Jump to content

JOHN BUTLER

All scripture is inspired of God. A small prophecy ?

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

JOHN BUTLER -
Outta Here -
21
534

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

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

2 Timothy 3 v 16

Was this in it's way a small prophecy ?                 

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

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

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

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

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

    • Hello guest!
    • Hello guest!

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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

Share this post


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

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

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

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

Share this post


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

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

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

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

Share this post


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

Was this in it's way a small prophecy ?

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

18 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

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

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

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

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

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

 

Share this post


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

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

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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

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

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

Share this post


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

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

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

4 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share this post


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

     

 

Share this post


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

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

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

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

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

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

Share this post


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

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

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

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

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

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Outta Here said:

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

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

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

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

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

4 hours ago, Outta Here said:

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

Yes. The Watchtower has referenced this view.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Share this post


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

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

Further to all the earlier postings and your original point. 

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

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

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

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

 

Share this post


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

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

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

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

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

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

Share this post


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

But illiteracy was very common in the first century,

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

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

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

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

Jesus’ parable of the unjust steward (

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

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

2 hours ago, Outta Here said:

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

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

2 hours ago, Outta Here said:

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

But apparently they did!

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Though still using the same scripture ?

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

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

 

Share this post


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

So the same point made by the blogger could be taken as evidence against the literacy of the common man.

Good point, along with the second quote.

But I can't think of a single instance where Jesus "walked into one" when dealing with the Pharisees and scribes, or anyone else for that matter.

So I think I'll stick with the view that Jesus argued from safe ground here, and that the apostles were sufficiently numerate to at least count to 50 (Mk.6:20), and had enough of a grasp of letters to carry out something of the advice of Ps.1:2.

So the patronisingly arrogant and self-agrandising view of the apostles, as held by the Pharisees and scribes, remains .....just that........ for now, anyway.?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • By 4Jah2me
      If the CCJW is going to be God's / Christ's chosen Organisation to bring humans through 
      Armageddon / Judgement Day
      What serious changes need to take place in it first ?
      As you know my feelings are that neither God nor Christ can use the CCJW as it is. But I am seriously trying to think on a more spiritual level so I'm trying not to be biased. By reading many comments on this forum I've noticed that even those JWs that resolve to stay firmly in the 'Org', still have some feelings of discontent. 
      So the question I'm asking is more to those JWs who are remaining 'faithful' to the CCJW and it's GB. 
      Do you see the need for big changes in the way the CCJW is run ?
      Do you really believe that God & Christ are happy with the CCJW as it is ?
      I am not deviating from my belief of a 'true Anointed' being 'raised up' in these 'last day', but as I've said before that 'true anointed' could well be within the CCJW.
      I'm keeping my mind 'open' to all manner of thoughts, whilst trying to, hopefully with God's guidance, find truth. 
      However, I am of the opinion that 'new light' via the GB, will not provide the answers or right direction that is needed. But that is just my personal opinion, and I may be proven wrong................
    • By 4Jah2me
      ACTS 2 V 16 , 17  & 18.
       On the contrary, this is what was said through the prophet Joel: 17  ‘“And in the last days,” God says, “I will pour out some of my spirit on every sort of flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy and your young men will see visions and your old men will dream dreams, Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  18  and even on my male slaves and on my female slaves I will pour out some of my spirit in those days, and they will prophesy
      Jerusalem had the end of it's 'last days' in 70 C. E. But prior to that a 'miracle' happened.  Acts 2 v 1 through 11.
       Now while the day of the Festival of Pentecost was in progress, they were all together at the same place. 2  Suddenly there was a noise from heaven, just like that of a rushing, stiff breeze, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3  And tongues as if of fire became visible to them and were distributed, and one came to rest on each one of them, 4  and they all became filled with holy spirit and started to speak in different languages, just as the spirit enabled them to speak.5  At that time devout Jews from every nation under heaven were staying in Jerusalem. 6  So when this sound occurred, a crowd gathered and was bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in his own language. 7  Indeed, they were utterly amazed and said: “See here, all these who are speaking are Gal·i·leʹans, are they not? 8  How is it, then, that each one of us is hearing his own native language? 9  Parʹthi·ans, Medes, Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  and Eʹlam·ites, the inhabitants of Mes·o·po·taʹmi·a, Ju·deʹa and Cap·pa·doʹci·a, Ponʹtus and the province of Asia, 10  Phrygʹi·a and Pam·phylʹi·a, Egypt and the regions of Libʹy·a near Cy·reʹne, sojourners from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  11  Creʹtans, and Arabians—we hear them speaking in our languages about the magnificent things of God.
      We are again in 'the last days', so why would you be surprised if God should pour out some of HIS SPIRIT on a true Anointed group of humans. 
      Where is your faith ? Do you no longer believe in God's power ? Do you no longer believe that God can do 'miracles' ?
      Your GB have admitted to NOT BEING INSPIRED OF HOLY SPIRIT.
      Yet here we have in scripture, God's promise that HE WILL POUR OUT SOME OF HIS SPIRIT in the 'last days'. 
      Are we in those LAST DAYS or not ? Do you expect God to act or not ? Or are you just physical men ? 
      Have you lost your 'spiritual eyes' ? Did you in fact even have 'spiritual eyes' ? Are you relying on men and not on God through Christ ? 
       
