Jump to content

JOHN BUTLER

All scripture is inspired of God. A small prophecy ?

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

JOHN BUTLER -
Outta Here -
21
300

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

"All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,"

2 Timothy 3 v 16

Was this in it's way a small prophecy ?                 

The 2nd book of Timothy was written 65 C.E.  However 1,2,3, John and Revelation were written much later.

So we have two points, 1. The writings were not complete when Paul wrote that information. 2, The Bible had not been constructed so no idea would have been formed as to what the Bible would contain. 

Were there other writings ? Would they be considered as Scripture? 

It seems that Paul was inspired to write that "All scripture is inspired.... " 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JOHN BUTLER First/Second Epistle of Paul to Timothy also known as The First/Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Timothy

    • Hello guest!
    • Hello guest!

Yes all text is inspired, but at the same time it is also best to know who wrote what and when.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stand corrected, thank you. But the rest of the comment still stands. When Paul wrote those words he didn't know about the other scriptures to follow. Nor did he know about a 'Bible' being formed. 

I have now corrected the first comment. I should think more deeply before i write :( 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

When Paul wrote those words he didn't know about the other scriptures to follow. Nor did he know about a 'Bible' being formed

Opinion surely? We can't really state what Paul knew or didn't know on these matters, surely? He must have had some idea that there was a difference between "inspired" and non-inspired religious writings from his experience with the Hebrew Scriptures.

Probably you have a point that isn't coming across clearly to me here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Gone Away said:

Opinion surely? We can't really state what Paul knew or didn't know on these matters, surely? He must have had some idea that there was a difference between "inspired" and non-inspired religious writings from his experience with the Hebrew Scriptures.

Probably you have a point that isn't coming across clearly to me here.

Well when i first started studying with the JW Org this scripture was used quite regularly. But I just accepted it as saying that the complete Bible was inspired of God. It is of course, but it never occured to me at the time that 'all scripture' had not been written when Paul made that statement. In my opinion, when many people study God's word with the JW's it's a bit parrot fashion, stick to the book. People don't seem to ask questions. I became of this opinion from the Book Study we used to have on a Tuesday evening at people's home. After the study people would stay for tea and biscuits, and there would be conversation. Most of the conversation was spiritual and I would ask people questions of their understanding of certain scriptures. It became clear to me that most JW's never questioned anything. They just took it for granted that the GB and the Org new everything and got everything right. It was from that time that I started to look deeper into God's word. Unfortunately at 69 years old, much of what I had learnt has gone. My mind / memory has deteriorated.  But there are a few things which i still find interesting, and this is one of them. How many JW's ever think of the fact that Paul wrote that information before the other scriptures were written and long before a Bible was composed ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Was this in it's way a small prophecy ?

Paul knew that Timothy was already well acquainted with the inspired Scriptures. So the reference would have been to the Hebrew Scriptures only at this time. This does not mean that Paul didn't recognize the status of at least some of his own letters or some parts of his own letters as "inspired." But it isn't likely Paul was referring to his own letters at this time, just the "Old Testament." Another question is whether Paul would have been thinking of the same set of books that we think of today. Some Jews and therefore some Jewish Christians might not have agreed on which books could be considered inspired (or partially inspired). I say partially, because some books had portions that included stories that were not considered inspired even if the primary portion of the book was considered inspired. (Daniel, Bel and the Dragon, Susannah and the Elders, etc., just as the book of John had a story about the near stoning of a woman caught in adultery, or Mark with both a short and long conclusion.

18 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

However 1,2,3, John and Revelation were written much later.

It's merely a tradition that tells us that the writer of 1,2,3 John and Revelation were the same person. Based on the language and grammar, it seems unlikely to many scholars that it was the same John who wrote Revelation. (The gospel of John was  apparently written by the same person who wrote 1,2, &3 John.) Also, there is some good external and some internal evidence and tradition that Revelation was written close to 96-100 CE. But there have also been some excellent scholarly books pointing to the possibility that Revelation could have been written prior to 70 CE. (Prior to Jerusalem's destruction by the Romans.)

For that matter, there is considerable speculation among scholars that the letters to Titus and Timothy were developed, more likely between 100 CE and 150 CE. This does not mean that they were not "Pauline," but to some scholars they appear to be attempts to turn Paul's counsel into a set of semi-legalistic rules. They are more akin, stylewise, to the style and content one would find in the books of 1 Clement, Ignatius or Polycarp. (Some of the writings and letters by the latter could well have been written prior to 1 & 2 Timothy.) If they are Paul's own direct words, many scholars find some of them at odds with the "spirit" of Paul's words in Thessalonians, Philippians, Romans and Corinthians.

Books of Enoch, Jannes and Jambres, The Assumption of Moses, 12 Patriarchs, Epistle of Barnabas, etc., were clearly very popular in some Christian circles likely going all the way back to the first century CE. There were also several gospel accounts that the writer of Luke hoped to replace with the gospel of Luke. This could have been one of the reasons that 1 John 4:1 asks Christians to "test the inspired utterances."

Of course, Christians much closer to the time when these books were first known were in a better position to test which of them had real apostolic authority and which came from the actual time period of the apostles. Also, when scholars look at supposed contradictions and assume a late authorship they are often taking the easy way out. Some portions of the Bible were clearly intended so that we would look at things from two different perspectives. The variations in the gospel accounts do not cause any doctrinal problems but they show different perspectives. The difference in James' statement that 'a person is declared righteous by works and not by faith alone,' while Paul says that 'a person is declared righteous by faith and not by works' is clearly intentional. These perspectives actually help us to 'make sure of all things.'

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Another question is whether Paul would have been thinking of the same set of books that we think of today.

What part would the gift of "discerning the spirits" (as some translate 1Cor.12:10) have had in Paul's evaluating the spiritual credentials of religious writings available at the time? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JW Insider So where is one supposed to start ? If you are saying that the Bible might not be the book it should be. 

You make the plot thicken very much. For simple men such as i who cannot comprehend so much information, is there no hope ? 

SM talks so much about Strongs. Should we need to dig so deeply to find the truth ?  Some of the disciples / apostles were fishermen, maybe not of the highest intelligence ? No insult intended but what I'm saying is they were inspired by God through Christ so they had divine guidance. What should i have ? I don't expect divine guidance, or should I ?  Jesus was talking to 'chosen ones' when he said 'ask and it will be given to you'. Hence i believe that only a true  anointed class can fully understand the truth of God's word.  

You seem to say that so many different scholars had so many different opinions. And then we have the GB that at times admit they 'get it wrong'.  So who really can we believe ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

SM talks so much about Strongs. Should we need to dig so deeply to find the truth ?

Yes indeed, I do speak of Strong's. It is not unknown to anyone of what is implied when the Strong's are brought up, mainly when it comes to a correction of occurrences, the normal ones or the special ones. For instance, as per our last discussion regarding nakedness or an ambassador, the Strong's tell you which verses/passages uses the word, and what the meaning of that word used there entails, moreover it triumphs any understand of man in the process. Furthermore, it can be used to I.D. a Biblical Violation in Hebrew/Greek easily.

4 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

What should i have ? I don't expect divine guidance, or should I ? 

