Revelation 5:9,10 - "On the Earth" vs. "Over the Earth"

[Evacuated]

On 6/8/2020 at 9:58 PM, 4Jah2me said:

In most translations I have looked at it reads as :  'on the earth'.   Why do the GB / Writing Dept translate it as Over the earth ? 

Oh, by the way, just a passing thought on Rev.5:10.

The scripture appears to be about rulership, not geography. In that case it would appear that epi is appropriately rendered in connection with the extent of rulership, rather than the geographical location of the rulers in question. The option of a contextual understanding of this preposition appears to have been exercised at Rev.9:11 and 11:6, and also by other translators in their rendering of the said Rev.5:10. (Courtesy www.biblehub.com).

Just my "version", of course.

[Srecko Sostar]

@Space Merchant if you are not able or not willing to concentrate, canalized your thoughts in  few words and few sentences than i have no need nor motivation to have conversation with You!  

You speaking about my "deviation" but you done nothing to change Your attitude toward people who don't accept your "faith" and stand for your "the truth" and your Bible hub or what ever.  

You are so ready to fight for "the truth", for your view on truth, for your version of truth here and now. Also here and now is right place and time to express not only your praise how WTJWorg teaching is wonderful, your "version" of their doctrines (and your version of own Faith, Organization, Church that you belong too), but to give Critical observation and speak against all, even minor detail that is not good and correct according to your inner sensitivity and intellectual    objectivity, about/in both Institutions. 

If you said how there is not nothing wrong in your Church and in WTJWorg OR just skip to speak up about it, to stay deaf and dumb, as you done every time when somebody ask you this same thing, you will show your true face....once again.

Have a good day :))

[Srecko Sostar]

3 minutes ago, Outta Here said:

Oh, by the way, just a passing thought on Rev.5:10.

The scripture appears to be about rulership, not geography. In that case it would appear that epi is appropriately rendered in connection with the extent of rulership, rather than the geographical location of the rulers in question. The option of a contextual understanding of this preposition appears to have been exercised at Rev.9:11 and 11:6, and also by other translators in their rendering of the said Rev.5:10. (Courtesy www.biblehub.com).

Just my "version", of course.

It looks how you are right about existence of several "versions" of doctrines inside JW members body, congregants.

But to use your vocabulary: "Who cares". :))

This testimony of yours defeats completely @Space Merchant "version" of his view on WTJWorg. :))

[Space Merchant]

22 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

@Space Merchant if you are not able or not willing to concentrate, canalized your thoughts in  few words and few sentences than i have no need nor motivation to have conversation with You!  

I am focused on the topic, but you are deviating. You were told to cite regarding Revelations 5:10, but you did not. Bringing up your errors relating to Understanding a Bible verse fits The Fable that is Srecko "of birds" Sostar.

You say this yet the question was presented to the subject matter, you are and wanting to deviate because you have no evidence.

22 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

You speaking about my "deviation" but you done nothing to change Your attitude toward people who don't accept your "faith" and stand for your "the truth" and your Bible hub or what ever. 

This is a subject of Bible understanding of the verse in question, NOT about faith. Thank you for trying to commit to deviation again.

Nowhere have I stated accepting faith, for my focus was the context and Strong's of the Bible verse in question.

22 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

You are so ready to fight for "the truth", for your view on truth, for your version of truth here and now.

My version? The Bible speaks of Jesus as King of God's Kingdom and he has those ruling with him over the earth from the heavenly Kingdom. Tell me Srecko Sostar, how does this constitutes to speaking of Faith vs. speaking of what the Bible says?

22 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Also here and now is right place and time to express not only your praise how WTJWorg teaching is wonderful, your "version" of their doctrines (and your version of own Faith, Organization, Church that you belong too), but to give Critical observation and speak against all, even minor detail that is not good and correct according to your inner sensitivity and intellectual    objectivity, about/in both Institutions. 

This no praise of anything. It is about the context and the Strong's of Revelations 5:10.

Oh, the Deviation is strong with you, proving my point again and again. Amuse me some more.

22 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

If you said how there is not nothing wrong in your Church and in WTJWorg OR just skip to speak up about it, to stay deaf and dumb, as you done every time when somebody ask you this same thing, you will show your true face....once again.

Where have I said this? Last I recall, my focus was on the viewpoint of Revelations 5:10, whereas the context is no different from others, expect if the person believes that Jesus is God, THAT IS WHERE the difference is.

How so, here we see either you are not making sense, or the birds of yours did not take care of your bandwidth which results in you jumbling about.

22 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Have a good day :))

Please cite your sources if you deem your claim for Revelations 5:10 to be true in terms of them being wrong.