    • By 4Jah2me
      What should we believe and what should we question ? What should we just accept and what should we research ? 
      How deep should we dig in order to find truth ? 
      How do we really know what TRUTH is ?
      Yes I'm asking serious questions and trying to dig very deeply
      THE BIBLE CANON.
      Now here is a lovely place to start digging. And here is a lovely place to ask ourselves, Should we just accept the Bible Canon as it is ?
      “Canon” is a Greek word meaning “rule” or “measuring stick.” So the Bible canon is the 'accepted' 66 writings that the Bible holds.
      Should we accept this canon or question it ? Do you know that many 'Bible scholars' did not and do not agree on the Bible canon ?
      140 C. E.  Marcion rejected the Old Testament, along with any writings that might reinforce views other than his own. He developed a list of books he considered acceptable: portions of the Gospel of Luke, ten of Paul’s letters, plus a letter purportedly from Paul to the Alexandrians. This list is known as the Marcion Canon.    After Marcion and Montanus, lists of New Testament books begin to appear. One of the first was The Muratorian Fragment. It was discovered among the Vatican’s sacred documents by historian Ludovico Antonio Muratori in 1740 and dates to about A.D. 190. The fragment is damaged. The portion we possess begins with “the third book of the Gospel is that according to Luke.” We assume the first and second Gospels to be Matthew and Mark. The fragment lists John, Acts, all of Paul’s letters, James, 1-2 John, Jude and the Revelation of John. It also includes the Revelation of Peter, the Wisdom of Solomon and (“to be used in private, but not public worship”) the Shepherd of Hermas.   In 367, Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria, wrote an Easter letter that contained all twenty-seven books of our present New Testament. In 393 the Synod of Hippo affirmed our current New Testament, and in 397 the Council of Carthage published the same list.   But :-   In the first and second centuries after Christ, many, many writings and epistles were circulating among the Christians. Some of the churches were using books and letters in their services that were definitely spurious. Gradually the need to have a definite list of the inspired Scriptures became apparent. Heretical movements were rising, each one choosing its own selected Scriptures, including such documents as the Gospel of Thomas, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter, and the Epistle of Barnabas.   The Council of Carthage established the orthodox New Testament canon in 397 AD; it was upheld at the  Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  in 1545. By the way, Protestants and Catholics are in agreement with their use of the same New Testament. However, were any of those men true servants of God through Christ ?  Were they guided by God / Holy Spirit ? The scriptures talk about men entering into the 'congregation' / organisation that would mislead many and not act is a truthful way.     A small point but of interest, is in Paul's Letter to the Colossians Ch 4 v 16  "And when this letter has been read among you, arrange for it also to be read in the congregation of the La·o·di·ceʹans and for you also to read the one from La·o·di·ceʹa. "   Here we read that Paul mentions his letter to the congregation of Laodicea, and a little bit of research will find this letter.  To the Laodiceans   1 Paul, an apostle not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ, to the brethren who are of Laodicea. 2 Grace to you and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.   20 And cause [this letter] to be read to the Colossians and that of the Colossians to you.   There is not much in the letter to Laodicea but, if the translation I've found is correct then it is one of Paul's letters. And it was important enough to Paul to mention in both letters Colossians and Laodiceans to read both to both congregations.   So, why is it not in the Bible canon ?    At this point i must thank @JW Insider for his work and for his giving me much information concerning other writings of 'Scripture' and history of Bible times. Thank you.    I was not aware, A, that so many other 'writings of scripture' had been written, B, that so many still exist and are available to read online.    But this poses a question. If we believe that God, through Holy Spirit, has kept 'His written word' 'alive' and available for all to read, then who has kept all those other 'writings of scripture' available for all to read ? and why ?   How much should we investigate and how much should we just accept ?    The Bible Canon is just a starting point. We could follow up with, Do we accept the translation we have or should we try to compare it to the original Hebrew and Greek scriptures ?  How close to the original Hebrew and Greek can we get ? What does God and Christ expect of us ? Do they expect us to dig deeper than just reading the translation of the Bible that we have ?   
    • By James Thomas Rook Jr.
      Perhaps the KIT could be the Society's next translation project !
      .... Years ago, on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, below the fold, on the right hand side (if memory serves), was a 2"x2" or so picture of Star Trek - The Next Generation's Security Officer Worf, and the article announcing the publication the KLV Klingon Language Bible.
      I have forgotten many of the details if I ever knew them, as I was crying from laughter so much it was hard to see.
      I do remember from the article that there were particular difficulties in doing a good job of translating, as the Klingon language is very abrupt, and there is no word for the concept of "mercy"..
      I understand that the KLV Translation is somewhat like our "Silver Sword", in that it is simplified and is more like a commentary, but I think I will wait until someone puts out a Klingon Interlinear Translation of the Bible (KIT).
      I guarantee NOBODY will fall asleep at the Klingon speaking Kingdom Halls, as the speakers are VERY loud, and they have a tendency to yell and spit at the same time.
      You may want to sit at least three rows back.
       
