The other sheep: Looking for an apologist to offer an explanation

by IP_SEC 64 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    DttP,

    I think I understand your reasoning better, but then I'm pretty sure you realise that it is bound to crash against my points # 2 and 3 (to which you did not reply btw) -- namely (2) that the "other sheep" are called from another origin to the same destination; and (3) that the merging of Jewish and Gentile believers into the divine oneness (or within the same "anointed congregation," to put Johannine theology in prosaic WT style) was alluded to (should I say, "retrospectively anticipated"?) in John's Gospel.

    It would require extraordinary exegetical evidence to show that (2) and (3) do not refer to the same thing.

  • Death to the Pixies
    Death to the Pixies


    Nark, I wanted to make sure my point got across or was understood, before I continued with any other objection.

    Nark:Second, such a "secondary application" would still run contrary to the logic of the text which I pointed out earlier (two origins, one destination).

    Reply: Well, the verse in question (John 10:16) has a oneness amongst two groups, but why do you presume it is as "anointed Christians", Because of Jon 11:51,52? I take that as the dispersed **JEWS** amongst the Greeks. A quick glance at John 7:35 brings this home.

    "Then the Jews said among themselves, "Where is this One about to be going that we will not find Him? He is not about to be going to the Dispersion [i.e. the scattered Jews among the Greeks] and to be teaching the Greeks, is He?" (Youngs Literal John 7:35)

    Nark:12:20ff: Now among those who went up to worship at the festival were some Greeks. They came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida in Galilee, and said to him, "Sir, we wish to see Jesus." Philip went and told Andrew; then Andrew and Philip went and told Jesus. Jesus answered them, "The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. (...) And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself. He said this to indicate the kind of death he was to die. "

    Reply: I do not see my contention being harmed here, do you? All people regardless of their being recivers of the NC, or else will be drawn to Jesus into a oneness of faith. WT theology isn't challenged here IMO.

    I see value in coming to any Gospel with an understanding of *who* Jesus came to give the New Covenent.

    Thanks for the brevity,

    Regards.

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    OK, I've read both arguments, three times, and it seems to me that DttP and Narkissos are agreeing that John 10:16 is referring to the Jews and the Greeks, two flocks, to become one. No assumption is to be made that this verse is referring to the Anointed.

    John 10:16 NIV I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.

    If I'm not mistaken, DttP's interpretation flies in face of the Watchtower one. Anybody?

  • Hellrider
    Hellrider

    DttP:

    Nark:Second, such a "secondary application" would still run contrary to the logic of the text which I pointed out earlier (two origins, one destination).

    Reply: Well, the verse in question (John 10:16) has a oneness amongst two groups, but why do you presume it is as "anointed Christians", Because of Jon 11:51,52? I take that as the dispersed **JEWS** amongst the Greeks. A quick glance at John 7:35 brings this home.

    "Then the Jews said among themselves, "Where is this One about to be going that we will not find Him? He is not about to be going to the Dispersion [i.e. the scattered Jews among the Greeks] and to be teaching the Greeks, is He?" (Youngs Literal John 7:35)

    Actually, all passages referring to the "great crowd" and the "little flock" can be read this way. There is nothing in the passages that would indicate that John 10:16 is any different (that this exact passage refers to the distinction between actual, physical jews and gentiles), than the other passages. With " a quick glance at John 7:35" - all of the passages making this distinction, could be read this way.

    This whole discussion is really about how the JWs apply the term "spiritual Israel", and how the rest of christianity does it. The somewhat bizarre conclusion is that the JWs are operating with this term on two levels, of course, they wouldn`t like to admit that, or even have it pointed out. First of all, all of christianity agrees that if we are to use such a term as "spiritual Israel", it would have to refer to all christians, such as is shown in:

    1 Corinthians 10:1-4. 10:1 For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea, 10:2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 10:3 and all ate the same spiritual food, 10:4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they were all drinking from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.

    Romans 9:6-8: 9:6 It is not as though the word of God had failed. For not all those who are descended from Israel are truly Israel, 9:7 nor are all the children Abraham’s true descendants; rather “through Isaac will your descendants be counted.” 9:8 This means it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God; rather, the children of promise are counted as descendants.

    John 17:11-18: "And now I am no more in the world, but they are in the world, and I am coming to Thee. Holy Father, keep them in Thy Name, which Thou hast given Me, that they may be one, even as We are one. While I was with them, I kept them in Thy Name, which Thou hast given Me; I have guarded them, and none of them is lost but the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. But now I am coming to Thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves. I have given them Thy Word; and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I do not pray that Thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that Thou shouldst keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the Truth; Thy Word is Truth. As Thou didst send Me into the world, so I have sent them into the world."

    ...So, would anyone dare to claim that these passages do not refer to all those who have chosen a life in Christ, at all times thruout history, since Christ was here? These people, like all who choose to live a life in Christ, must be counted as the "spiritual Israel", as the Bible is clear on this. This would mean then, that the JWs are operating with two different spiritual Israel...one "spiritual Israel" which are ...all christians (or well, in the WTS-world, all JWs) - and one "spiritual Israel" which refers only to the 144K. And that is just absurd. There is no Biblical support for such a view. DttP, who are Jesus referring to in John 17:1-18? Is he referring to the annointed (144k) - or is he referring to all christians?