You have the Word of God in your hands. Read it daily. Research it. Observe it. Recite it. And then some. Learn of the teachings of the apostolic church Jesus built and then maybe you can learn something.

If a child can do it, in fact, if Jesus as a child can obverse and read the Shema Yisrael, the Old Testament, so can you.

In doing so you become knowledgeable, can memorized and recite a verse and or passage, the very context of it orally from memory even like remembering a part from a movie.

It is not burdensome unless you make it. This goes hand in hand with following the commandments and what is being asked of you, as a Christian under the New Covenant.

It does not hurt to learn a little Greek and or Hebrew, if I can recommend someone, I recommend Hebrew Professor Jeff A. Benner, with his information give it a few months, you will know quite a bit of Hebrew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Outta Here said:

What part would the gift of "discerning the spirits" (as some translate 1Cor.12:10) have had in Paul's evaluating the spiritual credentials of religious writings available at the time?

Yes. Excellent point. I believe it has everything to do with it, and I believe that Paul was well aware of the responsibility and understood very uniquely from his own situation why such a spiritual gift was so important. After all, he was not one who had heard Jesus speak personally during Jesus' earthly life, and Paul at times, had to rebuke the very apostles who had such influence on others. The idea, I think, is even carried in the verse in the context of the idea of making sure of the more important things:

  • (Philippians 1:9-10) 9 And this is what I continue praying, that your love may abound still more and more with accurate knowledge and full discernment; 10 that you may make sure of the more important things, so that you may be flawless and not stumbling others up to the day of Christ;

Of course, Paul also made good and purposeful use of extra-Scriptural references which also were "useful for setting things straight and disciplining in righteousness," but in order for future congregations to be built especially upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Paul knew that, not just the Hebrew Scriptures, but also the authority of the apostles would become both the doctrinal and practical foundation of the congregations. He had to set things straight even among the other apostles, and the apostles were able to give Paul counsel, too. (Gal 2:10)

Fortunately, we don't need now to question anything that comes through the authority of the apostles. But we still need to follow the same principle of discernment that Paul used when questioning and accepting doctrine.

  • (Hebrews 5:12-14) 12 For although by now you should be teachers, you again need someone to teach you from the beginning the elementary things of the sacred pronouncements of God, and you have gone back to needing milk, not solid food. 13 For everyone who continues to feed on milk is unacquainted with the word of righteousness, for he is a young child. 14 But solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their powers of discernment trained to distinguish both right and wrong.

Today, of course, we also need to be reliant upon good scholarship to avoid acceptance of certain statements that do not have "foundational" apostolic authority and yet have crept into our Bible texts. It's a modern form of the same spiritual gift of accurate knowledge (and full discernment.) 1 John 5:7.8 is the best example, The New World Translation committee has accurately removed the non-authoritative parts of 1 John 5:7,8, but there are dozens of full verses removed in lesser-known examples found in some of the older texts (not usually the oldest texts) and found not to be as reliable, based on "textual criticism." Some of these omissions seem innocuous, but they are still without sufficient apostolic authority to keep in the context with the authoritative verses.

By calling our Christian Greek Scriptures "apostolic", we acknowledge that some were not written directly by apostles, because most of the apostles were evidently unlettered (illiterate) and required second-hand "secretaries" to record their first-hand experiences and memories. Writings by non-apostles were accepted on the basis that they were understood to have come from those with a direct relationship to the apostles, and who lived at the time of the apostles. The significance given to this idea comes through the statement from Paul that the number of eyewitnesses to Jesus resurrection was known.

  • (Luke 1:1, 2) 1 Whereas many have undertaken to compile a statement of the facts that are given full credence among us, 2 just as those who from [the] beginning became eyewitnesses and attendants of the message delivered these to us,
  • (2 Peter 1:16) 16 No, it was not by following artfully contrived false stories that we acquainted YOU with the power and presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, but it was by having become eyewitnesses of his magnificence.

    (Acts 1:21-23) . . .It is therefore necessary that of the men who accompanied us during all the time in which the Lord Jesus carried on his activities among us, 22 starting with his baptism by John until the day he was taken up from us, one of these men should become a witness with us of his resurrection.” 23 So they proposed two, Joseph called Barʹsab·bas, who was also called Justus, and Mat·thiʹas.

    (1 Corinthians 15:5-7) . . .and that he appeared to Ceʹphas, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that he appeared to more than 500 brothers at one time, most of whom are still with us, though some have fallen asleep in death. 7 After that he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.

     

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

 So where is one supposed to start ? If you are saying that the Bible might not be the book it should be. 

The Bible is the perfect book it should be. But we should discern the spirit of the Christian message and not be distracted with so many lower-priority details that we miss the forest for the trees. As brought up in the post to @Outta Here we need to be alert to what we are being taught. If we understand the "spirit" of the message and the "priorities" we will not be quickly shaken from our reason in believing a message has apostolic authority when it really was just some speculation over less important details:

  • (2 Thessalonians 2:1, 2) . . .we request of YOU 2 not to be quickly shaken from YOUR reason nor to be excited either through an inspired expression or through a verbal message or through a letter as though from us. . .

I think most of us would agree that the idea of priority of the objective has been perfectly met in the Bible, and is perfectly encapsulated in 1 Timothy:

  • (1 Timothy 1:5-7) . . .Really, the objective of this instruction is love out of a clean heart and out of a good conscience and out of faith without hypocrisy. 6 By deviating from these things, some have been turned aside to meaningless talk. 7 They want to be teachers of law, but they do not understand either the things they are saying or the things they insist on so strongly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

most of the apostles were evidently unlettered (illiterate) and required second-hand "secretaries" to record their first-hand experiences and memories.

The only portion of your excellent post that I would take issue with due to the possibility of an ambiguity.

The reference is to Acts 4:13 where this description of the apostles Peter and John appears: "unlettered and ordinary". The use of the word agrammatoi could be understood as "illiterate" in respect of it's literal meaning  of being "without letters". But this would only be done  by someone figuratively so. To take such a line of reasoning, in the face of scholarship on the application of this word to the apostles, would be as reasonable  as applying a similar "rule" to the use of the word idiotai, (rendered ordinary), which appears in the same verse. Then we could render Luke's description of the religionists' view of Peter and John as being "illiterate idiots".

Now, this might fit the religious leaders'general perception of those outside their social circle as being "accursed", eparatos,  (am haarets elsewhere). But it has long been held that the phrase has reference to those who are "unlettered"  in the sense of not having had formal religious training in a Rabbinic school of the day. The sense of the other word rendered as "ordinary" should be understood as one not having had the level of formal professional training necessary to become a State official of the day. So in more modern mode, their words, their speech and demeanor did not reflect them to be public school (UK version) educated, university graduates with degrees in theology and social policy.  The description could apply to most of us today, but, as then,  in no way would it be a relevant assessment either of our literacy, or IQ.

Interestingly, many "highly placed, public school (UK version) educated, university graduates with degrees in theology and social policy" also require "second-hand "secretaries" to record their first-hand experiences and memories", and indeed, much else of what they produce.  ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Outta Here said:

The reference is to Acts 4:13 where this description of the apostles Peter and John appears: "unlettered and ordinary". The use of the word agrammatoi could be understood as "illiterate" in respect of it's literal meaning  of being "without letters".