    • By James Thomas Rook Jr.
      WHY .... doesn't Jehovah God consider warfare ... murder?
      It seems clear to me that Jehovah allows civil governments to run their own affairs as they see fit, and even has no objection to them judging and executing wrongdoers ... and even commands us to be in subjection to these governments, as even the very worst of them are better than anarchy.
      People generally misinterpret the scripture that say " Thou shalt not kill." where the scripture more actually says "Thou shalt not murder".
      There is a very real difference.  A sovereign government, executing a wrongdoer is implementing the political will of that government ... whether it be a government the size of a continent .. or an extended family sized tribe of Jewish sheepherders living way out in the middle of nowhere, living in tents, governed by a patriarch.
      I have not been able to find in the Bible where actual warfare, committed by any sovereign group, is considered to be murder ... either by the perpetrators of the war, or the defenders of the war against them, except in the case of "war crimes" against non combatants and other cases.
      Did you know it is legal to drop napalm on civilians in war, from an aircraft ... but not from a flame thrower from a soldier on the ground?
      ....but I digress.
      Even people that warred against the Jews  were not considered murderers..... they were considered warriors.
      I am working on getting this all straight in my mind now ... as there seems to be a profound truth buried in this stream of thought, somewhere, but I cannot get it to crystallize, or perhaps it is approaching 3AM, and I am too tired to think about it.
      But whatever it is that is ... what profound basic principle that I am missing ...is based on having a correct answer  as to WHY ... WHY does God NOT consider warfare to be murder.
      I suspect when I figure it out, it will be like driving down a road in a southerly direction, thinking you are going North ... and then you see that landmark or sign that indicates you are really going South ... and that feeling you get when your whole frame of reference rotates in your head, like the world just rotated 180 degrees.
      It's like deja vu, and geography, combined.
      Perhaps my premise is faulty, but I don't think so.
      Please feel free to destroy my premise, or my stream of thought, or my conclusions.
      I try to be "loyal" to whatever is true, and not an agenda of defending an agenda.
      Knowing "WHY?" things are the way they are, is the key to good philosophy.
      Bad philosophy will waste our lives, which are pitifully short.
       