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos
    Nark:Second, such a "secondary application" would still run contrary to the logic of the text which I pointed out earlier (two origins, one destination).

    Reply: Well, the verse in question (John 10:16) has a oneness amongst two groups

    More exactly: two groups of distinct origin (ek). Two before, one after.

    , but why do you presume it is as "anointed Christians", Because of Jon 11:51,52? I take that as the dispersed **JEWS** amongst the Greeks. A quick glance at John 7:35 brings this home.

    "Then the Jews said among themselves, "Where is this One about to be going that we will not find Him? He is not about to be going to the Dispersion [i.e. the scattered Jews among the Greeks] and to be teaching the Greeks, is He?" (Youngs Literal John 7:35)

    An equally quick glance at 11:51-2 proves this is not the case: "being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus was about to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one (= 10:16) the dispersed children of God." The Jewish "nation" (ethnos) includes the diaspora as well as the Palestinian Jews. The other children of God are Gentiles -- such as the "Greeks" in 12:20ff.

  • Death to the Pixies
    Death to the Pixies






    My view is a distinction between the Priests and Kings, and between the Other Sheep, so is the WTs. When the Wt directs us to the fact that Jesus was talking to "His people" when discussing such verses as John 1:12,13 and John 3 (as they do in the Reasoning Book) it becomes clearer. They do not discuss this verse in the time period of Jesus' words, because there is no need too, we are post-Cornelius.

    Hell-Rider: You didn't think I was going to take you seriously after using the word "twat" did you! (insert horizontal smilie here)

    Nark:More exactly: two groups of distinct origin (ek). Two before, one after

    Reply: Two folds who become one flock. They are still two folds. As far as what the "one" is, is not defined as "anointed Christians". I say they are not, because the NC was for Israel. They could simply become Christians with a different function and still a oneness exists.

    Nark:An equally quick glance at 11:51-2 proves this is not the case: "being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus was about to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one (= 10:16) the dispersed children of God." The Jewish "nation" (ethnos) includes the diaspora as well as the Palestinian Jews. The other children of God are Gentiles -- such as the "Greeks" in 12:20ff.

    Reply: Keep glancing :>) Vs. 48-50 show who the "ethnos" is, it is not the Jewish race as a whole, but rather what the Romans will take away. Ethnos does not always specifically refer to race. Caiaphas= buddy of Romans, Jesus=King means Romans fight with the nation .Not only them of that nation but any Jew anywhere would become a threat to fight with the Romans.. I will let the fact that commentators are split (Clark, Interpreters Bible Commentary) quell this.


    Plus, in other Johanine expressions, he uses similiar language of Jews abroad.

  • Hellrider
    Hellrider
    Hell-Rider: You didn't think I am going to take you seriously after using the word "twat" did you! (insert horizontal smilie here)


    Did I call you twat? No, I used that word long before you showed up in the thread. I wrote (before you entered with your first post ever on the forum):

    My nick is "Ba`al", the JWs nick is "Dan". He`s about average (for JWs) in brains, very stubborn and WTS-loyalist. In other words, an utter twat

    So unless you are Dan, or you would use all three of the following criterias about yourself: 1) Average in brains 2)very stubborn 3) WTS-loyalist....then I did not call you a twat. And by the way:

    Nark:An equally quick glance at 11:51-2 proves this is not the case: "being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus was about to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one (= 10:16) the dispersed children of God." The Jewish "nation" (ethnos) includes the diaspora as well as the Palestinian Jews. The other children of God are Gentiles -- such as the "Greeks" in 12:20ff.

    Reply: Keep glancing :>) Vs. 48-50 show who the "ethnos" is, it is not the Jewish race as a whole, but rather what the Romans will take away. Ethnos does not always specifically refer to race. Caiaphas= buddy of Romans, Jesus=King means Romans fight with the nation .Not only them of that nation but any Jew anywhere would become a threat to fight with the Romans.. I will let the fact that commentators are split (Clark, Interpreters Bible Commentary) quell this.

    I don`t mean to but in on arguments between you and someone else, but I would just like to say that your explanation on this is very imaginitive, in my opinion. There is no reason (other than if you were theologically motivated to make it mean this) why this passage would mean what you say it means.

  • TD
    TD

    DttP

    So who specifically are the "Other Sheep" that Jesus mentioned at the moment in time that he mentioned them?

    If I've followed you correctly so far, I take that these are Jews who would have the "Earthly hope?"

  • Death to the Pixies
    Death to the Pixies

    Reply: I take the Other sheep at the moment of *Jesus'* words as the Gentiles . I do not take 11:52 and Caiahpas' words as to the same context.

    I believe Caiaphas had no other intention than merely to state that it was better to put Jesus to death than to have the whole nation be destroyed by/if Jesus became King..

  • Death to the Pixies
    Death to the Pixies

    I really do

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit