Jump to content

Kurt

Stake or Cross? How did Jesus die? What proof do we have?

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Kurt -
JW Insider -
209
6150

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

I don’t discredit anyone’s research other than to submit an area of incompetence.

That statement of yours reminded me of the way in which you tried to discredit Leolaia's research from 1990.

On 11/17/2018 at 12:45 AM, BillyTheKid46 said:

There are many other research points. Needless to say, the article was written by Leolaia in 1990, unfortunately, has no serious understanding of the original Classic Greek. Not to mention other areas of incompetence done with the research.

Were you able to find even one point yet in that particular research that is not supported by additional research?  Sometimes, or I could even say nearly all the time, when you do  try to point out an area of incompetence, so far I've only seen it fall flat because the research you offer will usually be often be found to exactly support the research you are trying to counter.

For example, the single item you offered in conjunction with this statement about Leolaia was a point about a Persian method of execution mentioned at Esther 5:14. It's true that Leolaia had mentioned the same point in footnote number 17 about Esther 7:9,10. But all that footnote pointed out was that the Greek word "stauros" was used to describe Persian methods of execution that could be more complex, comprised of boards or additional stakes according to the Greek.

You didn't say what the specific incompetence was, but yet in the same post you seemed only to be able to prove the correctness of the research by adding: "We know in Ancient Persia the gallows were equated to the cross, according to Ulfilas with the term “galga” used in the gothic testament. Gallows is in the shape of two T’s together. An (H) football goal post."

I'm not talking about people's conclusions and opinions based on their research. But when it comes to the research and evidence itself, I have not yet seen any particular item of research or evidence that you have offered that did not fully support what Leolaia had stated.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Unfortunately, I don’t cater to incompetence, as your research has shown.

Sorry about that last post. I tried to do the whole thing from my Dragon speech app on my phone, and every time I reworded something, or decided to change it, I couldn't find the previous version. Then I found it all bunched down there at the bottom of my post. I removed most of the gibberish.

1 hour ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

I won’t have any further discussions with a person that has but dissociated himself and trying very hard to discredit himself with logistics within that incompetence, just like the example you happened to find in google, jwcross or was that just the intent to prove the Watchtower wrong with such incompetent research. Happy Holidays.

I guess that was supposed to be me? LOL. I can assure you that I have never dissociated myself, nor have I ever been disfellowshipped. I did "step down" as we call it, but I am pretty sure that you yourself would most likely consider this to have been at least a "step" in the right direction. After all, I am now responsible for a lot less teaching assignments in the congregation. Your response to this has repeatedly been to call me someone who is "no longer in good standing," but surely this is better for everyone all around. (Turns out there are plenty of sacred service activities that don't require an "eldership" or "pioneership" etc.)

The jwcross.pdf by Leolaia does not prove the Watchtower wrong. It does not even say that the Watchtower is wrong about Jesus dying on a simple, upright pole. It does try a bit too hard to show up the dogmatism and research errors, in staking out a position, but without crediting the Watchtower for exposing a major flaw in Christendom's assumptions, too. Also, the article avoids the issue of improper veneration to objects and idols, which has been a major part of the history of the cross. I understand that this is not a real focus of a "cross vs. stake" discussion, but since it is obviously geared to a JW and ex-JW audience, it should therefore give more credit where credit is due.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't had time to read everyone's posts since the last time, but I have copied some interesting correspondence I found on "ibiblio.org" since I was researching Lucian's work, and especially its' translation.

The topic  was  anaskolopisthenta vs.stauron:

 

Lucian of Samosata's work "The Passing of Peregrinus" on pages 38-39 

(paragraph 34, line 7), as found in The Loeb Classical Library, 

Lucian with an English Translation by AM Harmon Volume V, 1972, makes 

use of the word STAURON when he states that as Peregrinus was heading 

for his self emolation, he was enjoying the admiration of the crowds 

"...not knowing, poor wretch, that men on their way to the cross 

( STAURON σταυρὸν ) οr in the grip of the executioner have 

many more at their heels."

However earlier (pages 12-13, paragraph 11, line 11) Lucian used a 

different word when describing " the man who was crucified in 

Palestine  (  Παλαιστίνῃ   

ἀνασκολοπισθέντα ANASKOLOPISTHENTA ) because he 

introduced this new cult into the world."

 

Again in paragraph 13 Lucian talks of the "crucified sophist" 

ἀνασκολοπισμένον ἐκεῖνον σοφιστὴν 

ANASKOLOPISΜΕΝΟΝ.

 

I also note that, according to Perseus Tuft, Lucian used 

ANASKOLOPISTHESOMAI in his Prometheus on Causasus paragraph 7. But I 

am unable to check a Greek text of this at present.

 

Prometheus: Perhaps there has been some nonsense talked already; that 

remains to be seen. But as you say your case is now complete, I will 

see what I can do in the way of refutation. And first about that 

meat. Though, upon my word, I blush for Zeus when I name it: to think 

that he should be so touchy about trifles, as to send off a God of my 

quality to crucifixion, just because he found a little bit of bone in 

his share! http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/luc/wl1/wl112.htm

 

I am not sure what word Lucian used for crucifixion earlier in 

Prometheus on Causasus paragraph 1, where he states:

 

Hermes:. The very thing. Steep rocks, slightly overhanging, inaccessible 

on every side; no foothold but a mere ledge, with scarcely room for 

the tips of one's toes; altogether a sweet spot for a crucifixion. 

Now, Prometheus, come and be nailed up; there is no time to lose.

Could someone please tell me what word was used in this instance?

 

Meier JP A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the historical Jesus. Vol.1, p.

102, note 20, states that anaskolopisthenta was probably used in 

paragraph 11 of Peregrinus scornfully ("mocking tone"), and that 

Lucian had an historical basis for using ANASKOLOPISTHENTA, "since 

crucifixion probably developed from impalement."

Similar to Lucian's use of both words, I have found that STAURON was  

used for crucifixion by Polybius (Histories 1.86 Book 1, Chapter 86, 

section 6), "All the baggage fell into the rebels'º hands and they 

made Hannibal himself prisoner. 6 Taking him at once to Spendius' 

cross they tortured him cruelly there, and then, taking Spendius down 

from the cross, they crucified Hannibal alive on it.."

 

An alternative reading found using Perseus tufts has:

They at once took him up to the cross on which Spendius was hanging, 

and after the infliction of exquisite tortures, took down the 

latter's body and fastened Hannibal, still living, to his cross; and 

then slaughtered thirty Carthaginians

 

Perseus tufts has the Greek as:touton men oun parachrêma pros ton tou 

Spendiou stauron agagontes kai timôrêsamenoi pikrôs ekeinon men 

katheilon, touton d' anethesan zônta kai perikatesphaxan triakonta 

tôn Karchêdoniôn tous epiphanestatous peri to tou Spendiou sôma, 

tês tuchês hôsper epitêdes ek paratheseôs amphoterois enallax 

didousês aphormas eis huperbolên tês kat' allêlôn timôrias.

 

Later Polybius used anaskolopisthenta in this same work, namely in 

Histories (10.33.8)." Suddenly letting down the portcullis which they 

had raised somewhat higher by mechanical means, they attacked the 

intruders and capturing them crucified them before the wall." http://

penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/10*.html 27/12/07

Perseus tufts has the Greek as:

Hoi de katarraktas, hous eichon oligon exôterô dia mêchanêmatôn 

anêmmenous, aiphnidion kathêkan kai epebalonto, kai toutous 

kataschontes pro tou teichous aneskolopisan. (1.11)

Could someone tell me if there may be a grammatical pattern or reason 

as to why these two authors sometimes used ANASKOLOPISTHENTA, or 

inflections of it, and other times used STAURON? Perhaps there is 

another possible reason for the choice of words apart from those 

given by Meier.

Are there any other ancient authors who used both terms to describe 

crucifixion?

Although ANASKOLOPISTHENTA isn't used in the GNT, did any of the 

early christian writers use it, or inflections of it?

Jonathan Clerke

clerke at humanperformance.cc

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anita Clerke wrote:

> Although ANASKOLOPISTHENTA isn't used in the GNT, did any of the

> early christian writers use it, or inflections of it?

Using  ANASKOLOPIS as my search term, I find:

Herodotus Hist.

Hist 9.78.15

Philo Judaeus Phil.

Post 61.7; Som 2.213.5; Jos 96.3

Dio Chrysostomus Soph.

Orationes 17.15.5

Lucianus Soph.

Prom 2.3; Prom 7.9; Cont 14.10; Pisc 2.8; Peregr 11.11

Acta et Martyrium Apollonii

Acta et martyrium Apollonii 40.4

Cassius Dio Hist.

Historiae Romanae 62.11.4.3; S164.22

Heliodorus Scr. Erot.

Aeth 4.20.2.8

Gregorius Nyssenus Theol.

Orationes viii de beatitudinibus 44.1297.53

Eusebius Scr. Eccl. et Theol.

Eccl Hist 2.25.5.4;  8.8.1.13

Epiphanius Scr. Eccl.

Haer 1.260.14

Joannes Chrysostomus Scr. Ecc

In epistulam i ad Corinthios 61.356.52; In Petrum et Paulum 59.494.68

   Theodoretus Scr. Eccl.

