Jump to content
The World News Media

Chioke Lin

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    146

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Chioke Lin

  1. Chioke Lin
    It seems the topic has changed to God's true name by its ancient form, YHWH. It appears, both sides have now gone pretty much to the left field. Not only that, it is true, in ancient times, Israelites cursed God as it appeared those people wanted more than what God was providing. There is a 1200BC Curse Tablet with God's name YHWH that does seem to indicate that. Does this mean, God's name is a negative form, YHWH as indicated by misapplying the lexicons? It would be disingenuous if a Christian would think of it that way. It was society that cursed God, because they thought God was bringing them to ruin. They saw no fault in disobeying God in search of their own interest, especially after worshiping other Gods, like Baal. Now, why does the organization use God's real name in the New Testament? To me, it separates Jesus (Lord) the son with God (Lord) the father. YHWH was also used in ancient times to mean Jesus. We know Jesus is not God. He made that clear himself. In Hebrew form, the YHWH is seen in the New Testament. How the scribe decided to apply YHWH was distinctive to the scribe, unless the scribe wanted to hide God's true form. Lord, LORD’: Jesus as YHWH in Matthew and Luke "Despite numerous studies of the word κύριος (‘Lord’) in the New Testament, the significance of the double form κύριε κύριε occurring in Matthew and Luke has been overlooked, with most assuming the doubling merely communicates heightened emotion or special reverence. By contrast, this article argues that whereas a single κύριος might be ambiguous, the double κύριος formula outside the Gospels always serves as a distinctive way to represent the Tetragrammaton and that its use in Matthew and Luke is therefore best understood as a way to represent Jesus as applying the name of the God of Israel to himself. Keywords: Christology, LXX, Tetragrammaton/Tetragram, translation, Synoptic Gospels, circumlocution So, we need to be mindful to separate Jesus and Jehovah in English form in the NT.
  2. Chioke Lin
    Nehemia Gordon, Blotting Out the Name 2020 Scribal Methods of Erasing the Tetragrammaton in Medieval Hebrew Bible Abstract Part 2. Early rabbinic interpretation of Deut 12:4 prohibited erasure of the Tetragrammaton, which required Jewish scribes to employ creative methods to resolve extraneous instances of the divine name. This may be foreshadowed in the writing of divine appellations in Paleo-Hebrew in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Medieval Jewish scribes employed diverse methods to deal with errors involving the Tetragrammaton. In codices this involved marking God’s name with dots, rectangles (also used in liturgical scrolls), lines, and supralinear circelli. Some scribes indicated the Tetragrammaton’s erasure by leaving it unpointed and recording a correction (usually Adonai) in the margin, without any additional notation. A special procedure involved a nonstandard usage of the Qere notation. All of these methods were performed in accordance with rabbinic strictures. Part 2 of this study will consider exceptions to the rule and the special case of liturgical Torah scrolls. Abstract Part 1 of this study considered how the rabbinic prohibition against erasing the Tetragrammaton led to scribes performing diverse procedures to resolve scribal errors. In part 2 it will be shown that special procedures were performed in Torah scrolls, namely, skiving, excision, and removing sheets. Washing off the divine name was not found in the corpus examined. Despite the rabbinic prohibition, medieval Jewish scribes occasionally marked the Tetragrammaton with a strikethrough or erased it through abrasion. This may have been the handiwork of Karaite scribes who did not see themselves bound by the midrashic interpretation of Deut 12:4. The scribes who wrote the Aleppo Codex may have abraded erroneous instances of the Tetragrammaton in order to create a model codex. Scribes in the isolated Jewish community of Kaifeng, who erased erroneous instances of the Tetragrammaton, may not have been familiar with rabbinic strictures. 〈The scribe who〉 was supposed to write the 〈divine〉 name, 〈mistakenly〉 wrote “Judah” with intention, but had not yet placed the dalet; he erases it and writes the 〈divine〉 name. Rabbi Judah says, “He traces over it with the pen and sanctifies it …
  3. Chioke Lin
    Bible Scholar "Nehemia Gordon" might shed some new light into the name of God in the New Testament. https://midwestoutreach.org/2018/02/01/is-gods-name-jehovah/#:~:text=On January 21%2C 2018%2C Bible Scholar Nehemia Gordon,Hebrew name of God was originally pronounced “Yahweh.” https://religionnews.com/2018/01/25/the-original-hebrew-name-of-god-re-discovered-in-1000-bible-manuscripts/ If you have no problem interacting with scholars, you can email him at, and see what his take is on it. Just remember, scholars don't always see leading questions. Nehemia Gordon Bar-Ilan University, Israel ngordon4@gmail.com His earliest find with the vowels added, as he claims, are from 894AD, well before the common knowledge of a Monk in 1100AD.
  4. Chioke Lin
    It is a good point. Now let's see if we can get the topic back on track without personal attacks that you claim are impersonal. How would you speak to an atheist about Armageddon? They do believe in the end of the trail of man, or at least some do. Does that mean, as evolution does, at some point, man will self-destruct and a new form of humanity will evolve? A better one. How would those humans know, what listen they need to learn as not to make the same mistake as the old human race? This type of reasoning actually has bible support.