       
       
       

    • By James Thomas Rook Jr.
      WHY .... doesn't Jehovah God consider warfare ... murder?
      It seems clear to me that Jehovah allows civil governments to run their own affairs as they see fit, and even has no objection to them judging and executing wrongdoers ... and even commands us to be in subjection to these governments, as even the very worst of them are better than anarchy.
      People generally misinterpret the scripture that say " Thou shalt not kill." where the scripture more actually says "Thou shalt not murder".
      There is a very real difference.  A sovereign government, executing a wrongdoer is implementing the political will of that government ... whether it be a government the size of a continent .. or an extended family sized tribe of Jewish sheepherders living way out in the middle of nowhere, living in tents, governed by a patriarch.
      I have not been able to find in the Bible where actual warfare, committed by any sovereign group, is considered to be murder ... either by the perpetrators of the war, or the defenders of the war against them, except in the case of "war crimes" against non combatants and other cases.
      Did you know it is legal to drop napalm on civilians in war, from an aircraft ... but not from a flame thrower from a soldier on the ground?
      ....but I digress.
      Even people that warred against the Jews  were not considered murderers..... they were considered warriors.
      I am working on getting this all straight in my mind now ... as there seems to be a profound truth buried in this stream of thought, somewhere, but I cannot get it to crystallize, or perhaps it is approaching 3AM, and I am too tired to think about it.
      But whatever it is that is ... what profound basic principle that I am missing ...is based on having a correct answer  as to WHY ... WHY does God NOT consider warfare to be murder.
      I suspect when I figure it out, it will be like driving down a road in a southerly direction, thinking you are going North ... and then you see that landmark or sign that indicates you are really going South ... and that feeling you get when your whole frame of reference rotates in your head, like the world just rotated 180 degrees.
      It's like deja vu, and geography, combined.
      Perhaps my premise is faulty, but I don't think so.
      Please feel free to destroy my premise, or my stream of thought, or my conclusions.
      I try to be "loyal" to whatever is true, and not an agenda of defending an agenda.
      Knowing "WHY?" things are the way they are, is the key to good philosophy.
      Bad philosophy will waste our lives, which are pitifully short.
       
       
       
       
    • By ntr
      More Free images and Videos at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      More Free images and Videos at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      More Free images and Videos at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      More Free images and Videos at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      More Free images and Videos at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      More Free images and Videos at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      Some of my 3d Bible artwork - More free videos and images at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      Some of my 3d Bible artwork - More free videos and images at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      Some of my 3d Bible artwork - More free videos and images at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      Some of my 3d Bible artwork - More free videos and images at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      Some of my 3d Bible artwork - More free videos and images at bibliaprints.com
    • By ntr
      Some of my 3d Bible artwork - More free videos and images at bibliaprints.com
    • By 4Jah2me
      It is true that I no longer go door to door teaching others about God or about His Kingdom. However i do a bit of what might be classes as 'witnessing' on Facebook and at other opportunities.  So I found this quote online and I thought, that it is probably better than I could write it myself.  Quote : -
       