Historia religiosa 31.13.12; Interpretatio in xii prophetas minores

81.1956.18

Joannes Malalas Chronogr.

Chron 473.10

Hesychius Lexicogr.

Lexicon (A-O alpha.4583.1 20a;  Lexicon (A-O alpha.4585.1 ‚20a;

Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anita Clerke wrote:

> Could someone tell me if there may be a grammatical pattern or reason

> as to why these two authors sometimes used ANASKOLOPISTHENTA, or

> inflections of it, and other times used STAURON? Perhaps there is

> another possible reason for the choice of words apart from those

> given by Meier.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As you'll see from the LSJ entry on anaskolop-izô

anaskolop-izô :--Pass., with fut. Med. -skolopioumai (in pass. sense)

Hdt.3.132, 4.43, but Pass.

A. -skolopisthêsomai Luc.Prom.7 : aor. -eskolopisthên ib.2,10: pf.

-eskolopismai Id.Peregr.13 :--fix on a pole or stake, impale, Hdt.1.128,

3.159, al.; in 9.78 it is used convertibly with anastauroô, as in

Ph.1.237,687, Luc.Peregr.11.

the reason there might be alternating usage is that the terms are

synonymous.

Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)

e-mail jgibson000 at comcast.net

---------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't have access to this work by Lucian either and don't wish to spend the time to look for it since I have other work to accomplish.  I will nevertheless give you some thoughts regarding this.

It is customary to think of a cross in the fashion in which we see it in virtually every church as the form of a "t."  The proper designation of σταυρός [STAUROS], however, is a stake.  Although the word σταυρός [STAUROS] is not used in the passage, I refer you to MPol where it refers to Polycarp's execution

ὅτε δὲ ἡ πυρκαϊὰ ἡτοιμάσθη, ἀποθέμενος ἑαυτῷ πάντα τὰ ἱμάτια καὶ λύσας τὴν ζώνην, ἐπειρᾶτο καὶ ὑπολύειν ἑαυτόν, μὴ πρότερον τοῦτο ποιῶν διὰ τὸ ἀεὶ ἕκαστον τῶν πιστῶν σπουδάζειν ὅστις τάχιον τοῦ χρωτὸς αὐτοῦ ἅψηται. ἐν παντὶ γὰρ ἀγαθῆς ἕνεκεν πολιτείας καὶ πρὸ τῆς πολιᾶς ἐκεκόσμητο. (3) εὐθέως οὖν αὐτῷ περιετίθετο τὰ πρὸς τὴν πυρὰν ἡρμοσμένα ὄργανα. μελλόντων δὲ αὐτῶν καὶ προσηλοῦν, εἶπεν· Ἄφετέ με οὕτως. ὁ γὰρ δοὺς ὑπομεῖναι τὸ πῦρ δώσει καὶ χωρὶς τῆς ὑμετέρας ἐκ τῶν ἥλων

ἀσφαλείας ἄσκυλτον ἐπιμεῖναι τῇ πυρᾷ.

Holmes, M. W. (1999). The Apostolic Fathers : Greek texts and English translations (Updated ed.) (236). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books.

hOTE DE hH PURKAIA hHTOIMASQH, APOQEMENOS hEAUTWi PANTA TA hIMATIA KAI LUSAS THN ZWNHN, EPEIRATO KAI hUPOLUEIN hAUTON, MH PROTERON TOUTO POIWN DIA TO AEI hEKASTON TWN PISTWN SPOUDAZEIN hOSTIS TAXION TOU XRWTOS AUTOU hAYHTAI.  EN PANTI GAR AGAQHS hENEKEN POLITEIAS KAI PRO THS POLIAS EKEKOSMHTO. (3) EUQEWS OUN AUTWi PERIETIQETO TA PROS THN PURAN hHRMOSMENA ORGANA.  MELLONTWN DE AUTWN KAI PROSHLOUN, EIPEN, "AFETE ME hOUTWS.  hO GAR DOUS hUPOMEINAI TO PUR DWSEI KAI XWRIS THS hUMETERAS ED TWN hHLWN ASFALEIAS ASKULTON EPIMEINAI THi PURAi

Note the use here of PROSHLOW and hHLOS indicating that they had intended to nail him to an unstated object which was most likely a stake since it is doubtful that they intended to nail him to the firewood they place about him.  I therefore think the answer to your question regarding why one or the other word might be used is that they were virtually interchangeable.

George G F Somsel

gfsomsel@yahoo.com

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Anna said:

I therefore think the answer to your question regarding why one or the other word might be used is that they were virtually interchangeable.

I've seen a word study on these two different basic terms that shows that they both went through a similar history, in both verb and noun forms, and both began with similar simple meanings and both developed and encompassed similar meanings when associated with punishments, and both took on the same prefix "ana."

Before I forget, what I really loved about the perseus.tufts.edu site was that in earlier versions, years ago, you could pick a classical Greek or Latin (or other) text, and then when you had to look up a word, the color would change from bluish to purplish (the old default HTML style for a "visited link"). This would give you kind of a visual feedback on how many words you had to look up, and also was a reminder that you had already looked up the word if you ran across the same word again later in the text. 

I think you have seen the 337-page David Chapman PDF for his book "Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion." I'm pretty sure that someone already linked it here in this topic (might have been you?). Anyway, it had a pretty good summary of the Greek terms on page 9 through 13 (where the footnotes even include a point about the Witnesses).

It's in agreement with your post above, but I'll share a good part of it, except for the footnotes which take up half the page on average:

----------remainder of post from David Chapman PDF ---------------------

Greek Terminology

The familiar New Testament terms for the crucifixion of Jesus include the

verbs σταυρόω (46 times, though not all of Jesus), συσταυρόω (5 times),

and άνασταυρόω (in Heb 6:6), as well as the noun σταυρός. Also NT

authors speak of the event with προσπήγνυμι ("to affix"; in Acts 2:23)

or with the passive of κρεμάννυμι and έπϊ ξύλου ("to hang upon a tree"; cf.

Acts 5:30; 10:39; Gal 3:13).

Combining this terminology with that in Lucian's Prometheus*

and in other works of Greek antiquity, several more

words surface that, in context, can designate a crucifixion event: particularly

άνασκολοπίζω (verb) and σκόλοψ (noun), and including verbs such as

άνακρεμάννυμι, κατακλείω, καταπήγνυμι, πήγνυμι, προσηλόω, and

προσπατταλεύω (= προσπασσαλεύω).

Nevertheless, in Greek it is rare for the semantic range of any single term

to be confined to "crucifixion." For example, a σταυρός appears originally to

have referred to an upright pole. Thus a σταυρός can be a stake in a

σταύρωμα ("palisade"; e.g., Thucydides, Hist, vi.100) as well as a pole on

which a person is impaled or crucified. Hence it naturally follows that both

άνασταυρόω and σταυρόω can refer to the building of stockades as well as

to the setting up of poles (especially for the purpose of suspending people on

σταυροί). Elsewhere a σταυρός can be used as a place of scourging, with

the death following from some other method.

Α σκόλοψ likewise generally refers to "anything pointed" (Liddell &

Scott, s.v.), including pales, stakes, thorns, a point of a fishhook, and (in the

plural) a palisade. And similarly, the cognate verb άνασκολοπίζω need not

exclusively refer to "fix on a pole or a stake, impale.

However, the "fundamental" references to an upright pole in σταυρός and

its cognates, and to pointy objects in σκόλοψ and its cognates, does not

rightly imply such that terminology in antiquity, when applied to crucifixion,

invariably referred to a single upright beam. This is a common word study

fallacy in some populist literature. In fact, such terminology often referred

in antiquity to cross-shaped crucifixion devices. For example, Lucian, in a

brief dialogue that employs most Greek crucifixion vocabulary, refers to the

"crucifixion" of Prometheus, whose arms are pinned while stretched from one

rock to another. Such a cross-shaped crucifixion position in the Roman era

may actually have been the norm; nevertheless, the point to be sustained at

this stage is that this position was not the only one to be designated with these

Greek terms.

In addition to recognizing the broader semantic ranges of these terms, it is

helpful to note that different authors prefer certain terminology. Thus, while

Philo knows σταυρός as a "cross" (see Flacc. 72, 84; contrast σταυροί as

fortifications in Agr. 11; Spec. Leg. iv.229), he does not use the cognate verb

άνασταυρόω, preferring instead άνασκολοπίζω. Josephus, on the other

hand, employs only άνασταυρόω and σταυρόω but never άνασκολοπίζω.

Hengel contends that in the Classical period Herodotus utilized άνασταυρόω

and άνασκολοπίζω with different nuances from one another (άνασκολοπίζω

of the suspension of living men and άνασταυρόω of dead men), but that after

Herodotus these two verbs become synonymous. Such a picture may require

some more nuance, but it is certainly the case that after Herodotus some

authors use the terms interchangeably and that both verbs can designate acts

of crucifixion (even in the narrow English sense of the word).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even back in Jesus day there was controversy and dissension about was it a cross, a stake, an "X", a tree,  a hewn plank of gopher wood, or  just a 10 foot length of a section of one of the cedars of Lebanon, with or without cross arm.

