Posts by KalebOutWest

49

40 Years Ago Today: May 15th 1984 "1914 Generation" issue was released. False prophecy, thy name is WatchTower.

by WingCommander in

jw
friends

it's incredible how this cover, and also this "series" of watchtower's is burned into my mind.

i was almost 5 years old when these were released.

“1914 and you” — may 1, 1984 watchtower.

KalebOutWest

Ratigan350:

FYI, it is not a false prophesy because it was not a prophesy. IT was an interpretation of scripture. That's why people proclaiming the rapture is not a false prophesy as that also is an interpretation of scripture. That is a misinterpretation of scripture. 1914 is a valid interpretation of scripture. You all are just disappointed because it didn't result in what you wanted it to be.

The term "prophesy," as in a "prophet" from the Bible era does not refer to someone who can foretell the future. It refers to someone who speaks the words of God to the people of God or to people who God wants to speak to.

For instance, the prophet Jonah gives a prophecy that Ninevah will be destroyed due to their sins, but the people in Ninevah repent. Jonah's words do not come true. Jonah gets very angry because this is what he expected to happen in the first place. He doesn't want to talk to God after his prophetic warnings do not come to pass, even when God comes to him to converse about the situation.--Jonah chapter 4.

The entire Mosaic Law forbids "soothsayers" from existing among the people. (Deuteronomy 18:9-12) A "soothsayer" is anyone who can "foretell the future." The difference between foretelling the future, which is what a soothsayer does and uttering a prophecy, which is what a prophet does, is that the message of a prophet is not a foretelling of events or a forecast. It is often a message, a lesson, and sometimes, like in the case of Jonah and the people of Ninevah, a warning.

But warnings are just that, warnings. When parents warn you that something may happen, they are not telling you that it will happen. They are telling you it may happen. "If you keep walking too close to the edge, you may fall," or "if you play too close to the stove while I am cooking something, you might burn yourself." The choice in such warnings is yours.

This is why Jonah is not a false prophet. If you notice, God wanted Jonah to understand that the work of a prophet was not to bring judgment or foretell the future, but to offer a means of light, a way out, a road to repentance. God tried to teach that lesson to Jonah, explaining to him at the end of the book that he should be rejoicing that his message was heard, not that he is someone who is a foreteller of events.

It is in this light that the text in Deuteronomy 18:20-22 is written:

Any prophet who presumes to speak in My name an oracle that I did not command to be uttered, or who speaks in the name of other gods--that prophet shall die....If the prophet speaks in God's name and the oracle does not come true, that oracle was not spoken by God; the prophet has uttered it presumptiously: do not be in dread ot them.--RJPS 2023

A prophet is anyone who claims to speak for God. Oracles that foretell events or deal with forecasting the future on a timeline are what are specifically being warned about in the context of Deuteronomy chapter 18. Immediately before verse 20, the previous verses forewarn the people against the practice of foretelling the future via the dark arts, like soothsaying. The main type of "oracle" that is being spoken of here in verses 20-22 are those that claim to make forecasts of future events regarding dates in God's name. Here the Mosaic Law it is basically telling the Jews that no such prophet will ever rise that will have that ability whatsoever.

No one outside of the Watchtower religion thinks there is an invisible Jesus who has "returned to power" or whose "invisible parousia" has started around October 2nd, 1914. People don't believe that on their own. People outside the Watchtower religion don't come to those views spontaneously. They have to come into contact with Watchtower literature and people who have been taught by Watchtower leaders who teach these things.

So everything one learns about the Watchtower religion's expectations regarding 1914 is dependent not upon a personal expectation regarding 1914 but upon what is officially taught via official theology from official Jehovah's Witnesses theology.

The 1914 information disappoints because it fails. It doesn't fail because of what people believe about it.

18

Out of the Mouths of Vampires

by peacefulpete in

one of the most quoted and loved passages of the bible has an unexpected textual history.

at matt 21:16 jesus is made to say:.

have you never read, ‘from the mouths of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise for yourself’?”.