  5. Chioke Lin
    How do we adapt that timeless wisdom of Jesus, as he did for those that were still under the Mosaic Law, to our time, without seeming invasive and dismissive of other's concern? Wisdom is a good tool to expand on with discernment. Has it not been expressed on the local level? Reasoning plays a great role as well. But, these are personal observations that have no relevance to the topic. We should continue with the topic above without personal distractions from all of us. So, we don't consider them personal to an impersonal discussion.
  6. Chioke Lin
    If this is true, commentator, why continue your hostility if you have peace of mind? Your personal action of down voting facts as described by many bible writers and experts indicate, you only believe what your hate dictates. That's not healthy in any case. Sorry if the truth hurts your feelings. Perhaps this bible forum isn't suited for your kind of hate. You are making it personal and taking it personally. I to feel that way at times. This is why, I noted that in a previous post, perhaps it's time for me to find a better bible forum. It appears hate runs both ways and the show here. If that's the case, I don't need Satan to control my life.
  7. Chioke Lin
    I don't get your rationale. You're not blaming God and insist the 1000-year doctrine belongs to an organization, when it belongs in the bible, which in turn belongs to God. Bible writers wrote, Adam and Eve made a choice of disobedience. How does that inspired word that's in all the bibles, including the KJV, belong to the WT? We are all imperfect, including you. Should this mean, it's okay to sin? You seem to be at odds with what is written in Matthew 5:48. Why do you believe people should continue to be sinners and disobey God's words as Christians? I think we are "all" overreaching on this topic. We should stick to the topic at hand.
  8. Chioke Lin
    We can see, that the Org is not the only one making sense of the bible. All things in the Bible 2006 Jesus also quoted many of the prophets in his references to the Day of the Lord, emphasizing that he was continuing the well-known tradition. Both Hebrew and Christian apocalyptic literature have references to the Day of the Lord or Judgment Day. As noted, the prophets looked forward to that time when God will come in judgment, the final battle against the forces of evil—“Israel’s final combat with the combined forces of the heathen nations under the leadership of Gog and Magog, barbarian tribes of the North” (Ezek. 38–39). “Assembled for a fierce attack upon Israel in the mountains near Jerusalem, they will suffer a terrible and crushing defeat, and Israel’s land will thenceforth forever remain the seat of God’s kingdom” (Kaufmann Kohler 2004). This final cataclysmic scene of Armageddon will end with the defeat of the heathen nations forever, and God’s kingdom will be established on earth. According to the New Testament writers, the New Jerusalem will be a city that needed no temple, for God himself will dwell in it. p.165 Aside from making a few adjustments to the wording like "Israel" to "Spiritual Israel" and the "barbarian tribes of the north" to "all nations" then we have confidence, the Org is interpreting the bible correctly.
  9. Chioke Lin
    True, however, these times are not Jesus time. If we have studied the bible for such a longtime, then we should know the best approach for those that condemn. If we are uncomfortable answering scathing remarks, what good has all that studying done? Mark 13:13
  10. Chioke Lin
    Are you faulting God for giving man a choice? Is God then a lie? This has no bearing to the topic above, sorry to say. Personal attacks on each other, is an unwavering example of that choice man made so long ago. Deuteronomy 30:15-20 How can we use the Adam and Eve affect to actively tie in the 1000-year reign? II Peter 3:8
  11. Chioke Lin
    Commentator. The only thing your list can prove is imperfection that existed in Jesus time. If you look at your list, you will find, plenty of bible proof that many things in your list are actually taken from the bible. While your passion is to condemn a certain Org, you are actually condemning the words of God. Now, some in your list, are schemes, as you put it, are made by men to discredit the Org. That's not the Org's fault, that is a misleading interpretation from the opposition. However, Those are personal views that a bible discussion can do without.
  12. Chioke Lin
    Being overhanded is a bit much, as you call an impersonal discussion. Bible discussion imply just that, a discussion of the bible. There should be no personal interaction with someone's personality or character. I see, you just made a point clear with another commentator that is opposed to the Org. If they shouldn't be able to excuse themselves, why should we?
  13. Chioke Lin
    This was done in a point in time, when people held their beliefs entirely. They knew the Roman pagan worship was wrong. In today's world, it's not the same. We are dealing with people that hold their version of Christianity is right and the Org's is wrong. In a bible forum, as well as door to door, it's required to meet such challenge, as it has become part of man's philosophy now.
  14. Chioke Lin
    Glad to see you would have to agree with at least one aspect of my comment. After the end of the 1000 years, we would have become God's temples and Jesus still being that cornerstone and foundation. Good needs to start from somewhere, and it does start with Jesus. Like you mention, many bible writers also believe in the same aspect, not just the organization. The fact you submitted at point of interest that agrees with my point is another example, it's not just my belief as a commentator. My personal identity has no bearing on my comments. The bible does. I would appreciate if you keep that in mind.