When they were going to do executions people would come into town from the farm areas to watch .... especially someone as famous as Jesus had become,  and they would rent a hotel room (barn, shelter, or sleep on the town square, hoping for some hospitality to be shown at a private home, as was the custom back then.).

There is recorded in Josephus about a disciple who came into an Inn in Jerusalem, the night before Jesus was killed, the same night in another part of the city that Jesus was being arrested, placed two very large black iron nails on the night clerk's counter, and said "Can you put me up for the night?"

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2018 at 11:18 PM, BillyTheKid46 said:

However, here is an alternative to the stauros that is seldom seen. By A.T. Fomenko. . .  there are many unbelievable areas where ancient writers compared the stauros to a simple vertical line. 😏

No one else pointed it out yet, so I thought it good to mention that A.T. Fomenko is a crackpot conspiracy theorist who came up with a theory that became surprisingly popular in Russia. He does not believe Jesus ever existed, and that all the things we know from history actually happened from the Middle Ages until now. There was no written history prior to 800 A.D. and everything we might call history: the Babylonian cuneiform tablets, Egyptian hieroglyphics, The "Old Testament" and the "New Testament" comes from about the year 1000 A.D. to 1500 A.D.

He believes that "Jesus" was actually from the 12th century AD, and died just over 800 years ago. This means that we are, in effect, now actually living in the "9th century AD." Fomenko also says that "Solomon's Temple" was built almost exactly 500 years ago. So, Solomon's Temple was about 365 years AFTER Jesus died!

Here's a summary taken from Wikipedia, with some of the dates and footnote numbers removed for readability:

  • According to Fomenko's claims, the written history of humankind goes only as far back as AD 800, there is almost no information about events between AD 800–1000, and most known historical events took place in AD 1000–1500.
  • Fomenko claims that the most probable prototype of the historical Jesus was Andronikos I Komnenos (allegedly AD 1152 to 1185), the emperor of Byzantium, known for his failed reforms; his traits and deeds reflected in 'biographies' of many real and imaginary persons. The historical Jesus is a composite figure and reflection of the Old-Testament prophet Elisha, Pope Gregory VII, Saint Basil of Caesarea, and even Li Yuanhao (also known as Emperor Jingzong or "Son of Heaven" - emperor of Western Xia, . . . ), Euclides, Bacchus and Dionysius. Fomenko explains the seemingly vast differences in the biographies of these figures as resulting from difference in languages, points of view and time-frame of the authors of said accounts and biographies. He claims that the historical Jesus may have been born in 1152 and was crucified around AD 1185 on the Joshua's Hill, overlooking the Bosphorus.

    Fomenko also merges the cities and histories of Jerusalem, Rome and Troy into "New Rome" = Gospel Jerusalem (in the 12th and 13th centuries) = Troy = Yoros Castle. To the south of Yoros Castle is Joshua's Hill which Fomenko alleges is the hill Calvary depicted in the Bible.

    Fomenko claims the Hagia Sophia is actually the biblical Temple of Solomon. He identifies Solomon as sultan Suleiman the Magnificent (1494–1566).

It's true that he references "stauros" as a column, but as you saw in the quote you( @BillyTheKid46) provided he also showed that the final shape could look like a T (Tau), or even a more traditional "cross." But then he goes right on in the next paragraph to say that the Trojan War (usually dated to about 1250 BCE in the 13th century BCE), must have actually happened in the 13th century AD. That's a difference of about 2,500 years.

image.png

 

Share this post


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

I haven't had time to read everyone's posts since the last time

This is a very interesting subject, with a lot of good research surrounding it. Much of the research actually overlaps fairly consistently, but there is always plenty to learn. From your comments and questions over the last couple of years, I can tell you have given it more thought than most of us.

I think that the David W Chapman book http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/books/crux01.pdf Ancient Jewish and Christian Perceptions of Crucifixion is excellent, especially since it fills in a known gap from Hengel, that Hengel himself admitted: that he had not given so much attention to the Jewish history and perceptions. I think Chapman fills this gap well, with Hebrew language and literature from every possible relevant source. In addition to classical Latin and Greek sources, he spends much time on Hebrew, Aramaic, and Syriac sources.

Also, I think that BillyTheKid is correct in recommending "The Crosses of Pompeii: Jesus-Devotion in a Vesuvian Town" by Bruce W. Longenecker. It tries too hard to put Christian crosses in Pompeii itself, but it does a good job bringing in comparative ideas about how the cross symbol could likely have been used among "immature" Christians in this time and place. And it brings other known artifacts into the discussion. A pretty fair assessment of Longenecker's position on the historical development of the cross symbol is summarized here: https://www.thepostil.com/the-early-history-of-the-cross/#.W_YwbuhKjIU

There was something I was surprised at, which is related. It's the study of early Christian gemstones. I've looked at them before, but noticed something different when thinking about the history of the cross symbol. This is actually what had led me to the nearly unrelated "Biblica" article on JSTOR, The Letter Tau as the Cross: Ornament and Content in Hebrews 2,14 Thomas E. Schmidt. That's a place, of course, where the discussion of all the T's in Hebrews 2:14 comes up.

But back to gemstones.

-------------------------SOURCE----------------------

Early Christian Gems and Their Rediscovery

JEFFREY SPIER
Studies in the History of Art
Vol. 54, Symposium Papers XXXII: Engraved Gems: Survivals and Revivals (1997), pp. 32-43 (12 pages)
Published by: National Gallery of Art
------------------------------------------------------------------
What surprised me was the popularity of the story of Jonah, and I hadn't realized that it could have been a kind of "crucifixion" story for those who knew the significance of the execution and resurrection of Jesus, but who might not have wished to display Jesus humiliated and tortured. Of course, there is also the ship in the story (which bears the stauros) and was thought by these outsiders to have succeeded in ridding themselves of Jonah.
 
The following picture is from the article mentioned above, and is a sample of several gemstones from the 200's through the 300's CE.
 
Even the "IXTHYS" (the first one) could be just as much a Jonah reference (ixthys=fish) as a reference to Jesus' association with fishermen, the call to be fishers of men, and the miracles performed related to fish.
 
The third picture of the two fish on the sides of an anchor could also be a "stauros" reference, not just "Jesus the anchor of our faith." It is a bit like other images of two evildoers hanging next to Jesus.
 
Jonah is depicted in two of the gems. One of them has the story carved out in the way some churches depict the "stations of the cross" on stained glass. And it creates the cross-beamed stauros image with the ship.
 
And the last one is finally of Christ's "crucifixion" from the 300's CE.
 
 gems.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • By 4Jah2me
      I was in conversation with an elder last week (or maybe two weeks ago) and I don't quite know how we got onto the topic but we started talking about suicide. I was a bit surprised when he said "But don't commit suicide or you will not get a resurrection". 
      I was wondering where exactly this information comes from. Having recovered from the shock, I have since emailed this elder and got no response. I have looked on JW Org and read a couple of older articles on there, but they seemed to say that it is or was not their place to judge, which i agree with. 
      So, is there 'new light' on the subject of suicide ? If so where does this new light come from ? And what scriptures back up this 'new light' ?
      I will willingly read any recent articles that are passed on to me, as this latest information, if it is true, i find disturbing. I know of many people that have committed suicide, both inside and outside of the Jehovah's Witnesses Organisation. 
       
    • By The Librarian
      The Holy Bible > List of Biblical Persons > Jesus Christ

      Jesus (/ˈdʒiːzəs/; Greek: Ἰησοῦς Iesous; 2 B.C.E. (timeline) to 33 C.E.), also referred to as Jesus of Nazareth, is the Son of Jehovah God and the awaited Messiah of the Hebrew Scriptures.The name Jesus (Gr., I·e·sous′) corresponds to the Hebrew name Jeshua (or, in fuller form, Jehoshua), meaning “Jehovah Is Salvation.” The name itself was not unusual, many men being so named in that period. He is also referred to as Jesus Christ, from the Greek Khri·stos′, the equivalent of the Hebrew Ma·shi′ach(Messiah), and means “Anointed One.” Our Modern day, most widely used Gregorian calendar uses the terms B.C. (Before Christ) and A.D. (Anno Domini = Year of our Lord in Latin) basing our current year of 2014 as the year since his supposed birth according to a medieval estimate.

      The person who became known as Jesus Christ did not begin life here on earth. In heaven he was known as Michael the Archangel. He himself spoke of his prehuman heavenly life. (Joh 3:13; 6:38, 62; 8:23, 42, 58) John 1:1, 2 gives the heavenly name of the one who became Jesus, saying: “In the beginning the Word [Gr., Lo′gos] was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god [“was divine,” AT; Mo; or “of divine being,”Böhmer; Stage (both German)]. This one was in the beginning with God.” Since Jehovah is eternal and had no beginning (Ps 90:2; Re 15:3), the Word’s being with God from “the beginning” must here refer to the beginning of Jehovah’s creative works. This is confirmed by other texts identifying Jesus as “the firstborn of all creation,” “the beginning of the creation by God.” (Col 1:15; Re 1:1; 3:14) Thus the Scriptures identify the Word (Jesus in his prehuman existence) as God’s first creation, His firstborn Son. This is direct opposition to the popular and later teaching of the Trinity by the Nicean Council.