True. Also, it was an accusation from outsiders and therefore not necessarily an accurate reflection. But there is also the fact that it is not rebutted in Acts, and it fits what Jesus said about revealing truths not to the wise and intellectual. 

  • (Matthew 11:25) . . .At that time Jesus said in response: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to young children."

Paul recognized the same point, and even spurned his own educational training as worthless.

We can also combine this with the fact that of the original 12 apostles, only two of them, Matthew and John, were ever credited with writing a gospel account. But even this is based on later traditions. Nowhere, in any of the gospels do we even see the names of the writers, whether Matthew, Mark, Luke or John. There was an early tradition that Matthew had written a gospel and that it was originally in Hebrew (Aramaic), but this gospel could not have been the one we now call Matthew. There was also a well-known gospel called the "Gospel of Peter" that probably originated in the second century, but might have even been written in the first century while the apostles were still alive. In spite of the name, it was not taken seriously after the second century, and the "Gospel of Mark" was seen as Peter's gospel through a "second" hand.

4 hours ago, Outta Here said:

But it has long been held that the phrase has reference to those who are "unlettered"  in the sense of not having had formal religious training in a Rabbinic school of the day.

Yes. The Watchtower has referenced this view.

*** w09 7/1 p. 4 1. Ask the Author for Help ***

  • Jesus’ apostles were considered “unlettered and ordinary” because they had not attended rabbinic schools for religious training. (Acts 4:13) Nevertheless, Jesus assured them that understanding God’s Word was within their reach.

Although the very next year, the Watchtower moved back to the idea of illiteracy in language education.

*** w10 10/1 p. 30 Speaking in Tongues—Is It From God? ***

  • Spreading the good news to that extent would require the use of many tongues other than Hebrew.  However, many of those early disciples were “unlettered and ordinary.” (Acts 4:13) How, then, would they be able to preach in distant lands where languages were spoken that they may never have heard of, let alone learned to speak? Holy spirit empowered some of those zealous preachers with the miraculous ability to preach fluently in languages they had never before learned to speak.

I have read the view that many Judeans of this time and even many more Galileans and Samaritans never learned Greek, but knew and spoke only their form of Aramaic (sometimes called "Hebrew" as in the above quote from the 2010 Watchtower). Being unlettered (illiterate) in the sense of not knowing how to read and write in your language even if you spoke it fluently, is considered an insult to one's intelligence in most societies today. But illiteracy was very common in the first century, and no one expected anyone to be able to read and write except a certain level of soldier required to send reports, certain types of merchants, and the rabbis who would need to learn to read for the synagogue services. Not even the average tax collector needed to know how to read and write, even though we now tend to think of some kind of accountant/scribe.

Because we anachronistically consider it to be such an insult, we think we are coming to the defense of the apostles by saying that this was only referring to a special level of illiteracy and a technical meaning of "ordinary."  We forget that "rabbinical schools for religious training" were precisely where persons learned to read and write. This is why even the persons we would today call civil lawyers came out of this same class of education (Pharisees, scribes). Josephus, for example, rose in military rank in Galilee due to his rabbinic training, i.e., literacy. After his capture by the Romans, he maneuvered quickly into Roman acceptance due in large part to literacy.  

I'm glad you pointed out one of the meanings of idiotai, as it would be easy for English readers to only see the insulting cognate when the original term did not have the meaning "idiot."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

How many JW's ever think of the fact that Paul wrote that information before the other scriptures were written and long before a Bible was composed ? 

Further to all the earlier postings and your original point. 

Yes, I can see what you mean. In the context of Paul's words having been written prior to John's writings, and to the consensus on what constituted the canon of the Christian Greek Scriptures, then, yes, Paul's statement might be viewed as a mini-prophecy as you state.

However, it is entirely unlikely that Paul meant specifically that his words should be understood that way. Rather, the purpose of his writing  was to instruct Timothy in what should form the basis for his own faith and that which he would teach to others, namely "the holy writings", or "All Scripture", as opposed to the ear-tickling teachings he refers to at 2 Tim.4:3.

He may well have had in mind at this time the coming conclusions to be made regarding his own writings, as well as the other completed letters and gospels, especially in view of the spiritual gifts he undoubtedly enjoyed. Also, as the book of Revelation confirms, further written communication is to be expected from Jehovah, so it seems unlikely that Paul felt the "All" was done in his day. In fact more likely that what was to be termed "All" would be expanded.

There is prudence in terming the holy writings as "All Scripture". If he had said the "Jewish Scriptures", or some other time-rooted descriptor, then there would have been room for dispute over what constituted those writings, perhaps falling into the hands of the Judaizers, or some other apostatisers and their time-wasting definition debates. This is, however a hindsight observation of practicality of expression, not unlike the embedded wisdom we can now see in the injunction to "cleanse ourselves of every defilement of flesh and spirit", which circumvents the need for listing every possible combination of the same.  ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Outta Here said:

There is prudence in terming the holy writings as "All Scripture". If he had said the "Jewish Scriptures", or some other time-rooted descriptor, then there would have been room for dispute over what constituted those writings, perhaps falling into the hands of the Judaizers

Good points, especially from our current vantage point in time. On the latter point in the above quote, Paul could be said to have dealt with that issue, by the admission that Scripture was "Jewish Scripture" in the following verse:

  • (Romans 3:1, 2) . . .What, then, is the advantage of the Jew, or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2 A great deal in every way. First of all, that they were entrusted with the sacred pronouncements of God.

Yet the immediate context, plus the entire book as further context, provides the explanation against misuse of this statement by Judaizers:

  • (Romans 2:29) . . .But he is a Jew who is one on the inside, and his circumcision is that of the heart by spirit and not by a written code. . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

But illiteracy was very common in the first century,

Somebody blogged a few points on this which I found quite thought-provoking. "

 "...the Bible expected the common people to be able to read and write. For example, when Moses led Israel out of Egypt, they were told to write the laws upon their door posts (

    Hello guest!
; 
    Hello guest!
). Isaiah predicted that Nebuchadnezzar would destroy the land to such a degree that a child could write the number of the trees left standing (Isaiah 10:19). This Scripture would make no sense at all unless children were customarily educated by either their parents (implying family literacy) or through an organized school presumably conducted through the Levitical ministry.

Concerning the 1st century, one of the favorite sayings of Jesus in rebuttal to his accusers was: “Have you not read…” This not only implied literacy to his opponents, but also to himself and to his apostles whom he taught, for why would he use the phrase against his accusers, if they could turn around and cast his own words in his teeth to point out the illiteracy of his followers?

Jesus’ parable of the unjust steward (

    Hello guest!
) also implies literacy in the normal course of business in the Jewish society. This is also borne out in some archeological finds dating to the 12th century BC where Israelite inscriptions are found on pottery and artifacts showing literacy was not exclusive to the elite. Moreover, just before the Jewish revolt, the high priest Joshua ben Gamala (cir. 64 AD) declared that teachers would be appointed in every town of every province throughout Palestine. Their purpose was to provide an education for every male of the age of six or seven and upward. One teacher would serve a community of up to 25 students. A teacher’s assistant would be added for communities having up to 50 students and for communities having more than 50 students two teachers would be provided.