KalebOutWest

I do feel he is misreading Mark's article or not reading it at all.

Either you are hurt somewhere by what I wrote or upset, because it is obviously apparent that I did read it. I quoted from it, remember?

Because of your "vampire" title and because of it's Catholic theme on creation, I had to even call someone who told me he was sure I knew Mark (we were in the same room at several events and he just never introduced me).

Mark is quite clear he sees a related parallel myth to the Ugaritic.

I also ended my comments on the article saying it was related to this myth, commenting on how after my discussion with my scholar/translator friend it was explained to me that the idea was that the Psalm might be advancing some inner hymn to a third cosmological creation mythology.

Like Judaism, Catholicism also holds that the Genesis story of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden is allegorical, so this makes these references equally so.

But since in Catholicism there is great richness in the Garden of Eden allegory, Psalm 8, being a Messianianic/Christological hymn in Catholic liturgy, the idea that it has cosmological creation allegory is important to Catholics. This last part is what I knew I was missing from the article, and was a central point. But being Jewish I needed help since I didn't get it.

The idea that you think Mark is a Catholic apologist like Jimmy Akin makes me realize why you would think I don't know what I don't know what I am talking about. You are still not outside the world of the Witnesses in some ways, despite how many years you have between them or what you have studied. You are thus working hard and perhaps struggling to create your own worldview, which I forget can be difficult to do. Sometimes we feel we can be there only to suddenly realize, no, not yet. Other times we feel like we will never make it to shore. It isn't our fault. We are cast out to see by a system controlled by the Governing Body and I don't think the outside world knows how hard it is to build a person from scratch afterwards.

For many I've met, leaving the Watchtower has meant seeing God as a monster. Why? Because that religion is controlled by monsters. It ruins people's lives. So anything in any form of academic paper that highlights a connection with God as something monstrous or grotesque becomes appealing in a way to sort of say: "See? Here's the proof! I was right. God is a monster."

In reality, Judaism and its writings are quite modern. It is just as much of a false story as what the Jehovah's Witnesses offer, but there was never a Governing Body or masters of one's faith. Instead of a monster at the head, there was status and reward. Instead of a visible idol, our God was invisible. There was no idol to care for in a shrine. The myths could not be verified. There were tons of laws, but they were designed to keep a person Jewish in a world where identity was valuable. God was in the stories of the past. There was no one looking over your shoulder. Judaism was practiced in our home where the doors were closed.

The reward for keeping the rules was eternal, true, but even better for now, there was a feeling of superiority over your Gentile neighbors who you could look down upon for being idol worshipers and stupid. A monster God could not be at the center of all this. Something more "human" had to be there.

The Levitical priesthood was intelligent enough to create a Deity unlike the gods of the nations. The stories may have been distant in time, but the character of the God of Abraham was definitely not. YHVH may have created us in his image, but the Levitical priesthood created God in the image of man. God feels, loves, gets jealous, debates, saves, gets angry, wages war, etc. YHVH is relatable unlike the gods before him. Still not a perfect "image-less" God, but monotheism was on its way.

This was late in the era of Babylon's existence. This is why there is a Babylonian Talmud. The Jewish sages took residence there even after most returned to Jerusalem and created a great center of learning. From the time of the Exile onward, the Levites began developing their system of cultural preservation, and at the center of it was a new and improved God, unlike anything seen before, even unlike anything they worshiped before the Exile.

You cannot recreate something that did not come from your culture and your language. You cannot tell Native American people that they got their myths wrong or Japanese that you know more about Shinto than they do, especially when you don't read or understand their languages or lived their lives or practiced their religions. Can you imagine what you must sound like to me?

But I understand that you are trying to make sense of things, struggling to find a path of knowledge. I will stop trying to convince you of something that you don't want to hear.

Along your way way in life, however, don't accuse people of not reading things they have. You don't know what they know. And especially when it's the works and mythology of their own culture in the native language that they speak in everyday. Especially right now when it's tough to go outside and just be who you are. The "vampire" comment right now isn't helping.

