Jump to content
The World News Media


Bible Speaks

Recommended Posts

  • Member
5 hours ago, ARchiv@L said:

Babylonian Deities.

After the death of Nimrod, the Babylonians reasonably would have been inclined to hold him in high regard as the founder and builder and first king of their city and as the organizer of the original Babylonian Empire.
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200001732#h=9

The Insight book entry continues:

"Tradition has it that Nimrod died a violent death. Since the god Marduk (Merodach) was regarded as the founder of Babylon, it has been suggested by some that Marduk represents the deified Nimrod. However, the opinions of scholars as to the identification of deities with specific humans are quite varied." [Emphasis mine.]

Are traditions, suggestions by some and varied opinions about identifications solid bases to conclude anything?

5 hours ago, ARchiv@L said:

Origin of Gods and Goddesses. 
The striking similarity readily observable when comparing the gods and goddesses of ancient peoples can hardly be attributed to chance. Concerning this, J. Garnier writes: “Not merely Egyptians, Chaldeans, Phoenicians, Greeks and Romans, but also the Hindus, the Buddhists of China and of Thibet, the Goths, Anglo-Saxons, Druids, Mexicans and Peruvians, the Aborigines of Australia, and even the savages of the South Sea Islands, must have all derived their religious ideas from a common source and a common centre. Everywhere we find the most startling coincidences in rites, ceremonies, customs, traditions, and in the names and relations of their respective gods and goddesses.”—The Worship of the Dead, London, 1904, p. 3.
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200001732#h=6

Notice who one of the sources is:

Garnier, Worship of the Dead, 1904, p. 3.png

Do Wilkinson, Rawlinson and others indisputably prove that all civilizations' religious systems have a common origin? I suggest Hislop's book is consulted for references (he does cite these two authors and their works may be viewable online) to see if they do indeed support this conclusion. 

However, regarding the once-popular concept of panbabylonianism (common origin for all religions and cultures), please see 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panbabylonism 

and 

http://members.westnet.com.au/gary-david-thompson/page9e.html

However, this is a sidebar to the subject of whether St. Valentine's Day is any way related to the worship of Nimrod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 9.8k
  • Replies 21
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is a very prudent approach advised by Ann O'Maly, and I would hasten to add that even relatively modern, purely secular scholarship should be treated with caution also. After all, the term "moder

* Valentine’s Day. “St. Valentine’s Day has nothing very saintly to commend it as to its origin.”—The Golden Age, December 25, 1929, page 208. "The romantic nature of Valentine's Day may have de

Posted Images

  • Moderator

*** g92 2/8 p. 32 Valentine Day—Where Did It Come From? ***
Regardless of the true origin of the practice, it is evident that it is rooted in ancient pagan beliefs 

*** g95 2/8 p. 27 A New Name for an Old Orgy ***
In any case, a “saintly” title cannot conceal the unsavory origin of this celebration. Valentine Day is rooted in pagan rituals and is therefore not celebrated by true Christians. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I treat Modern scholars with more caution - after all - money and grants have taken over all sciences. Global corporations have their fingers in all the pies.   (We have had a silent coo-de-dat of the democratic system by global corporations!)

Most of the gods of Babylon received a new name in Greece; most of the gods of the Grecian empire received new names under the Roman dispensation; and they received a make-over when many of them were incorporated into the catholic empire.  I remember studying the Harappa culture (Indus valley - originally in India) after I had gained a good understanding of Sumer and ancient Babylon and I was amazed at the number of similarities! 

If one looks at Babylonian architecture you will also find similarities with early architecture in Greece!  This was not the only part of the civilization that was exported from Babylon.... however, each geological area added their own flavor to the gods.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
12 hours ago, ARchiv@L said:

*** g92 2/8 p. 32 Valentine Day—Where Did It Come From? ***
Regardless of the true origin of the practice, it is evident that it is rooted in ancient pagan beliefs 

If the true origin is uncertain, how can it be 'evident' it's rooted in paganism rather than in romantic legends concocted in Middle Ages England? The article mentions Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase and Fable. The edition available to read online is from c. 1952 (so the Awake's quote referencing Lupercalia doesn't match) and it repeats the apparently mistaken idea about the celebration being connected to Juno.

12 hours ago, ARchiv@L said:

*** g95 2/8 p. 27 A New Name for an Old Orgy ***
In any case, a “saintly” title cannot conceal the unsavory origin of this celebration. Valentine Day is rooted in pagan rituals and is therefore not celebrated by true Christians. 

Again, the information contained in this article amounts to 'maybe its origin is a bit o' this, or a bit o' that.' Too speculative to condemn out-of-hand as a direct replacement for an ancient pagan rite.

Besides,

*** g03 9/22 p. 24 The Piñata—An Ancient Tradition ***
"A main concern is, not what the practice meant hundreds of years ago, but how it is viewed today in your area." 

