

peacefulpete

You used the term 'group think'. That is really the crux of the matter. It's about group identity, tribal loyalty. People do not become or remain JWs or Mormons or Baptists because of doctrine. Doctrine is merely the means of differentiation. I liken it to a language. Language is how we perceive the world and communicate

. But, even though doctrine is a large part of the identity, the group and its promise of 'specialness' is the appeal. This why the line about "nowhere else to go" is so powerful. The group is the safe place, the only place to be. It's only when the group identity no longer fits, does a person accept that there are options.

This why "stumbling" is such a prominent means of membership loss. My views about gravity and round earth are not threatened by my neighbor being a jerk. But my perception of group specialness can be shattered by a member treating me poorly or doing something shocking.

On the other hand, if my individual values change or I grow intellectually incompatible with the group, I'm forced to choose to either hide my true self or become alienated from the group. Unfortunately, even when a person leaves the group, the doctrinal patterns often remain. Like your first language, even after learning a new one, it may linger as the inner voice.

61

Why are so many Jehovah’s Witnesses Angry and Rude?

by Vanderhoven7 in

why do you think many jws are hostile and rude?

or is that just my imagination?.

mark jones writes: the vast majority of jehovah’s witnesses are nice people.

peacefulpete

Vanderhoven...It was my impression this site was supposed to be a welcoming place of acceptance and interchange of ideas. There is a risk of this place descending into a circle jerk, especially if we make JWs feel unwelcome.

61

Why are so many Jehovah’s Witnesses Angry and Rude?

by Vanderhoven7 in

why do you think many jws are hostile and rude?

or is that just my imagination?.

mark jones writes: the vast majority of jehovah’s witnesses are nice people.

peacefulpete

Fisherman, while frustratingly blinkered, has never been rude to me.

61

Why are so many Jehovah’s Witnesses Angry and Rude?

by Vanderhoven7 in

why do you think many jws are hostile and rude?

or is that just my imagination?.

mark jones writes: the vast majority of jehovah’s witnesses are nice people.

peacefulpete

Whatever we say about them was true of us. It may still be.

11

144,000 raise the dead and read hearts.

by enoughisenough in

i sometimes catch a video of a lady calling the kh and asking questions.

this morning she was questioning something that was said in the annual meeting part 2 and i looked it up for myself.

( feb 23 ) at timeline 1:37 the claim is in the new world jesus and the 144000 will raise the dead and just shortly after that the claim is jesus and the 144,000 will read hearts.

peacefulpete

Do you not know that we shall judge angels?

I know Boogerman was joking but really Paul did apparently make comments that suggest he believed his destiny was the same as Christ. They 'became' Christ through their martyrdom. A lot of this is lost through translating and editing but effectively the WT is not claiming anything Paul would have seen as blasphemy.

3

What's going on in Ohio?

by Bartolomeo in

reporter evan lambert arrested by ohio police live on train derailment for doing what big media won't do: ask questions about toxic chemicals that poison water and air.

.

the largest "democracy" in the world that arrests journalists for simple questions.. imagine if it had happened in russia what they would have said.... https://twitter.com/thethe1776/status/1625202284144791552.

peacefulpete

Notably the Governor has made clear he was not responsible for the confrontation nor supports it. The way it plays out in my head, Evan was talking too loudly and someone complained. The troopers and the Nat guard leader walked across the room to tell him to end his broadcast. From there it escalated. My takeaway is, when people in uniform tell you to move along, do it. You will not win the argument. You can complain about it afterward.