18

Out of the Mouths of Vampires

by peacefulpete in

one of the most quoted and loved passages of the bible has an unexpected textual history.

at matt 21:16 jesus is made to say:.

have you never read, ‘from the mouths of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise for yourself’?”.

KalebOutWest

I gave you the link to Mark's Prineston Seminary profile. He is a full-blood Roman Catholic, alright. But he is not an apologist. A Catholic apologist is a different sort of person, usually not an academic, but a religious (a member of a Catholic religious order), like a monk or nun, sometimes a layperson who is not even a scholar but assigned a ministry in the church to defend the faith. Smith is a professor. They don't do the work of a Catholic apologist as that requires a religious calling of some kind.

The problem is that you've never been exposed to Catholic theology. Just read the footnotes to the NABRE, the official Catholic Bible.

Or better yet, read the New Collegeville Bible Commentary.

You will find that Catholic theology is very hardline critical. There is no room for a Jesus that can foretell the future. There is no "Moses" who wrote the books of Moses. There is no prophet Daniel who prophesied about the coming of Jesus. Isaiah did not foretell the virgin birth, so who knows where Matthew got his quote. And none of the apostles wrote any of the books assigned to them.

This is just the beginning, the surface, and it is a hard and bumpy ride for many Catholics who have to do a balancing act between "faith" and data which Rome says each of the faithful must be exposed to.

Smith is mild by comparison to what you read in Collegeville and some of the footnotes of the NABRE. Some Catholics damn the NABRE as heretical, but it is what the USCCB and Rome have put their stamp of approval on.

Catholic apologists are people like Jimmy Akin and individuals associated with the ministry of Catholic Answers. These individuals are not necessarily academics, nor do they work in my profession. They generally do not speak or learn Biblical languages like me or like Smith.

18

Out of the Mouths of Vampires

by peacefulpete in

one of the most quoted and loved passages of the bible has an unexpected textual history.

at matt 21:16 jesus is made to say:.

have you never read, ‘from the mouths of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise for yourself’?”.

KalebOutWest

P.S.:

That new Psalter, The Abbey Psalms and Canticles, already published for the U.S. market, won't be issued here in the American Church until about a year later due to a delay in the publication of the Liturgy of the Hours, the Church's official prayer book, which includes the Psalms throughout.

It should be about only one year later, with an entire update of the NABRE incorporated along with it. The pandemic was mostly to blame for the delay, but the project was massive, as can be seen by this update page at the USCCB.

18

Out of the Mouths of Vampires

by peacefulpete in

one of the most quoted and loved passages of the bible has an unexpected textual history.

at matt 21:16 jesus is made to say:.

have you never read, ‘from the mouths of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise for yourself’?”.

KalebOutWest

So I got to do some further research on the article and its author. I had some trouble understanding what the paper was saying. Since it was from The Catholic Bible Quarterly, I asked an old acquaintance of mine who was a Catholic and a Bible translator who has asked for my help in translation in the past.

To my surprise, he told me that I actually run in the same circles as Mark Smith. I have just never met him.

First, Mark's article is not about "vampires" and the referring to the God of Abraham as "El." My buddy showed me this, even demonstrating that, just as I had posted on here earlier, the origins of the etymology of the word for "sucklings" stems from Semitic roots involving a non-Jewish myth that might involve something Smith labels as "divine 'suckers;'" but he goes on to say:

"It is hardly necessary that the same myth be involved."

This means that Psalm 8 has nothing to do with the myth even though a word evolved from the idea.

"The paper is about a Catholic theology quandary," my friend told me. "Is Psalm 8 another creation narrative? If so, who are these children and babes? Who is the enemy? What is the silencing that occurs? Is this a parallel to chapter 3 in Genesis?"

For Catholics, the question about Psalm 8 is not why is it using this word, but their belief that it is Messianic, about Jesus, and somehow tied up to him creating the world, and their view that it may have something to do with Genesis 3:15. If it does, if that can be proved, then in their eyes they will have a real "anchor" of sorts. (The only problem is that the Psalm is not as old as they want it to be.)