All of our modern opinions, scholarly or otherwise, concerning the low literacy rate of the Jews of the 1st century AD, are based upon subjective guesswork. There is not an ounce of hard evidence to support their conclusions."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent research. We have long used the "inculcate them in your sons" phrase to teach that literacy was high among the Jewish population. This would have been the ideal if everyone followed the Law. But there are as many pieces of opposing "evidence." And I agree that there is no hard evidence on either side.

2 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Concerning the 1st century, one of the favorite sayings of Jesus in rebuttal to his accusers was: “Have you not read…” This not only implied literacy to his opponents

Expressions like, "have you not read?" are actually found very rarely in the Bible. And if you note the context, it's always with reference to Pharisees and Sadducees which fits the previous points made.  To more common people, such as those who heard Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, the expression, even when quoting written scripture, is: "You heard that it was said. . ." It's found six times in the Sermon on the Mount alone. There are no examples of Jesus mentioning "reading" except when chief priests, scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees were the focus of attention. (Even Jesus' question about "Whose inscription was on the coin?", by the way, was directed at Pharisees.) So the same point made by the blogger could be taken as evidence against the literacy of the common man.

2 hours ago, Outta Here said:

why would he use the phrase against his accusers, if they could turn around and cast his own words in his teeth to point out the illiteracy of his followers?

But apparently they did!

Certain kinds of merchants, including house stewards who were the ones required to trade with merchants for foodstuffs and household supplies, might require a knowledge of money and writing. That is acknowledged. (Luke 16:6-7) And Joshua ben Gamala's potential reforms, as a chief priest married to a wealthy woman from the priestly Boethos family, were precisely because education --even of 16 and 17 year olds-- had been an exclusive privilege of the rich. The very fact that he hoped for a change in this regard could be used as more evidence of common illiteracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JW Insider "Although the very next year, the Watchtower moved back to the idea of illiteracy in language education."

Though still using the same scripture ?

You're not suggesting that the GB twisted scripture one way then the other are you ? Just for their own purpose 

'Moved back to' seems to mean that they first used a scripture one way, then another way, then back to the first way.  Wow how reliable is that folks ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • By jpl
      Culte matinal de Février 2019
      "Avant le désastre il y a l'orgueil"
      Fev 2019 Avant desastre il y a orgueil.pdf
    • By Bible Speaks
      Would You Walk on this Iceberg?
      Amazing Photo! Amazing God! 
      “Jehovah answered Job out of the windstorm:  2 “Who is this who is obscuring my counsel
      And speaking without knowledge?  3 Brace yourself, please, like a man;
      I will question you, and you inform me.  4 Where were you when I founded the earth?
      Tell me, if you think you understand.  5 Who set its measurements, in case you know,
      Or who stretched a measuring line across it?  6 Into what were its pedestals sunk,
      Or who laid its cornerstone,  7 When the morning stars joyfully cried out together,
      And all the sons of God began shouting in applause?
      22 Have you entered the storehouses of the snow,
      Or have you seen the storehouses of the hail,
      23 Which I have reserved for the time of distress,
      For the day of battle and war?"
      (Job 38:1-7, 22-23). 
      JW.Org
      #Repost @ladzinski
      ・・・
      Being stuck out at sea among the icebergs and sea ice can make you pretty restless and uneasy. Last July on an expedition in south east greenland we spent 6 days marooned in an ice flow at the mercy of the elements. @mikelibecki and @ethan_pringle seen here getting in a little exercise, jumping ship to climb this #iceberg. My favorite thing about this photograph is that this was Ethan’s first time ever wearing crampons and ice climbing, a very unlikely place for a lesson! @andy_mann @connor_seybert @3stringsproductions @mountainhardwear @dell @djigloba

    • By jpl
      Discours Assemblée Annuelle 2018 
      Etes-vous Prêt ? (réalisé à partir des sous-titre en français)
      Discours Assemblée Générale 2018 Etes vous pret.pdf
    • By jpl
      Transcription du culte matinal de Février 2019 :"Imitons Jésus"
      Fev 2019 Imitons Jesus.pdf
    • By jpl
      Voici une compilation des suggestions de conversation pour 2018 et 2019 (Janvier à Mai 2019)
       
      Suggestions de conversations_5_2019.pdf
      Suggestions de conversations_12_2018.pdf
    • By jpl
      Voici deux transcriptions de vidéos de décembre 2019
      Survivons au grand jour de Dieu Janv 2018.pdf
      Janv 2019 C_est ici Le Chemin.pdf
    • By jpl
      Voici la vidéo "Dieu accepte-t-il toutes les religions ?" en 10 langues.
      Il faut utiliser VLC pour la visualiser et utiliser l'option Audio pour sélectionner  la langue (Anglais, Arabe ……). Par défaut c'est le français qui est actif.
      Bonne utilisation dans le service pour Jéhovah. 
      Toutes Religions Bonnes 3,55 min (10).mkv
    • By jpl
      Bonjour à tous, qui connait cette application Floating Bible (pour android) ?
      Personnellement je trouve l'accès à la bible très rapide on y trouve aussi les cantiques en mode texte ainsi que le texte du jour. Il s'agit d'une application autonome.
      A l'écoute de vos avis….
      JPL
    • By indagator
      Yesterday the final (4th) installment of the 2018 volume of Journal of Biblical Literature was published. Among the articles in it is a new manuscript of the Gospel of John, dating to the third to fourth centuries. The manuscript is scrappy, as these things often are, a few verses from the end of chapter 1 and the beginning of chapter 2. On the back is a fragment of an unknown early Christian text. An rare instance of the word "God" in Greek, not in nomen sacrum form, but fully written out is one of the interesting findings in it.
      For those interested in reading the article, here it is.
       
       
      Willoughby John-JBL 2018.4.pdf
    • By Bible Speaks
      How did you learn the Truth? 
      I was raised in the Truth. ?