      Anguish of Nations not knowing the way....Out ? Out of What?
      “Anguish of nations, not knowing the way out . . . Men become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth.” (Luke 21:25, 26) Crime, violence, drug addiction, family breakups, economic instability, unemployment—the list is long and growing. One prominent scientist wrote: “We will eat fear, sleep fear, live in fear and die in fear.”
      “In the last days critical times hard to deal with.” (2 Timothy 3:1) The apostle Paul spoke of people “having come to be past all moral sense.” (Ephesians 4:19) He elaborated, however, on the moral breakdown he foretold for “the last days.” It sounds like today’s newscasts: “Know this, that in the last days critical times hard to deal with will be here. For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, self-assuming, haughty, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, disloyal, having no natural affection, not open to any agreement, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, without love of goodness, betrayers, headstrong, puffed up with pride, lovers of pleasures rather than lovers of God, having a form of godly devotion but proving false to its power; and from these turn away.”—2 Timothy 3:1-5.
      “In the last days there will come ridiculers.” (2 Peter 3:3) Newspapers, newscasts, magazines, books, and movies scornfully dismiss the Bible and replace it with their own freethinking propaganda, saying, as Peter foretold: “Where is this promised presence of his? Why, from the day our forefathers fell asleep in death, all things are continuing exactly as from creation’s beginning.”—2 Peter 3:4. " : End of quote.
      But this quote was written a decade ago. TEN years ago. And things are much worse now. 
      I think I've mentioned earlier that I'm into reading all the 'word news' but i did get a topic come up on my FB, page from the Telegraph, about 'some big climate change meeting of top knobs', so I just tried to give it some balance from God's viewpoint.  I will of course get a blasting from folks on FB but i can handle that.  
      It helped me also to gain a bit of balance. But then it also creates so many questions. God needs a true, faithful and clean collection of humans for when He decides to 'sort out the problems' down here on Earth. There is indeed much work to be done. Only time will tell how it all plays out, and who HE uses. 
       
       
    • By The Librarian
      Jehovah in the Bible, the God of Israel who 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. , a spirit realm outside the physical heavens and is not omnipresent or "residing" in a human's heart.
      "Jehovah" at Exodus 6:3(1611 King James Version)
      Jehovah /dʒɨˈhoʊvə/ is a Latinization of the Hebrew יְהֹוָה, a vocalization of the Tetragrammaton יהוה (YHWH), the proper name of the God of Israel in the Hebrew Bible, which has also been transcribed as "Yehowah" or "Yahweh". יְהֹוָה appears 6,518 times in the traditional Masoretic Text, in addition to 305 instances of יֱהֹוִה (Jehovih).The earliest available Latin text to use a vocalization similar to Jehovah dates from the 13th century. 
      Relationship of Jehovah with the rest of the Universe
      Think of Jehovah as the Architect of the Universe and Jesus Christ as his "Master Builder" (Proverbs chapter 😎 through whom everything else was created. His first Creation was Jesus Christ himself Billions of years ago before the physical universe ever existed.

      Michael the Archangel (later called Jesus Christ) used God's Holy Spirit in order to create our Universe and later perform miracles related in the Gospels. All energy in the Universe sources with Jehovah God's Holy Spirit and later the exalted and enthroned Jesus Christ enthroned as King would be given "Life within himself" thereby also being given immortality and having his own spirit. (source needed) See also
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. Jehovah's Witnesses Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  /  Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      Dear reader.
      You have often come across terms, God's holy spirit and God's love.
      You have also often prayed for the favor of God, among other things asking that God's holy spirit help you, guide you, to have a spirit. Some Bible passages say that God gives something to people.
      We find expressions that say how God gives:
      - his spirit without measure - John 3:34.
      - a certain measure of faith - Rom 12: 3
      - a measure of grace - Eph. 4: 7
      - measure of authority - 2 Cor. 10:13
      - a double measure of blessing - Isaiah 61: 7
      - double measure of inheritance - Deut 21:17
      - double measure for bad deeds - Rev. 18: 6
      Also how a man seeks or receives from another man:
      - double measure of spirit - 2 Cr. 2: 9
      - double honor - 1 Tim. 5:17
       
      There are also allegations relating to love. How love is given or received and under what circumstances:
      And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him. ”- John 14:21
      For God loved the world, - John 3:16
      I love those who love me - Prov 8:17
      Your love, O LORD, reaches to the heavens - Psalm 36: 5 -7
      I have loved you with everlasting love; - Jer 31: 3
       