My question was put forward as to how did Smith and other Catholics (since Smith is Catholic) see Psalm 8?

While I am sure he couldn't directly speak for Mark himself, Mark is a very well-educated Catholic layman, serving as a professor at various universities. But he did have this to offer about the general Catholic viewpoint:

"There is a difference between the academic answer and the one that motivates us by faith," he answered. "One [critical scholarship] is at service of the other [faith]. But for a Catholic, all Scripture has the earmark of divine inspiration."

My friend, by the way, is a language scholar who helped produce the new English-language Psalter for the Roman Catholic Church which is being employed, beginning this Advent, all around the world, in every country where English is spoken. He isn't stupid by any means.

The idea is that this Psalm might involve a cosmology in which creation, as Smith puts it, "ancient, divine victory over cosmic enemies," even though it is allegorical (there are no "children" or babies" in heaven, for example, and there was not yet a complex demonology in Judaism adopted into the Hebrew religion).

This is important for Catholic theology in building its Christological ideas and theological instruction, especially as it evolves.

18

Out of the Mouths of Vampires

by peacefulpete in

one of the most quoted and loved passages of the bible has an unexpected textual history.

at matt 21:16 jesus is made to say:.

have you never read, ‘from the mouths of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise for yourself’?”.

KalebOutWest

Believe whatever you wish.

English is not my first language. I grew up speaking Hebrew, Ladino and Aramaic, praying the Bible and the Siddur daily all my life in Hebrew. It was just an opinion

I have been an instructor in praying the Jewish liturgy for some years now. But It doesn't mean I know everything.

You do you.

18

Out of the Mouths of Vampires

by peacefulpete in

one of the most quoted and loved passages of the bible has an unexpected textual history.

at matt 21:16 jesus is made to say:.

have you never read, ‘from the mouths of infants and nursing babies you have prepared praise for yourself’?”.

KalebOutWest

I have heard this before, but this is just like the "torture stake" argument Jehovah's Witnesses created based off of reading the text and looking things up in lexicons, but forgetting that these texts were not written by Hebrew-speaking Jews but Aramaic-speaking Jews that used liturgical Hebrew for worship and were slowly beginning to replace their everyday speech with Aramaic.

In Psalm 8 you find Aramaic mixed in with Hebrew and influencing the Hebrew liturgy. This is a liturgical text, very different from a narrative one from, let's say 2 Samuel or Joshua. The liturgy is filled with both Hebrew and Aramaic. Some of the prayers of the Siddur are completely in Aramaic, such as the Kaddish, which is the prayer one says for the dead. The time period is of the Second Temple, the time of Ezra, likely after his death.

Since most doing research don't know the difference between a liturgical text and that there is an influx of Aramaic in these texts (and that, as I mentioned before in a previous thread, the Hebrew Bible was written during the Persian Era or the Iron Age and not the Bronze Age, when Hebrew was spoken), the cultural aspect of what the texts are used for and what language is actually being spoken is not taken into account.

When you write a Hebrew prayer for liturgy, whether it became a psalm for the Bible for a fixed prayer for the Siddur, Jewish prayers do not rhyme in their words like they do in English. You employ a type of cadence or beat to each line, sort of like saying:

"Georgie Porgie pudding pie, stick a finger in my eye."

Except the words "pie" and "eye" do not rhyme; you just have the sing-song of the line made up by the words.

This is important to understand why they selected these particular words over some more common Hebrew words. Let me give you a Hebrew example by transliterating part of a famous Hebrew prayer that uses a lot of this sing-song cadence that is hard to miss:

ASHER YATZAR ET HAADAM B'CHOCHMAH
UVARA VO N'KAVIM N'KAVIM
CHALULIM CHALULIM
GALULUI V'ADUA LIFNEI CHESEI CH'VODECHECHA
SHE-IM YIPATEI-ACH ECHAD MEIHEM
O YISATEIM ECAHD MEIHEM

[God] who formed the human body with skill
creating the body's many pathways and openings;
it is well known before Your throne of glory...