    • By salomon
      C'est moi le Potier dit Jéhovah Dieu 
      Tu es mon vase d'argile ! C'est moi qui t'ai modelé, façonné, 
      Une merveille au creux de ma main. 
      Tu n’es pas encore achevé, tu es en train de prendre la "forme" de mon Fils. 
      Voici que tu te désoles et que tu désespères 
      Parce que tu as pris quelques fêlures au contact des autres. 
      Tu t'es heurté, tu as été ébréché 
      Tu as même pu tomber par terre, te briser et tomber en mille morceaux 
      Fêlures, éraflures, lézardes, brisures, cassures, ratures... 
      N'oublie pas, c'est ta condition de vase. 
      Si je t'avais rangé dans un placard à vaisselle 
      Tu ne connaîtrais pas ces heurts de la vie 
      Mais tu ne servirais à rien ni à personne, tu serais un vase inutile ! 
      Moi, dit Dieu, j'aime les vieux vases, un peu usés, un peu ébréchés. 
      Ils ont toute une histoire, et toi, tu voudrais être lisse comme un nouveau-né ? 
      Je te connais, ô toi que j'ai façonné, pétri avec tant d'amour 
      Je ne voudrais pas que tu te désoles de tes ratées 
      Tu es fait de boue et de lumière, tu es fait pour servir ! 
      A ne regarder que tes failles, tes faiblesses et tes chutes 
      Tu te centres encore trop sur toi-même 
      Et tu restes prisonnier de tes failles ! 
      C'est moi le Potier et je m'y connais dans l'art de reprendre un vase. Laisse-toi faire ! 
      Avec mes doigts d’artiste, j'arrive toujours à rendre plus beau ce qui n'était que fêlure, brisure, cassure. 
      Je suis l’Esprit Créateur, ne l'oublie pas. Je crée ! Je mets la vie ! Je donne le souffle ! 
      Je suis le Potier ! C'est moi qui moule, qui pétris, qui donne la "forme" 
      Toi, mon vase d'argile, Viens te glisser au creux de mes mains paternelles et maternelles 
      Laisse-toi pétrir entre mes doigts d'artiste. 
      Abandonne-toi longuement à mon travail de potier. 
      Expose-moi tes fêlures, tes brisures, tes cassures ! J'aime faire du neuf, j'aime te regarder 
      Voici que je te réchauffe, ô toi mon argile 
      A force de te pétrir, je te communique ma chaleur, ma sueur, 
      mon souffle, mon intimité, ma chaude tendresse. 
      C'est moi le Potier, viens et n'aie plus peur. 
      Chaque fois que tu retombes dans ces fautes que tu ne voudrais pas commettre 
      Je te dis : Le pardon est là ! 
      Viens et continuons ensemble 
      J’aime te regarder, voir les efforts que tu fais et tout le mal que tu te donnes. 
      J'en éprouve grande joie et tu réjouis mon cœur 
      Je vois combien tu te transformes. 
      A l'abri de tes regards Je te modèle 
      A l'image du Fils bien-Aimé 
      Tout ce que je te demande 
      C'est de venir toujours et à nouveau après chaque chute 
      Entre mes mains pour me donner la joie de te remodeler. 
      Allons, n'aie pas peur       C'est moi le Potier 
    • By Jack Ryan
      (I wonder if Keanu Reeves actually said this or if some meme maker just posted this over his photo?)
    • By Jesus.defender
      Did Jesus really say He was God?
      That’s exactly how Jesus’ original audience seemed to take it when He said, “I and the Father are one.” In fact, the Jews were ready to kill Him right there! Why? “Because you,” they said, “a mere man, claim to be God” (John 10:33).
      On another occasion, He used the personal name of Israel’s God–the name revealed to Moses (Exodus 3:14)–to refer to Himself. And He even used the Torah for context, so no one would misunderstand Him: “Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58). This would be about wild as telling a Muslim, “I am your God, Allah.” Don’t try that in Saudi Arabia! It’s no wonder the Jews tried to stone Him to death. That was the exact penalty for blasphemy under the Jewish legal system. It was pretty clear to everyone there  that He was saying, “I am Israel’s God.”

      Why Jesus is God? The Apostle Thomas called Jesus God.John 20:27-29: 2. The Apostle Peter called Jesus God.2 Peter 1:1: 3.The Apostle John called Jesus God.John 1:1-3, 4.God the Father called Jesus God.Hebrews 1:8: 5. God the Father called Jesus God. 6.Isaiah the Prophet said the Messiah would be God.Isaiah 9:67. The Jews who crucified Jesus understood Him to be saying that He was equal with God.John 5:18: 8.Jesus called Himself "I AM", the Old Testament name for God (Exodus 3:14).John 8:58-59. 9.Jesus calls Himself "the Alpha and Omega," the title of Almighty God.Revelation 22:12-13. 10. Like God (Gen. 1:1) Jesus created.Colossians 1:16-1711. Like God, Jesus forgives sin.Mark 2:5-7, 10-11:12. Like God, Jesus gives eternal life.John 10:27-28: 13. Like God, Jesus received, receives and will receive worship.Matthew 14:32-33. 14. Jesus said that only God was good; and Jesus was good. John 10:11: "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep."John 10:11: "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep."Jesus was as good as they come. He was "sinless," "holy," "righteous," "innocent," "undefiled," and "separate from sinners." (Hebrews 7:26) That's pretty good! 15. Like God, Jesus can be present in more than one place at the same time.Matthew 18:20: 16. One of Jesus' titles is "God with us."Matthew 1:23. 17. Jesus' blood is called God's blood.Acts 20:28: 18. Jesus has the same nature as God.Hebrews 1:3a: 19. Jesus spoke as God.Jesus did not speak as one of God's prophets: "thus says the Lord," but as God: "I say to you."Matthew 5:27-29. 20. Like God (Psalm 136:3), Jesus is called the Lord of Lords and King of kings.Revelation 17:14. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. ( WHEN WAS GOD PIERCED? ). And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel (means God Among Us). 
      John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
      John 1:14, "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth."
      John 8:58 "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." Crossreference with Exodus 3:14 "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you."
      John 10:33 "The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God."
      John 20:28 "And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God."
      Collossians 2:9 "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."
      Hebrews 1:8 "But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: "
      Matthew 4:10 "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." Crossreference with Matthew 2:2, Matthew 2:11, Matthew 28:9.
      Isaiah 44:6 "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." Crossreference with Revelation 1:17 "And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he." and Revelation 1:8 "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty."
      2Peter. Jehovah The Father appears.
      John 1. Jehovah the son.
      John 8:58 Jesus identifies Himself as Jehovah "I Am"
      Acts 5. Jehovah the Holy Spirit identified.
    • By Bible Speaks
      “Send out your light and your truth. May these themselves lead me.” Psalm 43:3.  JEHOVAH is very considerate in the way he makes his purposes known to his servants. Instead of revealing the truth all at once in one blinding flash of light, he enlightens us progressively. Our trek along life’s pathway might be compared to a walk that a hiker takes down a long trail. He starts out early in the morning and sees little. As the sun begins to rise slowly over the horizon, the hiker is able to distinguish a few features of his surroundings. The rest he sees in hazy outline. But as the sun continues its ascent, he can see farther and farther into the distance. So it is with the spiritual light that God provides. He allows us to discern a few things at a time. God’s Son, Jesus Christ, provided spiritual enlightenment in a similar manner. Let us learn how Jehovah enlightened his people in ancient times and how he does so today.

    • By Srecko Sostar
      Confusing and controversial ideas and perceptions we can find about God, life and death, feelings, acts/deeds of human and gods.
       
      HOW GOD FEELS ABOUT LIFE
      3. What did Jehovah do when Cain killed Abel?
      3 The Bible teaches us that our life and the lives of other people are precious to Jehovah. For example, when Cain—Adam and Eve’s son—was very angry with his younger brother Abel, Jehovah warned Cain that he needed to control his anger. But Cain didn’t listen, and he became so angry that he “assaulted his brother Abel and killed him.” (Genesis 4:3-8) Jehovah punished Cain for murdering Abel. (Genesis 4:9-11) So anger and hatred are dangerous because they can make us become violent or cruel. A person who is like that cannot have everlasting life. (Read1 John 3:15.) To please Jehovah, we must learn to love all people.—1 John 3:11, 12. - 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  
      On other side we can find this in Bible, directly as words inspired to be written by Almighty God.  
       