      Sir Isaac Newton weighed in on the identity of Michael the Archangel

      That Jehovah was truly the Father or Life-Giver to this firstborn Son and, hence, that this Son was actually a creature of God is evident from Jesus’ own statements. He pointed to God as the Source of his life, saying, “I live because of the Father.” According to the context, this meant that his life resulted from or was caused by his Father, even as the gaining of life by dying men would result from their faith in Jesus’ ransom sacrifice.—Joh 6:56, 57.

      Logically, it was to this firstborn Son that Jehovah said: “Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness.” (Ge 1:26) All these other created things were not only created “through him” but also “for him,” as God’s Firstborn and the “heir of all things.”—Col 1:16; Heb 1:2.

      Jesus began his life billions of years before the first human ever existed (Compare Mic 5:2.) and was used by his father in the creation of all of the universe (Joh 1:3; Col 1:16, 17) and the other angels and spirit creatures in heaven (Da 7:9, 10; Re 5:11),

      Jesus was conceived by Holy Spirit being transferred from his heavenly life as Michael the Archangel into the womb of a virgin named Mary who was engaged to Joseph. He was born in Bethlehem as a human baby in the year 2 B.C.E.. A star shined above his birthplace guiding astrologers to pay tribute to him.
      He was later raised in Nazareth where archaeologists claim to have discovered his childhood home.
       
       
       
      See also:
      Jesus Face Drawn by Medical Artist based on Forensic Evidence  Is Jesus a "Mediator" for God and All Men?  
      The Memorial of the Death of Jesus Christ
    • By JOHN BUTLER
      I do find it kinda' funny that JW's love to talk about billions of people being removed / destroyed / killed / murdered at Armageddon. Billions of people.
      And for what ? Well JW's say it's for not serving God. But they will also say it's for not being a baptised JW. 
      Well we do know for sure that God either deliberately had, or deliberately allowed, the destruction of Jerusalem in circa 70 C E, and for what ? 
      Well the Bible shows us it was for not serving God properly, and for killing God's son. 
      BUT when I suggest that the Governing Body should be removed or destroyed, oh dear, the JW's they get really upset ya know. 
      Governing Body = 8 men.   Jerusalem = how many, men, women and children, thousands of them. 
      But oh dear, now it would be murder. So what was it back then ?  Your see JW's live in a dream world, wrapped up in cotton wool, they just cannot face the real world.
      The Governing Body do not serve God properly. That is clearly visible to anyone that honestly wants to see it. 
      The Governing Body are destroying JW Org, and if JW Org is God's true Organisation then the GB are deliberately working against God and against God's intentions. 
      Humans that deliberately work against God and cause problems for God do not last long on this Earth. 
      The Bible shows much proof of this, such as those that opposed Moses. 
      I am expecting the GB to be removed, one way or another. But only if God really wants to use the JW Org / Watchtower soc for His own purposes. 
      If God does not want to use those Orgs then it would seem sensible for God to set up a new Org for His purposes. 
      The only problem with the GB being 'removed' is that JW's will call it a 'sign of the times' and 'persecution', but if God causes the removal then I'm sure He will put them straight. 
      Those people that say that the GB cannot be removed / destroyed, are those people that worship the GB. And those people that worship the GB may probably need removing too. 
      The world is wicked, it belongs to Satan. The Earth is wonderful and it belongs to Almighty God.
      For God to save this Earth and for Him to save a few humans too, drastic things have to take place. Drastic things have to take place.
       
    • By Witness
      I found this on another forum.  It is a photo from the jw org online glossary.  Does any JW have an opinion as to why "Jesus" is left out of the glossary?   "Christ", as well as "Messiah" are both noted.  (Matt 24:24; Mark 13:22 NKJV) (Matt 24:24; Mark 13:22 NIV)  Yet, "Jesus", whose name means "YHVH is salvation", or, "Yah will save", isn't listed.  Also, both "Emmanuel"/"Immanuel", which means "God is with us" are not listed.     (Matt 1:23)
      Here is the link: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/publication/r1/lp-e/nwtstg/E/2019/172

    • 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 Jesus.defender
      Biblical Jesus Vs. Mormon Jesus.
      Simply believing in someone named Jesus means NOTHING unless we are talking about the historic, Biblical Jesus.
      The apostle Paul warns us in 2 Corinthians 11:4 — there are some who preach a different Jesus.
      - The Bible teaches that Jesus has always existed as God (John 1:1). Mormons see Jesus as someone who worked His way up to godhood.  In fact, to Mormons, Jesus is merely one in purpose with God the Father; whereas the Bible declares that the Father and the Son are also one in essence (cf. Phil. 2:6) — that they are both equally God and members of the Holy Trinity.
      - The Bible says Jesus was begotten by the Holy Spirit. Luke 1:34-5. Is. 7:14. Matt. 1:18,20.  Mormons see Jesus as being CREATED by sexual relations between God the father and mary.  "The birth of the Savior was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood---was begotten of his Father as we were of our fathers" (Journal of Discourses vol.8, p.115); and "when the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness [flesh and blood]. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost" (Journal of Discourses, vol.1, p.50). "I will say that I was naturally begotten; so was my father, and also my Savior Jesus Christ...he is the first begotten of his father in the flesh, and there was nothing unnatural about it" (Journal of Discourses vol.8, p.211); "Now remember from this time forth, and for ever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost" (Journal of Discourses, vol.1, p.51). Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: "The birth of the Savior was a natural occurrence unattended by any degree of mysticism, and the Father God was the literal parent of Jesus in the flesh as well as in the spirit" (Religious Truths Defined, p.44). Bruce McConkie (LDS apostle) states: "Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers" (Mormon Doctrine, p. 547, 1979).Carfred Broderick (Mormon author) writes: "God is a procreating personage of flesh and bone...latter-day prophets have made it clear that despite what it says in Matthew 1:20, the Holy Ghost was not the father of Jesus...The Savior was fathered by a personage of flesh and bone" (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn, 1967, p.100-101).
      - Mormons see Jesus as a polygamist. Apostle Orson Hyde: "…Jesus Christ was married at Cana of Galilee... Mary, Martha, and others were his wives ... he begat children" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p.210). Jedediah M. Grant: "Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana of Galilee, and he told them what to do... Now there was actually a marriage; and if Jesus was not the bridegroom on that occasion, please tell who was. If any man can show this, and prove that it was not the Savior of the world, then I will acknowledge I am in error. We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before he was crucified" (Journal of Discourses, vol.2, p.82). Orson Hyde: "It will be borne in mind that once on a time, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and on a careful reading of that transaction, it will be discovered that no less a person than Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha, and the other Mary also whom Jesus loved, must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the best of it" (Journal of Discourses, vol.4, p.259). Orson Pratt: "We have now clearly shown that God the Father had a plurality of wives, one or more being in eternity, by whom He begat our spirits as well as the spirit of Jesus His First Born... We have also proved most clearly that the Son followed the example of his Father, and became the great Bridegroom to whom kings' daughters and many honorable wives are to be married" (The Seer, p. 172).
      - The Bible says that Jesus created ALL things. This includes lucifer. Gen. 3:1, Ez. 28:13,15,17Mormons see Jesus as a brother of satan, not His brother.
      - Mormons see Jesus was procreated as a spirit child of the Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother and later conceived physically by the Heavenly Father and an earthly mother: The Ensign, Jan. 1989, pp.28-29; Come Unto Christ by Ezra Taft Benson, p.4). Bruce McConkie states: "Christ the Word, the Firstborn, had of course attained unto the status of Godhood while yet in pre-existence" (What Mormons Think of Christ, p.36).
      Bruce McConkie continues: "He is the Firstborn of the Father. By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre-existent state" (Mormon Doctrine, 1966, pg. 129).
      Orson Pratt: "God the Father had a plurality of wives, one or more being in eternity, by whom He begat our spirits as well as the spirit of Jesus His First Born" (The Seer, p. 172).
      "Jesus Christ is not the Father of the spirits who have taken or yet shall take bodies upon this earth, for He is one of them. He is The Son, as they are sons and daughters of Elohim." (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, vol.4, Appendix 4).
    • By Brother Rando
      In order for the following prophecy to be fulfilled, "He is guarding all his bones; Not one of them has been broken." (Psalm 34:20)  Which method of death is true?  A or B?

    • Guest Nicole
    • By Witness
      Pearl Doxsey, July 2, 2018:
      Many refute that Michael the archangel is an identity of Jesus Christ, in his capacity as protector of the saints (Dan.12:1;John17:12; 6:39; 18:9; Rev.19:12) and defender of God's supremacy in the face of global idolatry (Rev.13:8,4) 
      (The name "Michael" means, "Who is like God?").
      Those who refute that role of the resurrected Jesus Christ, point to the fact that Jesus could not be a mere angel, even if being, an arch - angel. 
      Those who make such an assertion, apparently do not know the meaning of the Greek word, angelos. It simply means "messenger" (John12:49; 7:16). 
      The Greek meaning of "arch", is defined as the original prototype, with no equal. To be the "archangel", is to be supreme among God's messengers. 
      When Armageddon arrives, Jesus takes on an identity of a warrior (Rev.19:11,14; 17:14; 12:7) (Rev.3:12; Jer.31:33; Heb.10:16;Ex.34:14; Deut.11:18; Rev.7:3; 13:7,8,16,4). The name "Michael" ("Who is like God?"), perfectly describes his battle tactic and purpose, and indicates the target of his warfare that needs to be neutralized by the strategy reflected in that victorious name (Isa.40:25,18; 46:5) (Rev.13:14).