There is a far easier way to say the above prayer, known as the Asher Yatzar. The word choice is peculiar, odd, and actually fun to say (and this is just a selection of it). But this is how all the prayers and Psalms go, just about, except for the acrostics (which ususally employ a different technique sometimes).

Just as when a poet in English will use a special dictionary to select special words to rhyme his words just right, the Jewish authors chose words that would keep this cadence in place. Why? Because the Hebrew text is not read like English text is. It is chanted.

If you go here, you will note not only vowel signs but also what are called cantillation is found in most Hebrew texts. You probably have never noticed them before because you didn't know the difference these marks and the vowels. But Jews have preserved and passed these down over the centuries. Eventually they developed a system to write it down to help you read and chant the text correctly.

The peculiar wording for Psalm 8 is used to make it bounce with the cadence it has so it can be chanted. It uses terms borrowed from Semitic sister languages and incorporates it into the text. The text isn't talking about vampires or parasites or young men or an orgy of the gods. But it is employing Aramaic at an early stage of liturgical development. People who forget that this text is meant to be sung or chanted and that the writers were looking for words to match music more than accurately reflect narrative theology can get mixed up in trying to reflect their own Western ideas about Bible study.

This term is also found throughout the Hebrew Scriptures for nursing children in general, but remember, these were Jews living in the Persian Era, and Aramaic was taking hold of the Hebrew language. (Ge 21:4; 24:59; 35:8; Ex 2:7 ff) This is because, again, the late date of when most of the Bible was written (not before but after the Babylonian Exile).

The cultural design of the God of the Jews was for the sake of cultural preservation. Preserving Jewish identity was important when this text was written, but the idea of what "God" was was still highly influenced by both a disgust for idol worship and an arrogance and self-superiority in their own ideals that would soon put Judaism at odds with Hellenism in time for the Macabbean Revolt. Only the Greeks were as arrogant as the Jews about their culture, language and religion. They were not writing about a weird deity. Alexender the Great was just on the horizon. Don't buy into the story that this Psalm was composed in some "Golden Age" of a Solomononic Temple than likely never was. YHVH's monotheism was fully established by the time this psalm was written. It was a lot later in time than you are thinking. By the time the Seleucid invasion occurred, the monothestic YHVH was a well-established concept.

20

So Let's Say Bigger Change Happens

by peacefulpete in

if a change in the blood policy happens, who will be more upset, jws or former jws?

i suspect the latter.

when the beard thing went down, jw's seem to immediately embrace it, whereas many former jw's have been brooding about it.. did it take away a pet gripe we had?.

KalebOutWest

That is indeed true, Peacefulpete.

Getting stuck in a particular "holding pattern," always looking back, is what the "pillar of salt" metaphor of Lot's Wife may be likened to. It can be self-destructive as one can end up 'dying' with the past and perishing 'society.'

20

So Let's Say Bigger Change Happens

by peacefulpete in

if a change in the blood policy happens, who will be more upset, jws or former jws?

i suspect the latter.

when the beard thing went down, jw's seem to immediately embrace it, whereas many former jw's have been brooding about it.. did it take away a pet gripe we had?.

KalebOutWest

One cannot help how they might feel over anything that happens anywhere in life. I myself laughed over the beards and slacks, while I heard some felt betrayed. But I have my own reasons which have nothing to do with being a Jehovah's Witness for my reaction. How I felt had to do with being a Jewish man who lives in a world where growing a beard is a norm and I never really think about somebody allowing or not allowing me to do this.

And being a refugee is not necessarily a bad thing or a good thing. It often comes upon people due to circumstances beyond their control. One cannot "stop" or "start" living in a state that is forced upon you.

And it isn't a term to judge others by.

The Watchtower religion is ever-changing because it is supposed to be the "restoration" of "true religion" which, according to their own theology this restoration would only occur in the Last Days during the final generation mentioned by Jesus in his discourse given recorded at Matthew 24. So their existence has painted them into a corner, so to speak. Those closest to them will feel something with any news from them or about them.

Because so much time has passed from the mid-1800s until now, 2024, and the group has drastically and dramatically evolved to deal with the fact that this generation is stretching over 2 centuries, people are seeing a different religion coming and going out. It should be upsetting to some ex-members. It is a horrible lie to see them go on and on.

It lies about life, history, religion, God, culture, belief, disbelief, science, medicine, sex, and itself, just to scratch the surface. So every change is a reminder not only of the ridiculousness of it all but to some people, the changes are personal and might remind them of where they once landed on the spectrum of JW beliefs and promotion. Theat can be a sore spot.

This sort of turmoil pains many who have been leaving the LDS church recently too. While the recent president seems to have put a stop to it, there was about a decade of faithful reporting from the Mormon church on its history and on Joseph Smith's lack of truthfulness behind his claims. It did much damage by decreasing numbers steadily until to pandemic. 2023 saw its first increase ever after that "truth" fiasco.

It's natural to feel in response to news reports, whether they regard the Jehovah's Witnesses or not. It's nothing to be ashamed of.

20

So Let's Say Bigger Change Happens

by peacefulpete in

if a change in the blood policy happens, who will be more upset, jws or former jws?

i suspect the latter.

when the beard thing went down, jw's seem to immediately embrace it, whereas many former jw's have been brooding about it.. did it take away a pet gripe we had?.

KalebOutWest

The religion I knew in the 1980s no longer exists. As I have often told others, if I were a baptized JW who fell into a coma in say 1985 and awoke today, I would be disfellowshipped for my belief and practices since my Watchtower religion would not be acceptable by Witnesses today.

I see the Jehovah's Witnesses as an ad hoc religion. Despite their claim to the contrary, they are founded on the premise that they are the sole modern-day prophet of God for the final days of history, inspired with the knowledge to understand the "true meaning" of Bible prophecy to forewarn of and proclaim the coming battle of Armageddon to the nations.

But as any ad hoc system, since the have been doing this since the 1800s (and it is now 2024), their system is set up for change. Jesus return in 1874 and subsequent destruction of all nations in 1914 left alot to be desired, so much change was ready at hand and quick to be to be thought of by the next generation of prophets to follow up behind in the footsteps of self-proclaimed appointee-of-God Charles Taze Russell. And thus it has always been.

The only true freedom will come to people who disconnect entirely from this ad hoc system and others like it. There will always be a change on the horizon.

The Mormon religion is one of the biggest ad hoc religious systems built upon an "end of the world/prophet" scenario. It is always undergoing change, always. Recently they have attempted to change their name, topple the angel Moroni from his place as their mascot/logo and replace him with Jesus (why wasn't he there in the first place?), and oddly all of this will of course be subject to change when the current prophet dies and the next one takes his place.

When all these current changes, I do, however fear a collapse similar to its sister religion, the Worldwide Church of God that went through similar changes and quickly and just lost over 75% of its membership in about 2 years. Unlike the LDS church, the Watchtower religion is highly apocalyptic like the WCG was. When it became apparent that changes being offered are novelty instead of following through on the end-time promises, like the fellowship of the WCG, followers may see it as pure gaslighting. If not handled right this will create a mass Exodus effect from the JWs instead of greater adherence.

This type of freedom will be different from independence. Independence is when a person realizes and chooses to leave and is capable of being untouched after they have done so.

After a collapse or during one, people leave as exiles. There is freedom, but for a while people are emotional refugees. That is a bit different.

Some of us might still be in that "refugee" situation, where we are affected by where we left. So when we hear news of what happens in the Watchtower world, it can affect us based on our particular situation and loss. But if there is a collapse due to poor leadership, it will be like popping corn without a lid on the top.

When springs have been held down too tightly and you suddenly let them go, they shoot off, some very far away. One needs only talk to those who have gone through what happened with the WCG fell apart.