Who Are the "Other Sheep" and Jesus "Brothers" ?

by Sea Breeze in

watchtower plays lots of games with definitions.

once they change a definition then they have a false assumption to build their deception on.

then they repeat the new definition and use its new meaning thousands of times to reinforce it.

peacefulpete

Certainly, the expression of 'brothers' of Christ had a cultic meaning, and was the objective of all Christians.

The tradition of Jeus also having literal brothers was arrived at an early stage in the second century proto-orthodoxy as a means to oppose Docetism (the early/original assertion that the Christ was not actually human but had taken the appearance). This development was enabled by the "too-many-Marys" conflation/confusion problems and two brief usages in Pauline material in reference to certain Christian men, perhaps in a special usage reflecting rank.

Mark preserves an older reference to a Mary, who was a disciple in 15:

40 Some women were watching from a distance. Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the younger and of Joseph,[d] and Salome. 41 In Galilee these women had followed him and cared for his needs. Many other women who had come up with him to Jerusalem were also there.

Contrast that with 6:

3 Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.

The bold lines almost certainly were added, perhaps as a harmonization with the Matthean (13:55) expansion/redaction of this passage.

Anyway, this adjustment to the euhemerization process served a purpose early on but later, once the proto-orthodoxy became thoroughly dominant, it was an embarrassment, requiring another layer of tradition that gave a widowed Joseph children from a previous marriage.

24

The Kingdom of God - when in Heaven ? -- according to Jesus

by wantingtruth in

john said "...the truth came through jesus christ" ?

--------the kingdom of god---------- .

"the kingdom of god is near.

peacefulpete

A year ago, I posted a comment on this thread that briefly described a process of reinterpretation that occurred in the first few decades of Christianity. It appears to be consistent with the evidence to suggest the movement spawned from a branch of Judaism that perceived through the OT texts that God had sent a Christ/Logos (etc.) and deliverance of the 'chosen' was immanent. Jews were believed to play a central role in the dispensation of world governance.

Pretty early on both premises fell out of favor.

It's my conclusion that the Gospel story was crafted as a didactic parable/tale that introduced and demystified spiritual concepts through dramatization for a later generation. The popularity of that story reshaped the movement in profound unanticipated ways.

The Gospel/s generally depict the disciples as thick headed, as they served as foils for outdated ideas or popular misconceptions. Acts follows that tradition further (and also attempts to domesticate Paul and groups that he inspired).

Therefore IMO, Acts 1:6-8 is a perfect example of a narrative crafted to polemicize against the outdated idea of an imminent Jewish-centric Messianism. The topic is shifted through the Jesus response toward a universal future objective, as decades had past and the church by then had broken from Judaism.

6 Then they gathered around him and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”
7 He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”

To imagine the closest confidants and friends of Jesus, having completely misunderstood 'his' message, is to not understand the narrative's purpose at all. The purpose is that the 'Spirit' was now teaching a more esoteric message, past Christians were mistaken in their expectations.

So, while, as was mentioned, the direction of movement was from a mystery/revelatory/experiential faith toward a formulaic text-based one; out of necessity the 'Kingdom' went from literal to metaphor in those same texts that cemented an orthodoxy.

5

Generation Alpha

by Gorb in

jw
friends

being generation x myself, with 2 teenagers in generation alpha, i see a lot difference between generations.. generation alpha has totaly different views.

my first reaction at home about the current conflict between gaza and israel made this clear.. what an automatic reaction is for a generation x is a disaster for generation a.. result was my first shock about myself, generation x. do i see the global and local issues still clear?!?

why became my teenagers so wise persons with a more balanced world view?

peacefulpete

In general, the world is less black and white. At least for the youth. Without looking to get into any political or social scrap, I for one feel this is a step toward a more inclusive and equitable future. There are many steps and course corrections in any journey, but what I'm sure of is that no progress can be made without youthful openness to change.

21

A Fun Topic: BEFORE God

by Terry in

jw
friends

yuh gotta start somewhere, right?.

big bang theory is not a theory of the creation of the universe, but rather a model of the history and evolution of the universe from its earliest moments.

it wasn't really until the time of st. augustine that the idea of "out of nothing" entered the discussion.. a reading of genesis doesn't force the "out of nothing" into it at all.. in fact, a kind of chaotic "something" was put into form - or - something out of "something", the way adam is formed from red mud and eve from the rib.

peacefulpete

When tasked with solving a jewelry store robbery, the district attorney doesn't hypothesize goblins and time machines. Rather, they pragmatically check surveillance cameras, collect physical evidence and do profiling using the details of the case.

Why is it when discussing a Jewish creation story, taking a sober look at the culture and politics of the Jewish people at the time of writing is neglected in favor of time paradox speculation and invisible entities?

78

God, one person, or three?

by slimboyfat in

the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.

niv.

gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.

peacefulpete

Great comment Kaleb. Christianity was originally an 'experience', a perception of something new. This is why revelatory charismata featured at an early stage. Once an orthodoxy became dominant, there was no longer place for 'personal' revelation. Tradition and text became cudgels for conformity and control. Paul seems to have arisen at a middle stage. At least as his works read today, he appears torn between tolerating "prophets" and demanding a standardization under his self appointed leadership.

Claims to be a "restoration" of original Christianity have had to determine first, what stage, in their opinion,constitutes, original. The personality of organizers play a huge role in this. Christian mysticism is/was an embrace of a stage prior to the faith 'based' on books. The Trinity is a product of the former with constraints of the latter.