      Others may refute this named role of Jesus, based upon Michael being called "the great prince" (Dan.12:1) and "one of the chief princes" (Dan.10:12-14). Those are the topics that the link below, addresses.
      The article on the chief princes was broken down into three parts/questions. Previously, only part one was finished. This post serves as notice, that part two is now ready.
      June 6, 2015:
      QUESTION:

      "does the Bible shed light on how many Chief Princes are there and who they are as stated in Daniel 10:13 Michael, one of the chief princes"

      MY REPLY:

      Yes, the Bible sheds light on how many Chief Princes there are,
      who these chief princes are, and who all the princes are, among whom there are chief princes.
      Accordingly, I will answer your question in three parts.
      1. Who are all the "princes"?
      2. Who are the "chief princes" among all these princes?
      3. Who is The "Great Prince" ("arch-angel") mentioned at Dan.12:1?
          (Jude1:9; Dan.10:21; 8:25; Acts 3:15)
          (Jude1:9; Job 1:8-11; Zech.3:1-2; Rev.12:10 --
                        "Moses" -Deut.18:15,18; Heb.3:5; Matt.16:28; 17:1-3,5; 2Pet.1:18; Rev.14:1)
      -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

      1. Who are the Bible's princes?

      I will limit my reply to the princes of God's covenant woman, and not include the princes of Satan's covenant of death
      (Eph.2:2; Isa.31:9; Eze.21:25; 22:27; 38:3; Dan.9:26; 10:20; Zeph.3:3; Rev.18:23; 9:7).

      The princes under the Great "guardian" Prince/Rescuer, (Dan.12:1; Isa.49:24-25; Matt.12:29; Rev.20:1-2; Luke10:19), who is Christ,
           (Isa.9:6; Dan.9:25; 12:1; John17:12; 6:39; 10:28; Matt.28:20),
      are the kings under the great king (Rev.19:16; 1:5; 3:21; 5:9,10; Eph.2:6; 1:22; Col.1:13).

      They are also considered by God, Christ's sons, because by means of Christ, they receive spirit life (John10:10; 20:22; 6:63; 5:21;17:2; Rom.8:9,10,11,13; 1John4:9,13; 5:11-12; 2:25; John3:6,15,36; 6:47,48,51,57,63; 10:28; Heb.5:9). "But", you may protest, "don't we all become 'sons of God'?". Yes. But there is more to it.---

      Within the Bible, forefathers are multiple. This tradition is a cultural difference from most modern day societies. 
      Please let me explain...
      Within the Bible, living faithful can have more than one father... both God and Christ (Isa.9:6).  Christ received his life from God first, before he can pass that incorruptible seed to those after him (1Pet.1:23; Luke8:11; John12:49; 6:63; James1:21).
      "Grandfather" is not in the Bible's language. This is why Abraham, David, Jacob, etc., are considered "fathers" of many subsequent generations. 
      All the generations of their descendants, have all of these as "fathers"
      (Zech.1:2,4-6; Acts3:13; 7:19; John8:39; Ex.3:6; Luke1:32; Matt.1:1), regardless of how many generations may come and go in between.

      Accordingly, we should not limit the spiritual lineage of those born of spirit, to either God or Christ as "father". Such ones are "sons" of both. Yet some are born of God's spirit directly (Rom.8:16; Heb.2:11), and others, through Christ and his bride (1Cor.15:45; Gal.4:26; Rev.22:17). 
      You may have noticed that within the scriptures, our spiritual fathers are the ones whom we imitate (John8:39,44; Eph.5:1;1Pet.1:16; Matt.5:44,45,48).  We can therefore, also be sons of Christ (1Pet.2:21) and of the sealed faithful (1Cor.11:1;4:15,14,16,17; 1John2:13,14; Philemon 1:10; Luke1:17; Phil.2:22; 3:17; 1Thess.2:11; 1:6) (Mal.4:5-6). 


      Hopefully, all these previous scriptures have helped to establish within your understanding, that whoever we imitate and do the will of, becomes our spiritual father (Eph.5:1; Matt.12:50; 7:21; 1John2:17; Rom.8:14) -- (Eph.2:2; John8:44). 
      If you do grasp that imitating Christ (1Cor.11:1; 1Pet.2:21) can make us his son, it will then be easier to grasp who the "princes" are. 

      First, lets look at Ps.45:16, which speaks of the dominion of Christ.

      "In place of your fathers will be your sons;
      You shall make them princes in all the earth."

      In place of Christ's kingly forefathers (Luke1:32; Isa.9:7; Matt.12:42), will come his spiritual sons (Heb.2:1-9,14,13,16; Isa.8:18;John10:28,29; 6:37-39; 17:2; 1Pet.1:5; Matt.18:3; 19:14), with whom he shares his kingdom (Ps.132:12; 110:2; Rev.3:21; 14:1;Jer.17:25; Eze.37:25; 34:24) (Heb.2:5,16; Rom.4:13; Gal.3:29; Gen.28:13,14; 13:14,15).
      They become co-kings (2Tim.2:12; Rev.5:9,10; 20:6) and co-princes (Isa.10:8; 9:6; Acts3:15; 5:31; Isa.32:1,2).
      As heirs of the earth, these will heal creation (Rom.8:19; Rev.22:1,2; 21:2-5; Jer.17:7,8; Matt.7:20; Eze.36:8), and also provide a "fatherly" example, that leads to life (1Cor.4:15-17; Phil.3:17; 4:9; 2Thess.3:9; 1Thess.1:6; 2Tim.3:14,15; Heb.13:7; 1Pet.5:3).
      From the foregoing reply to the first question...
      "Who are all the princes?";
      I hope you now perceive, that all those redeemed from death by Christ (Rev.5:9,10; 1Cor.15:54-55; Acts20:28) which "church" is the chosen saints of God's household (1Tim.3:15; 1Cor.14:33; 1Pet.2:10,9), are given fatherly life by Christ's blood...
             (through the new mother covenant of promise/sealed Bride
                 -Gal.4:26,24; Matt.26:28; Rom.9:8; Rev.12:2; Gal.4:19; Eph.4:13; 1Thess.2:7; 3John1:4) 
      ...These are his "sons", referred to as "princes" at Psalm 45:16.
      As such, they become "heirs of the earth" 
      (Rom.4:13; Gal.3:29; Heb.2:5,16; Matt.5:5; Psalm.37:11,22,29)
      and are, 
      "all the princes".

      2. Who are the "chief princes" among all these princes?

      Based upon the facts established above, we can re-word this question as, "Who are the "chief saints/sons of God" among all the saints/anointed chosen and holy ones?". Does such a position, exist? Please consider:
      Luke 12:42; John 21:17
      Although all members of the "one body" bride of Christ (Eph.5:31-32; 1Cor.6:17) are needed by all other members (1Cor.12:21,25;4:7); each has their own assignment (1Cor.12:14,4-7,18,11,20; Eph.4:8,11-12). 
      Some are given more responsibility (Luke 12:42; Mark 13:34; Matt.25:14-15; James 3:1; 1Cor.12:24,26; Luke 14:8,10-11), as "chief princes". How does the Bible describe the position held by those appointed as such?
      One of the symbols used to describe the body of Christ, is as God's Temple (Rom.12:5; 1Cor.3:16; 1Pet.2:5,9-10; Col.1:13).
      Jesus, is described as the cornerstone of that Temple (1Pet.2:6-8; Matt.7:24-25). If we build our faith upon the teachings of that cornerstone, we will not be put to shame but all we teach, will be proven true (Rom.10:11; 3:4; John7:16-18). Can you perceive how the symbolic "chief" cornerstone of our faith (remember, "chief princes"?), is the first symbolic foundation to our worship in spirit and truth? 
      If so, then we are starting to build the Temple of God, within your perception. If the "chief cornerstone" is the "great prince"/"chief prince" (Dan.12:1)... What about the other "chief princes" (Dan.10:13)? Does the Bible describe the rest of God's symbolic Temple, as having other foundation stones, upon which our faith needs to be chiefly built upon?
      Please consider Eph.2:20-22; 3:5; Rev.21:14; 1:20; Dan.12:3-4; Phil.2:15; 2Cor.11:4; Gal.1:8-9; Luke12:42; 1Pet.5:2;Heb.13:17; 1Cor.4:15)
      1Cor.12:28 and Eph.2:20, clarify the arrangement of authority ("chiefs") within the congregation, appointed by God and Christ. The apostles are our foundation stones, along with Jesus the cornerstone, of the truth. 
      ---No one can remain in union with the cornerstone and head of the body, if they leave the teachings of the apostles, whom he appointed as fatherly heads to the 12 tribes of spiritual Israel (Matt.3:9; Gal.3:29,26; Rom.2:28-29; Rev.7:7; 21:11-12,14). 
      ---No one can remain in union with the unfolding direction of holy spirit, if they leave the declarations and warnings of the genuine and faithful prophets, whose foundation is the right hand of Jesus (Rev.1:20; 22:6; Amos 3:7; 2Pet.1:21; 1Cor.14:32-33;Rev.11:3-5; Jer.23:29; Zech.4:11-14,6; Hosea 6:5; Rev.22:6; Mal.3:1-3; Rev.11:3). Those "stars" provide the light of spirit to each of their assigned "lampstands" (Rev.1:20), which lampstands hold up, and work to make visible (Matt.5:14-15; Eph.2:19;Gal.6:10), the prophet/"star" whom they support (Heb.6:10).
      We have learned that the symbolic foundation to the Temple of God's spirit (1Cor.3:16), is the truth of the apostles and the spirit of the prophets (Eph.2:20; 3:5). They are both necessary if a disciple is to lay a foundation of faith and worship, upon spirit and truth (John4:24). The apostles and prophets who produce spiritual food sourced in the spirit and truth from Christ (John15:4-5,8,16;Rev.22:1-2), are the "chief princes"/foundation stones. They are aligned with the cornerstone, and provide a basis upon which the living stones of the Temple of God, rest.