  15. Chioke Lin
    Yes, commentator. That's why I mentioned the KJV, ESV, and NAS on my previous post. They have the same interpretation. The point about these bibles, it confuses the issue in verse 8. There cannot be any conspiracies with the bible's interpretation. That was the reason I posted the lexicon that refutes that understanding. It doesn't mean, the saints in heaven, but the holy ones on earth after they become sinless. They, of course, become God's holy saints on earth. A blemish free temple of God.
  16. Chioke Lin
    My post agrees with your assessment.
  17. Chioke Lin
    Then it's not just the Org to have similar understanding. Once again, the discussion shouldn't be about an individual, but how we prove it to the public. How we arrive with our conclusions. It shouldn't matter if a commentator is an opposer. 20:7-8 20:7-8. John was told what would happen at the conclusion of the thousand years. Satan will be released from the Abyss, his prison, and will make a final attempt to induce nations - called Gog and Magog - to come and battle with him against Christ. Satan's release will produce a worldwide rebellion against the millennial reign of Christ. The armies will be so vast in numbers that they are said to be like the sand on the seashore. Who are these who will follow Satan? Those who survive the Tribulation will enter the Millennium in their natural bodies, and they will bear children and repopulate the earth (Isa 65:18-25). Under ideal circumstances in which all know about Jesus Christ (cf. Jer 31:33-34), many will outwardly profess faith in Christ without actually placing faith in Him for salvation. The shallowness of their professions will become apparent when Satan is released. The multitudes who follow Satan are evidently those who have never been born again in the millennial kingdom. (from Bible Knowledge Commentary/Old Testament Copyright © 1983, 2000 Cook All rights reserved.) Is all this commentary correct? Some of it is, some of it is speculation of the writer. But, what is similar to prove, it's not just the Organization interpreting the bible correctly. Apparently, you commentators think, I'm refuting your understanding. I'm not. I'm questioning whether it conforms to how the Organization interpretation of the bible.
  18. Chioke Lin
    This is all well and fine for the Org. The problem here, you are dealing with people that are opposed to the Org, and it's teachings. So, to them, they feel we are promoting man-made schemes. That's my point. Unless my English is so bad that it cannot be understood, commentators need to see my intent, and not convict, just because someone painted a bullseye on my back and commentators now believe something that is not factual. Too much opposition from both sides. That's the perception I'm getting. I thought this is a discussion forum about the bible, not about the person. Perhaps, it's time to find a better forum.
  19. Chioke Lin
    There seems to be some misleading words with this interpretation of the bible. 9 They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. This passage is referring to the people of the world, not the saints in heaven. Remember, after the 1000 years, God's people will have become Holy, perfect. So, whatever Holy temple that will be erected on earth, that will be the city God loves. Now what does the lexicon mean, "belonging to God saints?" God's people, believers. Those that survived Armageddon, and those that were resurrected and accepted God on earth, not in heaven. That's the understanding of "Belonging to." (1TH 3.13); as human beings belonging to God saints, God's people, believers (AC 9.13); (b) neuter τὸ ἅγιον what is holy, what is dedicated to God (MT 7.6); as a place dedicated to God sanctuary, holy place (HE 9.1); plural ἅγια holy place, (outer) sanctuary (HE 9.2); ἅγια ἁγίων most sacred place, inner sanctuary, very holy place (HE 9.3) How can we confirm that? By the passage on verse 8. 8 and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth—Gog and Magog—and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. There's no mention of heaven, and the heavenly saints on earth. Even with that misleading interpretation of the bible, KJV, ESV, NAS, etc, the passage indicated, "breadth of the earth" which has nothing to do with heaven.
  20. Chioke Lin
    How can you convince others that we are not doing the same? In What I can see, that question has not been answered by being affective with the bible.
  21. Chioke Lin
    I would appreciate it better, if you studied it further to discern what it's actually referring to.
  22. Chioke Lin
    Glad you can accept this. I have been correct on many parts. It appears, you have not been paying attention. Being humble is an assist, not a crime.
  23. Chioke Lin
    Is everyone here suggesting that I'm suggesting something different? Why are your words better than mine? I just make the discussion more factual with the organization's view by means of other publications that are not the Org's. The opposition doesn't care for the Org's view.
  24. Chioke Lin
    Did I mention you were? You seem to have a hard time reading my post. I made an example on a subject you have a passion for, which is Gog and Magog.
  25. Chioke Lin
    How about Gray's Concise bible commentary. The seventh event is the loosing of Satan at the close of the Millenium and the doom of Gog and Magog (vv. 7-9). Here Satan is again seen (this time in his own person) at the head of a final effort to overthrow the kingdom of God on earth. In the Millennial age sin still will be in the hearts of men except as they are regenerated, and Satan will find good soil to work in when his liberty is restored. The identity of Gog and Magog is not revealed, but their purpose is clearly indicated in verse 9. The eighth event is the doom of Satan (v. 10) who, being cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, is not to be conceived of as then reigning in hell. This idea, borrowed from Milton, is not in the Bible. The ninth event is the doom of the unbelieving dead and the last judgment (vv. 11-15). There just needs to be a hint of commonality to encourage further study as a student of the bible.
×
×
  • 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.