19

Not only the ORG who perverts Scriptures!

by BoogerMan in

john 14:6 - "jesus said to him, “i am the way, the truth, and the life.

no one comes to the father except through me.".

certain christian denominations lie & contradict jesus' crystal clear statement, by promoting the following dogma:.

peacefulpete

Prophets of Israel reused expressions and prophecies of earlier prophets in new creative ways, the NT is filled with OT texts lifted from context and creatively applied. This is how religion evolves. Take what is old and make it new.

9

I'll just leave this 'ere

by stan livedeath in

woman who died and 'went to heaven' says she now knows when armageddon will happen (msn.com).

peacefulpete

A lifetime ago, I preached in a community that had a large mental health clinic. We had an unusually large number of recent patients. One of them claimed to have 'discovered' the date using math and a dozen or so passages. We got a good laugh in the car group. Looking back... oh, the irony.

78

God, one person, or three?

by slimboyfat in

the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.

niv.

gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.

peacefulpete

The trinity is a man-made doctrine to take focus and worship away from Jehovah...

Rattigan, .....do you still imagine a conspiracy by evil agents of the Devil?

Thousands of hours have been spent by patient people, trying to assist former JWs that doctrines like the trinity were sincere efforts to harmonize divergent views of Jesus found in the NT. Their mistake, of course, was presuming there was a 'mystery' concealed in the contradictions.

The pre-Christian conceptualizations of God included similarly contradictory descriptions. As brief examples: while some passages said God cannot be seen, the Kabod of God is. This Kabod (Glory) speaks, listens and acts. Is then the Kabod God or not? Likewise passages that introduce a Mal'ak of God involved in stories that otherwise refer to God speaking and acting. Many Jews objected to the notion that God interacted directly with lowly humans (despite ancient tradition expressly saying so) and adjusted the texts accordingly. In this way God's separateness is preserved.

Famously God is described as using a feminine agent "Wisdom" to perform his will in creating the physical world and providing the Torah. In a parallel way, Jews, as evidenced by Philo of Alexanderia expounded on the 'Logos' as an emanation i.e.. 'Son' of God that was at the same time effectively God in a certain role.

Christain writers, understanding Christ to be an emanation of God, naturally described him in identical terms, Logos, Son, even Wisdom and Light. It was not a demonic conspiracy.

21

A Fun Topic: BEFORE God

by Terry in

jw
friends

yuh gotta start somewhere, right?.

big bang theory is not a theory of the creation of the universe, but rather a model of the history and evolution of the universe from its earliest moments.

it wasn't really until the time of st. augustine that the idea of "out of nothing" entered the discussion.. a reading of genesis doesn't force the "out of nothing" into it at all.. in fact, a kind of chaotic "something" was put into form - or - something out of "something", the way adam is formed from red mud and eve from the rib.

peacefulpete

... God created everything outside of himself as a NATURAL first step. Meaning, it wasn't out of desperation. More precisely, as we've come to read over and over in the scriptures, he wills all things into existence out of love.

Love as a motive, doesn't seem to be obvious in a universe defined, formed and maintained by catastrophe and consumption. The scriptures, you elude to describe the human tendency to anthropomorphize. We give water and food to those we love, so it isn't surprising that some projected this upon a creator. In a similar anthropomorphic way, the same writer often assumed terrors and slaughter on those this creator didn't favor. If you really think about it, since only a 'few' are described as being so favored, the motivation for such a creator might be philosophically argued to have been a schadenfreude type pleasure in the suffering of others.

However, the writers of the Bible were not united in any particular perspective. Many assumed a predestination of fates. Some fated to suffer and be destroyed, some to suffer a 'little' but then be set free from this world. All 'creation' is said to be 'groaning and waiting' for some remedy to the catastrophe and consumption. IOW, the creation, as it existed, didn't reflect love but only aspects of it, and the promise of escaping it.

As I read the Bible, I see authors trying to make sense of what was all around them. Suffering, deprivation, random injustice and death and yet sufficient resources for the world to continue on.

I had a chipmunk who lives in my woodpile 'trained' to be fed by hand. It brought me and the chipmunk much pleasure. A few nights ago, we heard horrible squealing as the hawk tore his flesh. I imagine that brought the hawk much pleasure. Me and the chipmunk not so much. How do I make theological sense of that.

21

A Fun Topic: BEFORE God

by Terry in

jw
friends

yuh gotta start somewhere, right?.

big bang theory is not a theory of the creation of the universe, but rather a model of the history and evolution of the universe from its earliest moments.

it wasn't really until the time of st. augustine that the idea of "out of nothing" entered the discussion.. a reading of genesis doesn't force the "out of nothing" into it at all.. in fact, a kind of chaotic "something" was put into form - or - something out of "something", the way adam is formed from red mud and eve from the rib.

peacefulpete

Enjoyable post. It is not due to ignorance that many ancient cosmogonies assumed a preexisting chaos from which order emerged. They actually gave it much thought.

In contrast, a preexistent highly ordered intelligence, as assumed by many, needs be defined by orderliness and ability to formulate. If there were nothing 'other' to order or formulate, any words like intelligent or orderly become oxymoronic. That is unless we hypothesize a self organizing, self formulation, an ever evolving self improvement from humble beginnings, an able intelligence from something lesser. IMO, this is the only logical origins for any hypothesized deity. An entity having evolved to the point of creativity.

This however returns us to a chaos cosmogony. Simplistic disorder with potential.

peacefulpete

Posts by peacefulpete

Prophets of Israel reused expressions and prophecies of earlier prophets in new creative ways, the NT is filled with OT texts lifted from context and creatively applied. This is how religion evolves. Take what is old and make it new.