      3. Who is The "Great Prince" ("arch-angel") mentioned at Dan.12:1?
      Dan.12:1 reads; “At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then. But at that time your people—everyone whose name is found written in the book—will be delivered."

      [Before I go into Part 3: The Great Prince; I would like to offer additional information on other points made by Dan.12:1. 
      First, the unprecedented "time of distress". Here is a link to start off the information about the Great Tribulation (Matt.24:21)

      Second, the Book of the Lamb, within which the names of the delivered, are written (Rev.13:8; 21:27; 3:5; 17:8; 20:15,12)

      (TO BE CONTINUED)
      Pearl Doxsey – “WHO ARE THE CHIEF PRINCES?”
      4womaninthewilderness
    • By Diakonos
      One thing that has always puzzled me is this: what happened to the spirit creature Michael when Jesus was conceived/born as a human? We are told that Jehovah transferred Michael's life pattern into Jesus in much the same way as God will do for those who are resurrected. This would mean that when Jesus was alive on earth there was no Michael in heaven. As we do not believe that humans have a spirit, in the accepted sense of the word, the question remains, what happened to Michael during Jesus earthly presence?
    • 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’.
    • By Jesus.defender
      JEHOVAH’S NAME or JESUS CHRIST’S NAME.

      The Watchtower teaches that God’s true Name is Jehovah. They teach that:
      ‘Sometime during the second or third Century CE, the scribes removed the tetragrammaton (JHWH) from both the Septuagint and the Christian Greek Scriptures and replaced it with κυριος (Lord) or θεος (God)’. Reference Edition of NWT, 1984, p 1564.
      The Watchtower’s Kingdom Interlinear Translation (KIT) proves that Jesus is Jehovah God.
      On page 10,11 of the 1985 KIT, under the heading ‘Restoring the Divine Name, Jehovah’ we read: ‘the evidence (what evidence?) is that the original text of the Christian Greek Scriptures has been tampered with (no proof) . . . Sometime during the second or third centuries CE, the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) was eliminated from the Greek texts by copyists (no proof).
      Instead of YHWH they substituted the words Kurios (‘Lord’) and Theos (‘God’).’
      Note: This is a lie. There is no historical or manuscript evidence or evidence of protest to support this claim. Somebody would have protested such a change.No one did. It never happened.
      The New World Translation (NWT) is the JW perversion of the Bible made to support their false doctrines. It inserts the name ‘Jehovah’ in the New Testament in the place of God (θεος=theos) or Lord (κυριος =kurios) on 237 occasions, where they believe it refers to God the
      Father. They often refer to Hebrew translations of the NT to see where this has been done.
      These are footnoted as J1 to J27. Their dishonesty and deceit is shown by their failure to translate these words as ‘Jehovah’ when it refers to Christ. (eg: Philippians 2:11; Hebrews 1:10).
      JWs say that the proper use of God’s ‘correct’ name (Jehovah) is absolutely essential to one’s salvation. They quote from their NWT: 
      ‘Everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.’ Romans 10:13 (NWT).
      ‘People will have to know that I am Jehovah.’ Ezekiel 39:6 (NWT).
      JWs believe that because they are the only group who refer to God by His ‘true’ name, Jehovah, they are the only true followers of God.
      Their claim is false for these reasons:
      1) Jehovah is not a Biblical term. It is a man-made term. The Old Testament has YHWH because the original Hebrew only had consonants. Jews feared taking God’s name in vain, so when they publicly read YHWH, they would pronounce it ‘Adonai’ (Lord).
      Later they inserted the vowels from Adonai (a-o-a) into the consonants YHWH to give YAHOWAH, which became Jehovah. Hence, the word Jehovah comes from a consonantvowel
      combination from YHWH and Adonai.
      2) No-one knows for sure the original correct pronunciation of YHWH. Hence we cannot insist on ‘Jehovah’ as being correct.
      3) Jesus never addressed the Father as Jehovah in the New Testament. If JWs are correct that God must be always called Jehovah, then Jesus was sinning by not calling God ‘Jehovah’. When the NWT puts Jehovah in Jesus’ mouth in the NT, it contradicts all the NT manuscripts which don’t have it.
      QUESTION: Since Jesus never in the NT addressed the Father as Jehovah, why should we?
      4) Jesus and the Apostle Paul tell us to address God as ‘Father’:
      a) Jesus taught us to pray to God as ‘Our Father’, not ‘Our Jehovah’: ‘After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father.....’ (Matthew 6:9).
      b) Jesus addressed God as Father in His own prayers:
      ‘I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth’. (Matthew 11:25).
      ‘O my Father, if it be possible.......’ (Matthew 26:39,42).
      ‘He said, Abba, Father.......’ (Mark 14:36).
      ‘ I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven.......’ (Luke 10:21).
      ‘Saying, Father, if thou be willing.......’ (Luke 22:42).
      ‘Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them;.......’ (Luke 23:34).
      ‘Father, the hour is come......’ (John 17:1).
      c) Paul said, ‘we cry, Abba, Father.’ (Romans 8:15).
      d) The Holy Spirit through Paul said, ‘God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father’. (Galatians 4:6).
      Here the Holy Spirit of God tells us to call God ‘Abba, Father’, not ‘Jehovah’
      QUESTION: If Jesus, the Holy Spirit and Paul all address God as Father nine times (and never as Jehovah) then shouldn’t we call God ‘Father’?
      5) No Ancient NT manuscripts contain the tetragram (YHWH) to translate as Jehovah.
      The Church writers before 325 AD only mention Jehovah once in passing. JWs tell us that most Bible versions deceive people because they omit Jehovah as God’s Name, so
      the JWs dishonestly add the word ‘Jehovah’ to the NT text, even though it is not in any NT Greek manuscript, ancient version, papyri or lectionary.
      The WT’s claim that ‘Jehovah’ as God’s name was removed from the NT by superstitious scribes, is a total lie with no supporting historical or manuscript evidence.
      6) Whose Name did the early Christians identify themselves with? Was it Jehovah or was it Jesus Christ? Always Jesus Christ, never Jehovah.
      Who knows more, the Apostles or modern JWs? Consider these examples:
      a) The Apostles never used the name ‘Jehovah’.
      b) The Apostles and first century Christians were never called ‘Jehovah’s Witnesses’. ‘The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.’ (Acts 11:26).
      c) There is no proof that Jesus or his disciples ever pronounced the tetragram YHWH. 
      JWs claim that when Jesus read from Isaiah 61:1 ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me....’ as quoted in Luke 4:18,19, that Jesus pronounced the word ‘YHWH’.
      This is most unlikely. JWs assume that the religious leaders endorsing Christ’s ‘gracious words’ in verse 22 was because He uttered the name YHWH?
      Historical records in the Mishnah, from Josephus, and from other sources show the Jews were loathe to allow the name YHWH to be used. The Jews would not have tolerated it being used by anybody but the High Priest.Jesus would have read ‘Adonai’
      7) 119 Bible passages referring to Jehovah, are quoted and applied to Christ in the New Testament (Proof Available)
      QUESTION: In view of 119 Bible verses applying ‘Jehovah’ to Christ in the NT, what does this tell you about who Christ is?
      ? The New Testament tells us to name the name of Jesus Christ, not the name of Jehovah. Consider these examples:
      1. ‘Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.’(II Timothy 2:19)
      2. ‘I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ . . .’ (I Cor 1:10)
      3. ‘Ye are washed,....sanctified,... justified in the name of the Lord Jesus ’ (I Cor 6:11)
      4. ‘Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.’ (Col 3:17)
      5. ‘That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you....’ (II Thess 1:12)
      6. ‘Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves.....’ (II Thess. 3:6)
      7. ‘all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours.’ (I Corinthians 1:2)
      8. ‘Thou holdest fast my name....’ Jesus said to the Pergamos church. (Revelation 2:13).
      JWs have not held fast Christ’s name, nor have they called upon Christ’s name, nor do they name the name of Christ, nor is Jesus Christ precious to them, because they do not have saving belief in Him. ‘Unto you . . . which believe He is precious’.(I Peter 2:7).
      QUESTION: Where does the NT tell us to name the name of Jehovah?
      9) The New Testament always lifts up Jesus Christ’s name, not Jehovah’s name. Why?
      Because Jesus Christ is Jehovah God on earth. Christ is 100% God and 100% man.
      Q1: In whose name should we meet together?
      ‘Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.’ (Matthew 18:20)
      Q2: Demons were cast out by the authority of whose name?
      ‘Paul.....said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.’ (Acts 16:18)
      Q3: In whose name should we preach repentance and forgiveness of sins? ‘And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations. And ye are witnesses of these things.’ (Luke 24:47,48)
      Q4: In whose name are we to believe and receive forgiveness of sins? ‘....through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.’ (Acts 10:43, John 1:12)
      Q5: By whose name, and no other, do we obtain salvation? Acts 4:10,12 says: ‘by the name of Jesus Christ ... Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.’
      Q6: In whose name should we pray? John 16:23,24; 14:13,14; 15:16 says: ‘Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.’
      Q7: In whose name is the Holy Spirit sent?
      ‘But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name......’ (John 14:26)
      Q8: In whose name and authority did the disciples heal the sick?
      ‘His name through faith in his name hath made this man strong’ (Acts 3:16; 4:30)
      Q9: Whose name did Paul say that we are to call upon?
      ‘ all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.’ (I Cor 1:2)
      Q10: Whose name is above every name?
      ‘God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name .... that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.’(Phil 2:9-11)
      Paul’s quote about Christ is from Isaiah 45:22-24 where every knee will bow to Jehovah. What is true about Jehovah, is also true of Christ, the Lord of all mankind
      Q11: According to Acts 1:8, of whom are we to be witnesses?
      ‘Ye shall be witnesses unto me (Jesus)’
      Q12: In whose name were believers baptized?
      ‘they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus’. (Acts 8:16; 2:38)
      Q13: In whose name were believers designated?
      ‘the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch’. (Acts 11:26)
      Q14: In whose name did the apostles speak?
      ‘Commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus’ Acts 4:17,18
      Q15: In whose name did early Christians suffer? Acts 15:26 says:
      ‘Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ ‘rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name’Acts 5:41;9:16
      Q16: Whose name was Paul to carry?
      ‘Lord said: He is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel.’ (Acts 9:15)
      Q17: In whose name did Paul deliver a man to Satan?
      ‘In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ...to deliver such an one to Satan.’ I Cor 5:4,5
      Q18: In whose name did the apostles teach? Acts 5:28; 8:12 says:
      ‘Did we not straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name?’
      10) Why does WT break their own rule (where the OT speaks of Jehovah), that they do not insert Jehovah in the NT, when the quote clearly refers to Christ?
      Peter quotes from Joel 2:32 (spoken of Jehovah) and applies it to Jesus in Acts 2:21 and 38.
      Calling on the name of Jehovah for salvation equals repenting and being baptised in the name of Jesus Christ because of the forgiveness of sins.
      Conclusion: Jesus shares the nature of His Father and His Name. The absence of YHWH in any NT manuscript demolishes the WT case of introducing the word ‘Jehovah’ into the NT.
      Question: If God was so concerned about preserving His covenant name, why did the apostles not preserve it in their writings?
      Question: To imply that the name ‘Jehovah’ is the main name of God that we are to use, contradicts the continued NT use of the name ‘Jesus’ on 900 occasions, while the tetragram YHWH is used nowhere in the NT.
      QUESTION: Why does the WT not translate ‘Jehovah’ into Hebrews 1:10, I Peter 3:15 andPhilippians 2:11, when the OT passages from which these are quoted refer to YHWH?