Why is the Valentine's Day custom not given similar latitude? Shouldn't it be up to every 'true Christian's' conscience as to whether to observe it or not, or to what extent?

11 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:
13 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Well, this is not for the regular amateur, ...

Yes it is rather long and involved - tl;dr for many, I guess. 

In summary, then (and this bears on the whole approach to critically analyzing and using sources):

"Panbabylonism is now regarded as discredited speculation. The Panbabylonists were/are criticised for their:

(1) Disregard for textual evidence.

(2) Excessive speculation (postulates and assumptions) and absence of rigorous evidence.

(3) Abuse of the argument from analogy.

(4) Wide use of secondary sources.

(5) Wide use of antiquated translations.

(6) Use of a preconceived chronology of Babylonian civilization.

(7) Uncritically argued ideas about an alleged Babylonian "Weltanschauung [world view] (i.e., astral philosophy)."

(8) Inability to provide any directly supporting statements contained in texts (i.e., the Panbabylonists could only argue their tenets were implied in widely divergent material).

(9) Overstressing "parallels" and similarities.

(10) Far-fetched interpretations and combinations."

- Gary D. Thompson

(Hislop comes to mind and he is indeed mentioned among the proponents of the panbabylonian mindset further down in the article.)

11 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

I like Queen Esther's approach

St. Valentine wouldn't be spoken about in the Bible because he existed in the 3rd century CE, long after the last book of the Bible was written. And the celebration of e.g. wedding anniversaries, baby showers, baptism gifts, and end-of-the-pioneer-year parties aren't mentioned in the Bible either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I would just like to add:  If one studies the bible and interesting idea comes to the fore.  God did NOT want them to build cities so early after the flood - he told them to spread out!

Nimrod was in opposition to Jehovah because he not only lead them to built 'many cities' in Babylon and Assyria (as indicated in genesis)  but started an empire.  Originally he hunted lions to keep people safe but became a leader and then became very powerful. In ancient Babylonian culture as well as the Assyrian culture, kings regularly hunted lions to prove their power as king.  Look at some of the Assyrian reliefs in the London Museum of antiquities.....(they are online). Later on ... they used to breed lions for the king to hunt. The word " Nimr " also has connections to the tiger. 

Why was it wrong to build cities which we today call "civilization?"     It immediately divides peoples into a class system.  A ruler with his religious leaders to back him up (as in ancient Babylon) with the  religious order controlling many sectors of the economy such as grain storage etc. These religious leaders then built an entire system of worship around a person or persons.... and they controlled the wealth.  In my studies of ancient Babylon I soon realized that the zodiac was paramount in their religious system and superstition and spells were the order of the day.  They studied every movement of the stars and planets and their mathematical calculations were extremely advanced so that they could use it for predictions - for the king.  When to go to war -when to make alliances etc.   

Within cities one also immediately gets diversification of permanent jobs...   The potter makes pottery (mass production); the cotton producer dies his material in massive urine dams.....   This not only leads to rich and poor but also brings dirt and disease in cities.  Hogs used to roam in Babylon's streets to clean up rubbish.   Massive food cultivation leads to depletion of the ground. 

Today Babylon is arid because of the salt in the ground due to over irrigation by the irrigation channels.  They built a network of irrigation channels to cultivate crops.   Yes - and you get slaves - because the king needs people to do the hard labor of building water channels  and palaces etc.  And what about the building of walls for protection because more wealth brings greater chance of being attacked!   It seems to be a vicious circle!

 Jehovah called Abraham out of a 'city' where the moon god was prevalent as the chief deity.  City-states became the norm everywhere and many of these made war against each other.  Soon after Abraham left Ur - Ur was attacked and had major destruction! 

Abraham trusted in Jehovah and had protection from him.  He also came out from the pantheon of Gods that were everywhere!  Babylon was famous for its shrines just like Rome had shrines everywhere to its gods.  Abraham looked forward to the 'city' of Jehovah (many city states had a king-priest because religion and the king were closely bound together.)

I love reading about agriculture and have read that small, diversified farms are the best way to farm.  Diversity of animals and diversity of crops....  I think we will do this in the new system.   Hi rise cities may become something of the past!

Yes, Babylon was responsible for many of the false teachings and most civilizations still adhere to many of its teachings in our modern era.  Fortunately - we only have to adhere to the bible to serve Jehovah well.  And while it is interesting to know where these things come from (1 Co 8:1 "now concerning food offered to idols....... knowledge puffs up.")  Knowledge of false religion is not the most important aspect of our worship to Jehovah. 

Like good English - one does not learn bad English to know what is good - one learns good English and then one can discard bad English when it is spoken. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

@Ann O'Maly  All things, which really importend for us, we can read in the Bible :)  And many others things, which coming later to us, for these we've to use our conscience ! 