      From these statements we can see that love also works under certain circumstances. Sometimes it's eternal, going to heaven. Sometimes it is conditioned because he says: I will love you if you love me", "if you obey, listen me".
      Based on the paragraphs that speak of giving / receiving a spirit, I could conclude that God gives the holy spirit to those who seek it, and those whose hearts are pure receive that spirit from God. When GB claims that they make mistakes in word and deed because they are not perfect and because they are not "spirit-inspired," then that is just an excuse. When they claim that they are not "inspired by the spirit of God," that would mean that God does not give his spirit to anyone, not even to them. So, if they, as "God's elected," "anointed," cannot be "inspired," then they are actually sending the message that no one else can be "inspired." And then such a claim has the consequence, meaning, that God and his spirit are not able to be active. God works through his spirit, doesn't he? Well, he created the universe with his spirit ?! He wrote the Bible with his spirit ?! He uttered prophecies with his spirit ?! And today the spirit is unable to act on the few people sitting in Warwick?
      Does God lie when he says, "... for God gives the Spirit without limit. - John. 3:34
      Is the problem in the spirit of God? Or is it a problem in humans? :))
       
       
    • By 4Jah2me
      I do hear occasionally on this forum, the expression of, (oh dear it's gone now), I'll say Basic beliefs, Foundation beliefs, of Jehovah's Witnesses. 
      My point being, when were those basic foundations started ?  Yes we have Russell and Rutherford et al. So who decided what was what and when ? 
      We have things like 'hell fire' eternal damnation' ' soul in continual punishment' etc. But who basically found the truth from God's word about 'The dead are conscious of nothing at all' ?
      Then we have the 'resurrection of the dead',  those being split into heavenly and earthly. Who decided these things from scriptures ? And when ? 
      It would probably take me 10 years, which I probably do not have left, to research all the things I wish to know. 
      So here is a question. From 1960, what new serious Bible knowledge do we have from those whom regard themselves as the F&DS or top of the tree ?
      What have they given to the congregation that is of extreme importance ?  BUT, more importantly what have they given that they haven't changed since giving it ? 
      So we've lost the 7,000 year creative days. We've lost Armageddon in 1975, We've lost no blood / replaced with blood fractions. We've lost the Superior Authorities as God and Christ, and probably lots more. BUT what important beliefs have we gained since 1960 ? What IMPORTANT SCRIPTURAL input have those at the top made since 1960 ? 
       
    • By 4Jah2me
      Point 1. I really do laugh at this term "Only game in town"   As I've said before the JEWISH RELIGIOUS LEADERS would have said that serving God by obeying THEM and the Mosaic Law, was the only game in town. Jesus however proved those Religious leaders to be wrong. Jesus and his disciples carried over the good points of the Mosaic Law and discarded the bits no longer needed. (Such as animal sacrifices, circumcision etc). 
      Russell & Co came out of former religions. I presume they must have carried over some good points from those former religions, then made adjustments or changed doctrines.
      So why would it not be possible for people that have left the JW Org to form a new religion ?  Carrying over the good and disposing of the bad, of which there seems to be plenty....
      I'm not saying it will happen but it does dispose of this idea of 'the only game in town' brainwashing. JW's seem to be taught that there cannot be anything else ever. What if Russell had believed that, the Bible Students would have never been formed. 
      Point 2.  The 'Truth' / JW Org.
      As I read more and more on here I am finding out that the Governing Body / Writing Dept'  / Legal Dept' et al,  have deliberately told many lies.
      The latest I'm reading (on a new topic on here) but the info stems back a while, seems to contain information whereby the 'Org' / those in charge at the time, implied, that children cannot get baptised, and that blood transfusions were acceptable to the Organisation. It seems that this was written in order to get favours from a certain government. 
      Both of those things are lies but seem to be deliberately used for some form of dishonest gain.
      Then of course we have lawyers telling lies in court about shunning. 
      And C.S.A court cases have proved that elders and others have deliberately lied. And the American 'section' of the JW Org deliberately withholding information regarding such matters.
      Link this to misuse of scriptures, such as, Superior Authorities, which deliberately took away people's conscience / freedom of choice, in WW2.
      And I'm sure people here can come up with lots more examples of lies, deliberate wrongdoing, mistakes, misinterpretations, 'new light' corrections et al.
      Why am i writing all this ?  Well I am proving two points. 
      1. If it's your 'only game in town' then it's not a good one. 
      2. That calling it 'The Truth' is totally deceptive.
      I do not think you would like it if I gave you a meal that was three quarters yummy, but a quarter poison. The poison might well contaminate the good food !
      So, saying that the Org / GB are three quarters right does not help. 
       
       
       
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      GB claims how they are not "inspired". They also claim that the Organization is "spirit-guided". There is also an idea that God has always had his organization on Earth, the first being the Old Nation of Israel, and then First Assembly at the time of the Apostles, and after long centuries of darkness organization appeared again in 1879 as WT Society. So, we have three organizations in three time periods.
      Who has guided, led these organizations? We see that organizations were guided by people. The first was Moses, then the Judges and Prophets, the Kings, and then the Apostles and today is The GB. According to the present claims of this modern organization of God, it is logical to conclude that both of the previous two organizations had been guided by God by the same principles too, meaning, that no inspirational/uninspired people were at the forefront of a spirit-guided organization.
      Which tools are used to run today's organization? Thousands and thousands of pages of written text and public and private talks. All of these published texts and speeches were/are not "inspired", in fact, they presented many erroneous teachings and instructions, in the face of claims, that the organization is/was spiritually driven at the same time. So we have a God's spirit-guided organization that teaches the wrong things.
      What does this have to do with past God's organizations? In the past, members of those two perished Organizations also wrote texts and held public and private speeches. Did those texts and the words been "inspired". If we judge according to today's GB teachings and the way how God, supposedly,  leads a modern organization, we could rightly say that, how past leaders were not "inspired" when writing and gave speech. Because God has no need to "inspire" imperfect servants when He already has "spirit guided organization" :))
      What is "inspired" in that, if someone had wrote what he has seen or heard during her life? Or if they write down their memories after a few years after the event? Most of the biblical text is precisely this - writing what someone saw and heard personally or that writing came through the oral tradition, something that other people have seen, heard, and spoken in some period of time. Only in exceptional cases, the authors of certain parts of the script, claimed that the instructions/revelations/prophecy  were received through dreams, visions or God or angel directly addressed them. So, for a very small part of the text in the Bible, we can say that it is "inspired" by divine supernatural power. The vast majority of the text in the Bible is actually a retelling  of the events that have been experienced - either from oneself or from other people. And for such, there is no need for extra "inspiration", but a good memory of those who recount the event and a good memory of the one who later writes it.
      To bring claim that God, with his spirit, has led each of these three organizations, but that only the Israeli representatives (and writers) and representatives of the 1st Assembly (and the writers) had "inspired" directly with His spirit to make the written and spoken content, but how God changed his mind in the 19th century and gave up from doing the same way of managing his organization, it seems strange. Why would God be inconsistent with his principle of how to lead his earthly organizations? Why would God "inspire" Moses and the John (and all the rest between) to speak and write, but today he does not want to "inspire" his Anointed Representatives who sitting in GB? Was theirs time more difficult than today? Do not we live in the end time when all is much worst than before? :)))
      If JW  members considers that it is quite right and normal for God to lead his organization through "not inspired" texts of today's "servants of God" whose "research and knowledge was multiplied" and become far greater, clearer and safer because of more and more "Brighter Lights" that is far more advanced than before, of all what previous generations of God's servants knew and understand, then it is strange that today's texts and public speeches are so inaccurate and unsafe and need to be continually changed and corrected.
      From this WTJWORG idea of how God has kept his earthly organization in continuity since Moses' time, it is not difficult to doubt the accuracy of the texts that people have collected and incorporated into a single book, the Bible. In fact, if today's WT Society (WT is equal to God's Organization) texts contain both, accurate and incorrect things, then we could assume that the old records,  "publications" and "public and private talk" of Old Time Organizations, in their content were subject to the influence of the human factor too. The idea may seem strange and impossible (because "God with the spirit" leads his organizations) but that not give guaranties that such Organizations will not End Up in Some Form of Slavery (to inside and/or to outside Masters). Recall yourself how had ended previous 2 God's Organizations. 