      We are to make the name of the Father known as Jesus emphasized (Matthew 6:9; John 17:26). How do we do it? By recognizing that Jesus Christ was chosen by the Father to embody all the glory and important reputation of that Name.
       
    • By Jesus.defender
      CHRIST’S BODILY RESURRECTION ‘I have power to take it again’Jn 10:18
      Watchtower Teaching: ‘Jesus was raised to life as an invisible spirit. He did not take up again that body in which he had been killed . . .’ ‘Let your Name be sanctified.’ (p.266).
      The Watchtower teaches that Jesus’ body was disposed of by God.
      The NWT mistranslates I Peter 3:18 as ‘being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit’ to teach merely a spiritual resurrection of Christ.
      Bible Teaching: I Peter 3:18 refers to when Christ died. His Spirit went and preached to spirits in prison (v. 19,20). After three days, Christ’s physical body was raised.
      I Peter 3:18 (KJV) correctly reads: ‘being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.’
      Which Scriptures best teach Christ’s bodily resurrection?
      1. ‘They were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.’ (v.37) He said unto them, ‘Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.’ (Luke 24:37, 39)
      Notice that the resurrected Christ says here that:
      (1) He is not a spirit;
      (2) His resurrection body has flesh and bones;
      (3) His physical hands and feet are proof of His physical resurrection;
      Jesus is trying to convince them that He, ‘I myself’ has a permanent physical body which still had the nail scars in His hands and feet. This is opposite to the WT teaching that Christ’s body was disposed of and that He became only a spirit. If the WT claim was correct, then
      Jesus would be deceiving the disciples here in showing them His body.
      2. ‘Then saith he to Thomas, . . . reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.’ (John 20:27)
      Here Jesus says that He has a physical side that He challenges Thomas to touch.
      3. ‘Neither did his flesh see corruption.’ - Acts 2:30,31
      Notice the following:
      a) God promised David that ‘according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ’ to sit on his throne.’ (v.30). This is a bodily resurrection of Christ, not spiritual. The NWT omits this because of its corrupt Westcott-Hort Greek text. Well over 38 manuscripts have it.
      b) ‘neither did his flesh see corruption’ (v.31) means that Christ’s body did not decay.
      Why? Because Jesus was raised from the dead in a material, fleshly body.
      4. ‘I will raise it up . . . he spake of the temple of his body.’ - John 2:19-21
      ‘Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up (v.19). But he spake of the temple of his body.’ (v.21)
      Jesus here promised that He Himself would raise up His own body after three days.
      Notice how Jesus uses the word ‘body’ meaning a bodily resurrection, not a spiritual resurrection.
      5. Christ promises to eat of the fruit of the vine in the Kingdom. Only a body can eat.
      ‘I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the Kingdom of God shall come.’(Luke 22:18)
      Jesus here showed that his resurrected body would be able to eat and drink even in the Kingdom of God. Notice that a non-material spirit cannot eat and drink. Jesus promised the disciples in Luke 22:30 ‘that ye may eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom.’
      Question: If Jesus expected to become an immaterial spirit, why would He promise the disciples that they would eat and drink with Christ at His table in His Kingdom?
      6. Christ ate a broiled fish and a honeycomb in front of them. Luke 24:41,42.
      7. ‘he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies’. Rom. 8:11
      As Christ’s body was raised physically from the dead, so shall our mortal bodies be raised.
      8. His resurrection body could ‘breathe on them’(John 20:22). A spirit cannot breathe, can it?
      9. ‘His feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives...’ Zechariah 14:4
      A spirit does not have feet. Only a physical body has feet as Jesus has at His second coming.
      10. ‘One shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands?’ Zechariah 13:6
      Question: How can a non-material spirit have wounds in his hands which can be observed?
      11. The resurrected, glorified Christ touched John, laying his right hand on him. Rev. 1:17
      Watchtower Objection: JWs quote I Corinthians 15:44,50 to support their claim that Jesus was raised from the dead as a spirit creature:
      a) ‘It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.’ (v.44)
      b) ‘flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God.’ (v.50). JWs claim that Jesus must have had a spiritual resurrection, because flesh-and-blood bodies cannot exist in heaven.
      They claim that mortality and corruption belong to the fleshly body.
      Bible Teaching:
      a) The Greek word for body, ‘soma’ (4983), always means a material body, an organised whole made up of parts, when used of a person (Zodhiates, NT Word Study,p.1358). The spiritual
      body in I Cor.15:44 is not an immaterial body, but a supernatural, spirit-dominated body.
      It is a body directed by the spirit, as opposed to a body under the dominion of the flesh.
      There are no exceptions to Paul using ‘soma’ for a material body.
      Paul even refers to a believer as a ‘spiritual’ man who judges all things (I Cor. 2:15), yet Paul did not mean an immaterial invisible man with no physical body.
      He meant a spirit-controlled man with a flesh and blood body.
      QUESTION: In I Corinthians 2:15 (‘He that is spiritual judgeth all things’), is Paul discussing an invisible spirit creature or a material, flesh-and-blood human? Can you see that being ‘spiritual’ does not demand a non-material body? The same is true in I Corinthians 15:44.
      b) Key: In v.50 ‘flesh and blood’ is an idiom meaning that mortal, perishable, earth-bound
      humans, as we are now, cannot have a place in God’s glorious, heavenly Kingdom.
      c) ‘this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.’v.53
      Nothing is taken away from us (materialness). Instead immortality is ‘put on’ or added to us.
      Question: Don’t the words ‘put on’ mean adding something to humanity (that is immortality),
      not taking away something from humanity (our material body)?
      Conclusion: Since Christ’s resurrected body could eat, drink, breathe (John 20:22), show His hands and feet with scars (Luke 24:40), be touched, and have flesh and bones (Luke 24:39), it is certain that this body was a material body. This is especially true since Jesus corrected the disciples’ misconception that they had seen a spirit (Luke 24:37).
      For the JWs to say that a body is not a body, is their last resort of redefining common words.
       
    • By The Librarian
      Is there more than one acceptable way of treating the remains of the dead?
      Source
    • By Cos
      One of the most striking features of the teachings of Jesus is that He was constantly talking about Himself. And to enter into the Kingdom depends on how we respond to Him personally; He even called the Kingdom of God “my Kingdom”.

       

      This self teaching of Jesus is one of the first things that set Jesus apart from the other religious teachers of the world. Jesus points people to Himself saying “I am the truth; follow me” No other founder of the world religions would dare say such a thing and expect to be taken seriously.

       

      The personal pronouns that Jesus uses force us to pay attention.

       

      "I am the bread of life…” (John 6:35)

       

      "I am the light of the world…" (John 8:12)

       

      "I am the resurrection and the life…”  (John 11:25)

       

      The great question on Jesus’ teachings about Himself leads to Him asking, “Who do you say that I am?” (Matt. 16:15).

       

      Jesus had such a strong opinion of Himself, it is not surprise that he should call people to Himself, “Come to me” and “Follow me”.

       

      Jesus offered Himself as someone in whom His contemporaries should put their faith in and to whom they should offer their love to. People are to believe in God – Jesus urged them that to have eternal life people are to believe in Him (John 3:36).

       

      So when we look at the biblical evidence for the true Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ one cannot help noticing Jesus’ own self-consciousness witness of Himself, in other words, His self-understanding…what did Jesus think and believe about Himself?

       

      Let’s have a look at what Jesus says about Himself and whether what He says reflects a consciousness of being Deity?

       

      Keep in mind that what follows is NOT an exhaustive study, but just a brief expose of the topic.

       

      In Mark 2:5-10 we read: “When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, ‘Son, your sins are forgiven.’ Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, ‘Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?’  Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, ‘Why are you thinking these things?  Which is easier: to say to the paralytic, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up, take your mat and walk'?  But that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins....’"

       

      When the paralytic was lowered through the roof by his four friends, Jesus did not respond with a comment about the man’s physical condition or his need of healing. Rather, his initial comment was, “your sins are forgiven”. The reaction of the scribes indicates the meaning they attached to his words: "Why does this fellow talk like that? He's blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?"

       

      What we have is a strong statement of divine authority, and the context shows that it was a blasphemous assertion IF HE WAS NOT GOD! Notice that He does not answer their charges with a "Hold on now! I am not claiming to be God! I am claiming something less!"--not at all!

       

      The reaction of the Jews shows that they interpreted Jesus’ words that He was exercising the prerogative that belong to God alone (see Isa, 43:25). Here was an excellent opportunity for Jesus to correct the scribes if they had misunderstood the significance of His words. Note that He did not. In fact His response is highly enlightening for He goes on to claims that He has that prerogative of God, notice also how Jesus knew their thoughts; only God can know the thoughts of men (Acts 15:8; 2 Chron. 6:29; 1 Kings 8:38). More can be said but I’ll leave that for another time. <><
       
       
       
       
       
    • Guest Nicole
    • By Brother Rando
      The Memorial of Christ is not the Last Supper that the world continues to celebrate. The Last Supper can also be rendered the Last Passover Meal. The Jewish Day began at Sunset.  Since the Sun sets at various times, the Passover Supper would begin after the Sun disappeared from the Horizon with darkness setting in. The Last Passover Meal was Nisan 14th, 33 CE with the abolishment of the Old Covenant.
      When evening came, he was reclining at the table with the 12 disciples. ?While they were eating, he said: “Truly I say to you, one of you will betray me.” (Matthew 26:20-21)   The event that concluded the Last Passover Meal was the dismissal of an unfaithful apostle.  Jesus answered: “It is the one to whom I will give the piece of bread that I dip.” So after dipping the bread, he took it and gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. ?After Judas took the piece of bread, then Satan entered into him. So Jesus said to him: “What you are doing, do it more quickly.”  (John 13:26-28)  “So after he received the piece of bread, he went out immediately. And it was night.” (John 13:30)
      After dismissing the betrayer from the midst of the Faithful Disciples, Jesus instituted a new teaching for His Faithful Followers.  Notice, the whole world wasn’t invited, but those who proved to be faithful and trustworthy up to this point.  Since the founding of the Christian Congregation on Pentecost 33 CE, Christians have been commemorating the death of Jesus Christ every Nisan 14th.  With one simple command,  his faithful sheep “Keep doing this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19)
      Please join us for the annual observance of the death of Jesus Christ. This year it will be held on Saturday, March 31.   Search for your Language and Place.
       
    • Guest Nicole
    • By Israeli Bar Avaddhon
      Referring to those cities that would not listen to the message, Jesus said that on the Day of Judgment he would be more bearable to Sodom and Gomorrah than to them - Matt. 10:14, 15; Matthew 11: 20-24

      Before saying that he used a hyperbole, we would think about another writing.
      Matthew 12:36 says, "I tell you that any unprofitable word that men will say will account in the Day of Judgment."
      If we only read what has been written without seeking articulated interpretations, it is well understood that "they have said" is in the past, referring of course to what has been said in this life and not what they could have said in the future (in fact, Jesus he is condemning the Pharisees who have just asserted that He drives out demons by Beelzebub).
      Let's think about one last writing.
      In 2 Timothy 4:14, the Apostle Paul said, "  Alexander the coppersmith did me a great deal of harm. Jehovah will repay him according to his deeds "
      Jehovah would have repay his works when?
      Before his death, that is in the first century?
      Did Jehovah perhaps intervened to punish all persecutors of Christians in the first century?
      Is it not clear that the Apostle Paul is saying that Jehovah would remember the actions of this Alexander on the Day of Judgment?

      The fundamental question is therefore the following:

      We are certain that when the apostle Paul spoke the words in Romans 6: 7, he meant what we believe he understood?
       
    • By The Librarian
      See main topic:
      The name "Jesus" has a long, long history. The origin of this name is the Hebrew name ????? (yehoshu'a, Strong's #3091 [Latinized as Joshua]), which means "Yahweh saves." This Hebrew name is first used Exodus 17:9 where we are introduced to Yehoshu'a Ben Nun. When this Hebrew name was transliterated in the Greek Septuagint (2,000 year old Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible) it was written as ?????? (iesous). The Greek alphabet had no "Y" sound, so it used the "I" sound. The Greek alphabet has no consonant "H," or equivalent, so this sound is dropped. The Greek alphabet also had no "Sh" sound, so it used the "S" sound. Then, Greek male names end with "s," so the "s" was added. And this is how ????? (yehoshu'a) became ?????? (iesous) in the Greek. It is common for names to shift and evolve when transferred from one culture to another. For instance, the German name Ludwig is Louis in France and the Spanish name Juan is John in English speaking countries. The Hebrew name ????? (yehoshu'a, Strong's #3091) is ???? (yeshu'a, Strong's #3442 [Latinized as Jeshua]) in the Aramaic language, such as we see in Ezra 2:2. When this Aramaic name was transliterated in the Greek Septuagint, they used the same method as stated above and it comes out to ?????? (iesous), the same as it did for yehoshu'a. When we come to the New Testament period we find that the name of the Messiah is ?????? (iesous) in the Greek New Testament, but we find that it is ???? (yeshu'a) in the Aramaic New Testament. When the Greek New Testament was translated into Latin in the 4th Century this name was written as Iesus, an exact match to the Greek that it came from. The Latin letter "I" split into two letters, "I" and "J." Originally this was two different ways of writing the same letter. So the Iesus became Jesus, but they were both pronounced the same way. Years later, some cultures began using the "I" for the vowel sound and "J" for a "Y" sound. It was not until around 1500 AD that the letter J took on the "dg" sound we are familiar with today. So, the modern name "Jesus" comes from the Latin Iesus, which comes from the Greek Iesous, which comes from the Aramaic Yeshu'a and the Hebrew Yehoshu'a.
    • By Bible Speaks
      What did Jesus look like? ~ ?
      Today the misrepresentation of Jesus continues. Most people picture Jesus as a babe in a manger or as a tragic figure nailed to a cross, with his face distorted in agony under a crown of thorns. 
      Christendom’s clergy have encouraged such views. They have failed to present Jesus as the mighty heavenly King with whom nations will have an accounting. 
      When human rulers confront the exalted Jesus in the near future, they will have to deal with a Messiah who has ‘all authority in heaven and on the earth’!—Matthew 28:18. - Bible Speaks
      Hand painted beautiful portrait here. Thank you 

    • Guest Nicole
    • Guest Nicole
    • Guest Nicole
    • Guest Nicole
  • Forum Statistics

    62,081
    Total Topics
    116,853
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,534
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Marek Markus
    Newest Member
    Marek Markus
    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.