       
        7   Remember, O Jehovah,What the Eʹdom·ites said on the day Jerusalem fell:“Tear it down! Tear it down to its foundations!” Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  O daughter of Babylon, who is soon to be devastated, Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. Happy will be the one who rewards you With the treatment you inflicted on us. Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  Happy will be the one who seizes your children And dashes them against the rocks. Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  -   Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
    • By JOHN BUTLER
      The JW Org / GB say that Armageddon is very close. They also say that Jehovah is speeding up the work in these 'last days'.
      Now, it seems I'm not one for knowing truth from lies, so people keep telling me, but this webpage/site seemed interesting to me.
       It seems to show more of a decrease in JW's, but more importantly it seems to show more of a lack of faith, or lack of action / 'works' of JW's. It also shows a large number of people leaving the JW Org. 
      If this video or page has been used before then I apologise for any repeat. But I thought it was of interest. 

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By admin
      He is according to Pope Francis...
      i know a lot of members on here are religious and I saw this in the bookstore today 


    • By JOHN BUTLER
      This topic is aimed toward asking ADMIN these questions. I do not know who Admin are. Some folks here seem to have made friends with Admin where as I just use the forum. 
      Why was Jehovah's Witnesses Private Club set up ?
      Should it be 999% about Jehovah's Witnesses and their Organisation, which would include the GB ?
      Am I therefore wrong when i only talk about Jehovah's Witnesses and have no interest in other religions ?
      There are those on here that regularly 'bite my ears off' because i only talk about the JW's, but I thought that was the intention of this forum.
      Admin please clarify these matters for me, please ...... 
    • By JOHN BUTLER
      I have always wondered if the Bible is for 'all of us' to understand fully, or if it's only for a chosen few to fully understand.
      I don't mean is it just for one 'religion' to understand, I mean is it just for say 'an anointed group of people to understand'? 
      Jesus spoke in illustrations to the people, but the disciples asked Jesus what the illustrations meant. Then Jesus would explain the illustration to them fully. 
      Jesus told his disciples that 'to them the sacred secrets would be revealed' but that the crowd would not get the meaning of such things. 
      It was also that after Jesus was resurrected he opened the eyes of his disciples / apostles so that they began to fully understand all things.
      For my part I would never expect to fully understand God's word the Bible. A lot of it is straight forward of course, and easy to comprehend.
      But I think a lot of it is 'in deep code' so to speak, only fully understood by those that Jehovah chooses.. 
      It still seems strange to me, but it would be a separate topic, that God allows it to be so difficult for people to find any truth amongst the huge amount of lies in 'religion'. 
      However, in my opinion, there has to be a 'group of humans' 'anointed people' that do have some direct contact with God, through Jesus Christ. 
      We no longer have 'miracles' being done in Christ's name, so it is difficult to know exactly who the 'chosen ones' are. 
      If there was a 'body of people' that could prove that they had God's approval and God's holy spirit, that would make life much easier. 
      However when those that say they are chosen either make mistakes or tell lies about the meaning of scripture, and then their predictions fail, then they seem to prove themselves false or without God's guidance.
      So we go back to square one. Is there really a 'body of people' being truly guided and upbuilt by God's holy spirit at this time ? 
      Is the Bible and it's prophecies being fully opened up to such ones ?
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      "clear, pure water of truth" ?? ...and famous question that can be hear from platform and in witnessing "Would you drink water from a glass with just one drop of poison in it?"
       
      Water That Leads to Life
      ..."Jehovah’s Witnesses invite you to taste the pure waters of truth." .....
      [Picture on page 9]
      "You can find the ‘waters of truth’ at your local Kingdom Hall"
       
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By Jack Ryan
      In paragraph 9 of this weeks Watchtower it was talking about how children’s comments at the meetings can prompt newly interested ones to recognise the ring of truth.
      I donÂ’t recall ever hearing it referred to as the ring of truth before. Is this a new phrase theyÂ’re going to try and get everybody using along the lines of, the truth, the brotherhood, this wicked system of things, etc etc.
       
    • By JW Insider
      I have recently, just today, communicated again with Gerard Gertoux requesting permission to quote extensive long passages from his book on this topic as a basis for a more in-depth forum discussion. The Amazon link to his book is here:
      The Name of God Y.eH.oW.aH Which is pronounced as it is Written I_Eh_oU_Ah
      A subset of that same material is also found here:
      http://areopage.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Gertoux_UseNameEarlyChristians.pdf
      Gerard Gertoux has responded that it would be better to use  https://www.academia.edu/14029315 as it is a free version that all of us can download, and it has no copyright.
      Since this topic comes up now and then, under various topic headings, I hope that some might find it useful to understand the basics of his argument. He assumes a lot of background and expertise that many do not have, but the material is accessible enough so that we can all learn a lot about the topic and even about the related background material at the same time.
      Out of respect for the author's wishes, let's not make extensive quotes from the book or the "areopage.net" link above except where fair use might allow. And even the "academia.edu" content should only be quoted in reasonable portions to the extent that it is needed for discussion. I have also mentioned to the author that I will do my best to keep the topic from devolving into a discussion of the Trinity. I will try to keep the discussion on topic, which also means that it should not become a free-for-all with critiques of the New World Translation or the persons who may have worked on it.
      The topic will not revolve only around Gerard Gertoux's writing, but it's a good place to start. Feel free to bring in evidence from other authors and researchers if it is related to the questions. As a reminder the evidence we discuss should focus especially on the following questions:
      Did Jesus and the apostles and disciples of the first century use the Divine Name? Did they read it aloud when they came to it in the OT Scriptures? Did they include it (and therefore expect it to be used aloud) in the writings of the NT? [And, of course, feel free to use the terms OT and NT as abbreviations for "Hebrew Scriptures" and "Christian Greek Scriptures" respectively.]
    • By The Librarian
      1934 Jehovah.mp3
      Talk by Judge Rutherford
       
      Part of the archive:
       
    • By The Librarian
      Part of a series on:
       
      ALMIGHTY.
      Heb., Shad·dai′, plural to denote excellence, occurs 41 times and is translated “Almighty” or “Almighty One.” (Ge 49:25; Ps 68:14) The corresponding word in the Christian Greek Scriptures is Pan·to·kra′tor and means “Almighty,” or, “Ruler Over All; One Who Has All Power.” (2Co 6:18; Re 15:3) The expression ʼEl Shad·dai′, “God Almighty,” occurs seven times in M and indicates that Jehovah has irresistible power.—Ge 17:1; Ex 6:3.
      ANCIENT OF DAYS.
      Aram., ʽAt·tiq′ Yoh·min′, meaning “One Advanced [or, Aged] in Days.”—Da 7:9, 13, 22.
       
      CREATOR. 
      Heb., Boh·reʼ′. (Isa 40:28; 42:5) GRAND CREATOR.—Ec 12:1.
       
      FATHER. 
      Heb., ʼAv; Gr., Pa·ter′; Lat., Pa′ter; as Creator (Isa 64:8); as giver of everlasting life to all those who exercise faith. (Joh 5:21) The expression “Holy Father” is used exclusively with reference to Jehovah.—Joh 17:11. Compare Mt 23:9.
      GOD. 
      Heb., ʼEl, without the definite article, probably meaning “Mighty One; Strong One.”—Ge 14:18.
       