      But what do you think that after 1 or 2 thousands of years from now, when we all become old dust and ashes, someone came up with the idea of choosing certain WT Society texts and create a modern "Bible" for JW?
       
    • By James Thomas Rook Jr.
      I realize there are many reasons to go to an Assembly, or Convention, and when my children were living at home they would go to others' conventions  for a variety of reasons, as well as their own.
      I would always ask them when they returned home "What did you learn that was new?" .  This was important to me as I had to work long hours to afford to finance their explorations and socialization, which I thought was important ... but I still expected them to learn something new ... and since I was paying for their travels, to tell me what was going on.
      Generally, attendance to an out of town Convention nearby would cost about $200 a day, times three days, so that would be $600.
      Now that I am retired, and my income has been cut by about 80%, it's even MORE important to me to want to get good value for the time and money I would be spending for my wife and I to spend three days, traveling out of town, to learn something of lasting value .... something worth at least three days of our time, which is painfully obviously shorter, and the what is now considerable effort and considerable expense.
      In Engineering it's important that the "Law of diminishing returns" be observed so that you do not go physically, mentally or emotionally bankrupt.
      Perhaps I am just asking for some encouragement that the effort is worth the cost and effort, and that the benefit is worth it, so if I may ask ......
      WHAT DID YOU LEARN THAT WAS NEW AT THE 2019 "LOVE NEVER FAILS" REGIONAL CONVENTION ?
      ......
       
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      Inspired ....spirit-driven.... spirit-guided.....motivated.....to have spirit of....lead up by spirit....to feel that spirit leads us ..... spirit impelled him .... he came in the spirit....sent out by the spirit....spirit did not permit them.....bound by the spirit...he was in the spirit....carried him away in the spirit... and many more other phrases in the Bible.
      Why JW's mostly, generally think that "inspiration" is action reserved only to JHVH and Jesus or devil and demons?
      "Inspiration" is state/condition of some person soul, mind and emotions.  The biblical / religious state of inspiration comes mainly out of the will of the people. But do you think how this is something that can be  achieved/put on/force upon only by the actions of superhuman powers?
      JW's are very occupied with their religion in own life and have specific relationship to this word and have specific (organizational) understanding of the concept about this special word - inspired. They think, I think that they do think :)), about this word only in religious sense and consider how it is about or only about some sort of divinity or divine holiness (or devil evil) in background.
      Because they attach great importance to this word in only one direction, they forget that there is also a very powerful influence of another force. It's the spirit of man. JW's must recall themselves more often that people are created on the image of God. And that all people in themselves have a strong spirit (of divine source by birth and genetically inherited). This human spirit is powerful and can inspire other people (earthly spirits) around them. You, as individual can be inspired by people around you or by people about whom you hear about, you are watching, you read about. 
      Also it is interesting how some other things can inspire people. For example; nature, music, poetry, stories, events, animals, imagination.
      Please, join to this topic and give, express your thoughts. Let your spirit free and let's inspire others :)))
       
    • By Jesus.defender
      In 1889, the WT said " we present PROOFS that the setting up of the kingdom of God has already begun...and that 'the battle of the great day of God almighty' (Revelation16:14),which will end in AD1914 with the complete overthrow of the earth's present rulership, is already commenced.".
      The watchtower presented "proofs".
      These "proofs" were wrong, so what credibility do they have to "proclaim" anything?
       




×
×
  • 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.