And now lets stop the 'never ending' discuss under the post a photo category !  We've special area's for that, Thank you very much. Agape

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Queen Esther, the thread title was put in the form of a question, thereby inviting comment. The 'photo' in the OP was actually an infographic with accompanying remarks. Again, this invites discussion.

Sometimes we simply are unaware that a view is mistaken. I'm sure all of us wouldn't want to intentionally spread "false stories" but rather do our best to be accurate and truthful in what we present for the edification of 'brothers and sisters in the faith.' Agape :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 2/16/2017 at 11:07 AM, Ann O'Maly said:

St. Valentine wouldn't be spoken about in the Bible because he existed in the 3rd century CE, long after the last book of the Bible was written. And the celebration of e.g. wedding anniversaries, baby showers, baptism gifts, and end-of-the-pioneer-year parties aren't mentioned in the Bible either.

Thats why I like @Queen Esther's approach. What matters is contained in Scripture. (2 Tim 3:16). We are then equipped to deal with questions that relate specifically to our times, excercising conscience. I won't always feel the same way as Queen Esther or others do about trivial matters such as those you list, but we will be agreed on what Paul says are "the more important things". Ph.1:10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

We are then equipped to deal with questions that relate specifically to our times, excercising conscience

I have no interest in Valentine's Day, but I understand the appeal, especially for young ones, to have an excuse to express an amorous feeling verbally in a kind of teasing way that won't get them into trouble (because the holiday is designed to create an approved way to do this without the typical issues that young ones would deal with trying to navigate social norms). But the very fact that such a day was named after a "saint" that I knew nothing about was enough for me to avoid it and disapprove of it for my children. I can't say I ever cared to learn about the true history of the holiday, but it wouldn't surprise me that many things that might have some small value to some people are based on practices that we would and should find disgusting today.

I often hear that we make it difficult to our children to get along in school by taking away so many things that others find "innocent." To me, however, taking a stand against something is a good and healthy thing, as long as we can explain our reasons correctly. (1 Peter 3:15)

That said, I am very glad that someone (Ann, in this case) actually answered the question with relevant research. The question implies that Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Valentine's Day is related to Nimrod, and this should be quite embarrassing to many Jehovah's Witnesses, if they don't know anything about the basis for the claim.

The Bible doesn't say anything about Nimrod being related to any one of the gods mentioned in the OP. None of that is Biblical and therefore 2 Tim 3:16 doesn't apply directly.

What if the topic had been:

Was Santa Claus and the Babylonian God of Pedophiles the same god worshiped?

The Bible does not say anything about a Babylonian God of Pedophiles, of course, but neither does it say anything about Nimrod being worshiped. But if we became known as a group of supposed "Bible students" or "Bible researchers" and we went around talking about the "God of Pedophiles" then we should rightly be ridiculed for sloppy research. It turns out there also is no research that ties Nimrod to any of these claims we have made for him, either. 

Now if the discussion had turned toward false or improper practices and the ease with which religion absorbs these things for syncretic or ecumenical purposes, or the relationship of worldly attitudes in religion as a form of Satan's influence, then this could still be a useful and reasonable discussion of how such things from old still related to our times and our conscience. 

The fact that the Watch Tower publications stopped making such claims years ago, is a hint that we should probably be more careful ourselves. 

Just a quick follow-up quote from the Watchtower:

*** w84 9/1 p. 20 Would You Spread a Rumor? ***
DURING the Middle Ages an incredible rumor spread among the so-called Christians of Europe. It was whispered that each year at Passover, the Jews murdered a Christian and used his blood in their rituals. Sometimes they were said to capture Christian children and torture them horribly before killing them and using their blood. Right up until this century, during the Nazi period in Germany, this rumor was used as an excuse to persecute the Jews.
The story was investigated and disproved several times, yet it persisted for almost a thousand years. If someone had told it to you, would you have shared in spreading it? Hopefully, all of us would have had enough common sense or compassion not to do so. Yet rumors are persistent and complex things. Once started, they are difficult to stop. Even today, absurd rumors spring up and spread like wildfire.
For example, Procter & Gamble, a large firm supplying household products in the United States, was recently victimized by a rumor that it promoted Satanism and that its trademark was really a demon symbol. Another widespread rumor had it that a well-known chain of fast-food stores was putting worms in its hamburgers! Some years ago it was widely believed that a member of the singing group the Beatles had died in an auto accident and had been replaced by a double. Even the Watchtower Society’s publications have been the subject of rumors—for example, that one of the artists had secretly been introducing pictures of demons into the illustrations, was subsequently found out and disfellowshiped!
Did you share in spreading any such stories? If so, you were—perhaps unwittingly—spreading an untruth, since they were all false.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,670
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Apolos2000
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.