      GOD. 
      Heb., ʼEloh′ah, singular of ʼElo·him′, without the definite article. It occurs 41 times in Job and 16 times in other books.—Job 3:4.
      GOD. 
      Heb., ʼElo·him′, without the definite article. In The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, Vol. XXI, Chicago and New York, 1905, p. 208, Aaron Ember wrote: “That the language of the O[ld] T[estament] has entirely given up the idea of plurality in אלהים [ʼElo·him′] (as applied to the God of Israel) is especially shown by the fact that it is almost invariably construed with a singular verbal predicate, and takes a singular adjectival attribute. . . . אלהים [ʼElo·him′] must rather be explained as an intensive plural, denoting greatness and majesty, being equal to The Great God. It ranks with the plurals אדנים [ʼadho·nim′, “master”] and בעלים [beʽa·lim′, “owner; lord”], employed with reference to human beings.” ʼElo·him′ draws attention to Jehovah’s strength as the Creator and occurs 35 times in the creation account.—Ge 1:1-2:4.
      GOD OF GODS (LORD OF LORDS).
      De 10:17; Da 2:47.
       
      GOD OF TRUTH. 
      Heb., ʼEl ʼemeth′, indicating that Jehovah is true and faithful in all his dealings.—Ps 31:5.
       
      GRAND GOD. 
      Aram., ʼElah′ rav.—Da 2:45.
       
      HAPPY GOD. 
      Gr., ma·ka′ri·os The·os′.—Compare 1Ti 1:11.
       
      HOLY GOD. 
      Heb., ʼElo·him′ qedho·shim′.—Jos 24:19.
       
      HOLY, HOLY, HOLY. 
      Heb., qa·dhohsh′, qa·dhohsh′, qa·dhohsh′. This expression as applied to Jehovah includes holiness, cleanness, purity and sacredness to the superlative degree.—Isa 6:3; Re 4:8.
      INDEFINITELY LASTING GOD. 
      Heb., ʼEl ʽoh·lam′.—Ge 21:33.
       
      INSTRUCTOR. 
      Heb., Moh·reh′. (Job 36:22) GRAND INSTRUCTOR.—Isa 30:20.
       
      I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE.
      See Ex 3:14 ftn.
       
      JEALOUS. 
      Heb., Qan·naʼ′, meaning “Insisting on Exclusive Devotion.”—Ex 34:14; see also Eze 5:13.
       
      JEHOVAH GOD.
      Ge 2:4. See App 1A.
       
      JEHOVAH OF ARMIES (JEHOVAH OF HOSTS) (LORD OF HOSTS). 
      (This expression with minor variations occurs 283 times in M. It also occurs twice in the Christian Greek Scriptures where Paul and James quoted or alluded to prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures. (See Ro 9:29; Jas 5:4.) The expression “Jehovah of armies” indicates the power held by the Ruler of the universe, who has at his command vast forces of spirit creatures.—Ps 103:20, 21; 148:2; Isa 1:24; Jer 32:17, 18. See App 1E.
      KING OF ETERNITY. 
      Gr., Ba·si·leus′ ton ai·o′non.—Compare 1Ti 1:17.
       
      KING OF THE NATIONS. 
      Heb., Me′lekh hag·goh·yim′.—Jer 10:7.
       
      LIVING GOD. 
      Heb., ʼElo·him′, with the plural adjective chai·yim′ (De 5:26); or with the singular adjective chai (Isa 37:4, 17); Gr., The·os′ zon.—Compare Heb 3:12.
      MAJESTY. 
      Gr., Me·ga·lo·sy′ne, denoting his lofty, superior position. (Compare Heb 1:3; 8:1.) MAJESTIC ONE. Heb., ʼAd·dir′.—Isa 33:21.
      MAKER. 
      Heb., ʽO·seh′. (Ps 115:15; Jer 10:12) GRAND MAKER.—Isa 54:5.
       
      MOST HIGH. 
      Heb., ʽEl·yohn′.—De 32:8; Ps 9:2; 83:18.
       
      MOST HOLY ONE. 
      Heb., Qedho·shim′, plural to denote excellence and majesty.—Pr 30:3.
       
      OVERSEER OF YOUR SOULS.
      1Pe 2:25.
       
      THE ROCK. 
      Heb., hats·Tsur′. (De 32:4) Figuratively used to describe Jehovah’s qualities as perfect, just, faithful, righteous and upright; as father (De 32:18); as a stronghold (2Sa 22:32; Isa 17:10); as a secure height and refuge (Ps 62:7; 94:22); as a source of salvation.—De 32:15; Ps 95:1.
      SAVIOR. 
      Heb., Moh·shi′aʽ (Isa 43:11; 45:21); Gr., So·ter′.—Compare Lu 1:47.
       
      SHEPHERD.
      Ps 23:1; 1Pe 2:25.
       
      SOVEREIGN LORD.
      Ge 15:2; Lu 2:29. See App 1E.
       
      SUPREME ONE. 
      Aram., ʽEl·yoh·nin′.—Da 7:18, 22, 27.
       
      THE [TRUE] GOD. 
      Heb., ha·ʼElo·him′.—See App 1F.
       
      THE [TRUE] GOD. 
      Heb., ha·ʼEl′.—See App 1G.
       
      THE [TRUE] LORD. 
      Heb., ha·ʼA·dhohn′. -
    • By Jesus.defender
      BIBLE PROOFS OF THE TRINITY

      Key: The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are so clearly and consistently linked in Scripture that, assuming that God is not three persons, makes it impossible to understand some passages.
      Though JWs exalt human reasoning against the Trinity doctrine, saying it is unreasonable,those who submit to God’s Word must conclude that it is unreasonable to doubt the Trinity.
      Consider these scriptures proving the Trinity:
      1. Matthew 28:19 The ‘Name’ of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

      Watchtower teaching: JWs ask, ‘Does this verse prove the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are equal in substance, power and eternity?’ They say, ‘No, no more than listing three people
      Tom, Dick and Harry mean that they are three in one.’ They say that the Trinity doctrine is imposed on the text, not derived from it.

      Bible Teaching: The key point is that the word ‘name’ is singular in the Greek NT, thus proving that there is one God, but three distinct persons within the Godhead.
      This proves the Trinity because Jesus did not say:
      i) ‘into the names (plural) of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.’
      ii) ‘into the name of the Father, and into the name of the Son, and into the name of the Holy Spirit’, as if we had three separate beings.
      iii) ‘into the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit’ omitting the three articles (the), as if the Father, Son and Holy Spirit might be three designations of a single person.
      What He does say is: ‘into the name (singular) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit’.
      Jesus first teaches the unity of the three by combining them all within a single name.
      He then teaches that each is a different person by introducing each of them in turn with the
      article (tou):
      Question: Can you see that rules of grammar dictate plurality (the, the, the) within unity (the name), because the word ‘name’ is singular and definite articles (Greek: tou) are placed in front of Father, Son and Holy Spirit?
      Other verses showing ‘three-in-oneness’ of the Godhead are:
      i) At the creation of man, ‘God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness . .’ (Genesis 1:26). ‘Our image’ in v. 26 is explained as God’s image in v. 27.
      The one true God consists of three persons who are able to confer with one another and carry out their plans together, while still being one God.
      ii) After the Fall, ‘the Lord (Jehovah) God (Elohim) said, Behold, the man is become as one of us . ’ (Genesis 3:22)
      ‘Us’ refers back to LORD (Jehovah), showing plurality within the Jehovah Godhead.

      iii) At the Tower of Babel, ‘the LORD (Jehovah), said . . let us go down’ (Genesis 11:6,7).
      iv) Isaiah ‘saw the Lord (Adonai) sitting upon a throne (v.1) mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD (Jehovah) of hosts (v.5). I heard the voice of the Lord (Adonai) saying: ‘Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?’’ (Isaiah 6:1,5,8) Here Isaiah sees ‘Adonai’ on the throne, then Isaiah calls Him ‘Jehovah of hosts’ (v.5).