[Space Merchant]

5 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

This testimony of yours defeats completely @Space Merchant "version" of his view on WTJWorg. :))

To correct you, my commentary sources were ALL pulled from Biblehub, Biblegateway and the Bible Study website; identical to Outta Here's responses.  Therefore you created your own lie granted my responses. Therefore, no defeat here. Very obvious in my responses from yesterday.

Thank you very much.

That being said, prove it wrong, cite Biblehub and cite the JWs, show us as to where the difference is, which will be unfounded because the latter is not Trinitarian.

[Srecko Sostar]

20 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

Please cite your sources if you deem your claim for Revelations 5:10 to be true in terms of them being wrong.

 

32 minutes ago, Outta Here said:

Oh, by the way, just a passing thought on Rev.5:10.

The scripture appears to be about rulership, not geography. In that case it would appear that epi is appropriately rendered in connection with the extent of rulership, rather than the geographical location of the rulers in question. The option of a contextual understanding of this preposition appears to have been exercised at Rev.9:11 and 11:6, and also by other translators in their rendering of the said Rev.5:10. (Courtesy www.biblehub.com).

Just my "version", of course.

You don't need me to cite any of my sources, because i believe how Outta Here is JW member. And he has his "version" about your asking. In another word that is how he understand official doctrine :))

[Space Merchant]

20 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

 

You don't need me to cite any of my sources, because i believe how Outta Here is JW member. And he has his "version" about your asking. In another word that is how he understand official doctrine :))

What @Outta Here  stated is identical to what I said, which is quite obvious on this thread alone, I quoted myself several times too. lol 🤣you can't be this serious. Are you? So now you backed yourself into a corner, what will you do now in this regard?

Restorationist are not Trinitarians by the way, so clearly Outta Here does not believe Jesus to be God, therefore, the actual view of the common Anti-Trinitarian are 100% the same vs the latter, so now you just exposed yourself some more.

Again, instead of tap dancing on ice and glitter, cite your sources,

show us where the difference is regarding the context of Revelations 5:10

Also you are well en route to the realm of contradiction, I can already see that.

 

I mean, you DID agree with 4Jah2me when he quoted some information from Biblehub, but you, and the others, why this terrified of commentary?

[Srecko Sostar]

3 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

So now you backed yourself into a corner, what will you do now in this regard?

I will go for a beer :))  Also, suggest you to buy one for yourself too.

[Space Merchant]

9 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

I will go for a beer :))  Also, suggest you to buy one for yourself too.

Evading? Understandable, better than deviating. You can go for your drink, therefore you can login to still answer the question posed to you granted you agreed and backed the claim of "Different viewpoint" as is "Different Doctrine". when the context speaks for itself, as with the Strong's.

That being said, I do not drink, never have, never will. As for I have reasons for such.

The question will be waiting for you when you get back, so I will quote it again granted you see what you agreed with, and to what you must answer to the claim you side with:

 

45 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

Please cite your sources if you deem your claim for Revelations 5:10 to be true in terms of them being wrong.

45 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

cite Biblehub and cite the JWs, show us as to where the difference is

 

15 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

show us where the difference is regarding the context of Revelations 5:10

 

[Srecko Sostar]

7 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

Evading? Understandable, better than deviating.

I am not evading beer, you misunderstand something :)) 

[Space Merchant]

14 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

I am not evading beer, you misunderstand something :)) 

You were asked several times to state the claims of which you acknowledged and stated yourself.

• Evade [Verb] - escape or avoid, especially by cleverness or trickery.; avoid giving a direct answer to (a question).

Also you were sure of yourself when you said I am a debater, to which I am. You even quoted methods of debate and as to how we see things, here is one for you to add to your list:

• Evading/Evasion (Question dodging) in ethics - Question dodging is a rhetorical technique involving the intentional avoidance of answering a question. This may occur when the person questioned either does not know the answer and wants to avoid embarrassment, or when the person is being interrogated or questioned in debate, and wants to avoid giving a direct response.

You can always come back to attest to your agreements and claims, instead of misfire statements and remarks, next time provide what is being asked of you.

Go have your beer, answer when ready.

Or, it can be made easier for you.

Regarding context, point out how they or what is wrong with how they see the context of the vs. version what the true context actually is, by your word. This I'd like to see.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

SM is actually worse than TTH for writing books. I just could not be bothered to read it all. I glanced over bits. There is nothing spiritual there to be learnt. I did notice SM accuse me of something to do with picking quotes from Biblehub to suit myself. But in fact i had picked the two different examples 'on' and 'above'. SM I cannot be bothered with your domineering attitude. YOU think YOU are right. That's good enough for YOU.  As for me I know that i don't need to rely on your opinions.