      Then Adonai asks,‘Who will go for us?’The ‘us’ shows plurality in the Jehovah Godhead. This equivalence of Adonai and Jehovah (both called ‘us’) proves the Trinity Godhead.
      2. Genesis 18 and 19. Three men each called Jehovah.
      JWs believe that it is impossible for Jehovah God to exist as three persons: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Yet Genesis 18 and 19 shows Jehovah appearing to Abraham as three men. This
      shows that even the impossible from a human viewpoint is possible with God. Notice that:

      i) Abraham addresses the three as ‘Jehovah’ (v.3 NWT);
      ii) When two of the three men depart to visit Lot in Sodom, Abraham continues to address the remaining one as ‘Jehovah’ (Genesis 18:22,26,27,30,31,32,33).
      iii) Lot addressed the other two as ‘Jehovah’ (Genesis 19:1,18 NWT). ‘Then Lot said to them: “Not that please, Jehovah”.’ (19:18 NWT)
      iv) ‘Then Jehovah made it rain sulphur and fire from Jehovah, from the heavens upon Sodom and Gomorra.’ (Genesis 19:24)
      Notice the mention here of two Jehovahs, one in heaven who sends judgment on Sodom and Gomorra, at the bidding of the other Jehovah on earth.
      This gives strong evidence for more than one person in the Godhead. The Jehovah upon earth was one of three persons to visit Abraham, one of whom stays behind to speak further to Abraham and is called Jehovah. (Genesis 21:1 ‘Jehovah turned his attention to Sarah’).
      Hence this shows that it is possible for Jehovah to manifest Himself as three-in-one.
       
      3. II Corinthians 3:17 - ‘Jehovah is the Spirit’ (NWT).
       
      JWs challenge Christians to prove the Trinity in the Bible. This can be done if we find verses teaching that the Holy Spirit is Jehovah God, and the Son is Jehovah God.
      II Corinthians 3:17 teaches this by saying: ‘Now Jehovah is the Spirit.’

      How much clearer can it be than this, which states that the Holy Spirit is (=) Jehovah God? This proves the Deity of the Holy Spirit, and the existence of 2 persons in the Godhead.
      4. I John 5:7,8 The Johannine Comma, the famous Trinitarian proof text (3 Heavenly witnesses)
      Watchtower teaching: JWs claim that this passage ought not to be in the Bible, because it is not in most Greek manuscripts. It is omitted by most modern Bible versions. ’
      Bible Teaching: Erasmus omitted it from his first edition of the printed Greek NT (1516), because it occurred in the Latin Vulgate and not in any Greek manuscript. To quieten the
      outcry that followed, he agreed to restore it if it could be found in one Greek manuscript.
      Two Greek manuscripts, Codex 61 and 629 were found, so Erasmus included it in his 1522 edition. Since these manuscripts are late (14th and 15th Century), some think the readings are
      corrupt. What do we answer? (See page 805-806).

      5. In II Corinthians 13:14, (the Apostolic Benediction) why is there a change in the order of the persons of the Trinity, compared to Matthew 28:19, if not to show that ‘in this Trinity
      none is before or after the other, and none is greater or less than another’?

      ‘The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.’ (II Corinthians 13:14)
      ‘Baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.’ Matt. 28:19
    • By Jesus.defender
      Isaiah 9:6 - Is Jesus ‘a Mighty God’ or ‘Jehovah God’?

      ‘His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God (410), the Everlasting
      Father, the Prince of Peace’.
      Watchtower teaching: JWs concede that Jesus is a ‘mighty God’, but they are adamant that
      He is not Almighty God as Jehovah is. They think that Christ is one of lesser gods.
      Bible teaching: The Bible shows that both Jesus and Jehovah are called ‘Mighty God’.
      Jehovah is called ‘Mighty God’ in:
      a) ‘The remnant of Israel . . . shall stay upon Jehovah, the remnant of Jacob shall return . .
      unto the mighty God (410)’. (Isaiah 10:20,21).
      b) ‘the Great, the Mighty God (410), Jehovah of hosts, is his name’. (Jeremiah 32:18).
      Because Jehovah and Jesus are both called ‘Mighty God’, this proves Christ’s equality with
      God the Father.
      Ask: Since Jehovah is called ‘Mighty God’ (Isaiah 10:21) just as Jesus is called ‘Mighty
      God’ (Isaiah 9:6), doesn’t this mean that the Watchtower is wrong in saying that ‘Mighty
      God’ means a lesser deity?
      Ask: If both Jesus and Jehovah are ‘Mighty God’, then what does this tell you about Jesus’
      divine nature?
      Ask: If both Jesus and Jehovah are equally ‘Mighty God’, then isn’t this two members of
      the Trinity?
      Note: There is only one Mighty God in heaven:
      a) ‘I am the first and I am the last; beside me there is no God (430)’. (Isaiah 44:6b)
      b) ‘Is there a God (433) besides Me? Yea, there is no God; I know not any’.(Isaiah 44:8b).
      c) ‘I am the Lord (YHWH), and there is none else,there is no God beside me’(Isaiah 45:5a)
      The NWT translates John 1:1 as ‘the word was a god’.
      Isaiah 44:8b shows this to be false by denying the existence of ‘a god’ other than Jehovah.
      The phrase ‘Mighty God’ is ‘Elohim’ in Hebrew, meaning ‘Fullness of power’, portraying
      Christ as the ‘powerful Governor of the universe’.
      Notice that ‘Elohim (430)’ is also used to describe Jehovah God as:
      i) ‘The God (430) of the whole earth’. (Isaiah 54:5)
      ii) ‘The God (430) of all flesh’. (Jeremiah 32:27)
      iii) ‘I prayed to the God (430) of heaven’. (Nehemiah 2:4)
      iv) ‘For the Lord (YHWH) your God (430) is God (430) of gods....a great God.’(Deut 10:17)
      In Isaiah 40:3 Jesus is called both Jehovah (3068) and Elohim (430) in the same verse:
      ‘Prepare ye the way of the Jehovah, make straight in the desert a highway for our God (430)’.
      Mark 1:3 and John 1:23 apply Jehovah here to Jesus.
      Question: What is meant by calling Jesus ‘Everlasting Father’?
      Since Jesus is not the Father, why does Isaiah call Jesus ‘Everlasting Father’?
      Answer: Jesus considers the Father as someone other than Himself over 200 times in the NT.
      ‘Everlasting Father’ in Isaiah 9:6 means ‘Father of eternity’.
  • Forum Statistics

    59,463
    Total Topics
    105,307
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    15,943
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Vivek Valvi
    Newest Member
    Vivek Valvi
    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.