The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness 1380 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  AuldSoul

  Fisherman,

  The Hillah Stele is the unsourced basis for the Watchtower Society's determination for (1) the accession year of Nabonidus (556 BC) and (2) the fall of Babylon (539 BC).

  The Hillah Stele provides one of the most narrow windows of time available as a starting point for calculation for the ANE period, and astronomical observation that could only have occurred within a 5-day window of time, between May 31 and June 4, 555 BC.

  Why do you have doubts about the Hillah Stele?

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  AlanF

  It occurred to me that thirdwitless' plaintive cry that I am an "enemy of Jehovah's people" is his admission of defeat. After all, what else is a JW to do when he knows he's been put in complete zugzwang by his opponent?

  He already strongly suspects that my asking his opinion on whether the Society's references to Josephus in that 1996 Watchtower article on Parousia is going to get him in deep doo doo. And that's right, because no matter how he answers, he's screwed. And if he pulls his usual stunt of not answering at all, he's still screwed.

  AlanF
• 

  saki2fifty

  One thing is for sure... you can't beat AlanF's intellectual insults!
• 

  thirdwitness

  AlanF prides himself on being an all wise intellect. Anyone disagreeing with him of course is a lying moron. He says a lot of intellectual words that really don't say anything at all in disproving JWs.

  For example, he quoted all the sources about parousia. Here are a few of them that support the definition used by the WT:

  One definition of parousia is the "arrival or visit of a king."
  The following are among the best source references (is this all the modern day scholars that exist) to show what parousia really means:

  The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised (Harold K. Moulton, Zondervan Publishing House, 1978) indicates on p. 311 that parousia is related to pareimi, which has various meanings including to be beside, to be present, to be come (p. 307).

  Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon (2nd edition, 1979) says ...On the one hand the word served as a cult expression for the coming of a hidden divinity, who makes his presence felt by a revelation of his power, or whose presence is celebrated in the cult… On the other hand, parousia became the official term for a visit of a person of high rank, especially of kings and emperors visiting a province…

  Expository Dictionary of Bible Words (Lawrence O. Richards, Zondervan Publishing House, 1985, p. 65) says of parousia that “the word means ‘presence’ or ‘coming’ and emphasizes both the idea of ‘being there’ and the idea of ‘having come.’ . . .

  .”Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon (p. 490) gives Matt. 24:3 as an example of the meaning “the presence of one coming, hence the coming, arrival, advent.

  Maybe AlanF does not know what the WT teaches. Maybe he doesn't realize that for one to be present he must also arrive. After the arrival of a king he stays and he is present. He thinks that in quoting these sources he has disproven that all modern day scholars disagree with the WT's translation of parousia. He thinks that if he tells you that they disprove the WT then since he is the all wise intellect of the DB you will have to believe him. Otherwise you will risk being labeled a moron. But really, look at the definitions above. Do they disagree with the WT's translation of parousia as presence. Or do they agree. And has he quoted every modern day scholar above and shown us that none agree with the WT's translation. That is what he has claimed so surely it must be true since he is the all wise all knowing intellect who far surpasses God's word because of its many failed prophecies.

  Now if AlanF said that none of the above sources gave the translation of parousia as presence then I would have something to refute since that would be a lie. Many do give that translation of the word. So what would you have me refute? I see no reason to refute sources that agree with the WT in translating parousia as presence. To do that would make me a moron.
• 

  thirdwitness

  AlanF said: You also failed to type in an important further reference that appeared in the Merriam-Webster reference, namely, to SECOND COMING.

  Here he is attempting to paint me as deceitful that I hid part of the definition of parousia in the Merriam Webster reference from the readers. What he fails to tell you is second coming is not part of the definition of parousia. Here is what it said.

  Parousia

  One entry found for Parousia.
  Main Entry: Par·ou·sia
  Pronunciation: "pär-ü-'sE-&, p&-'rü-zE-&
  Function: noun
  Etymology: Greek, literally, presence, from paront-, parOn, present participle of pareinai to be present, from para- + einai to be -- more at IS
  : SECOND COMING
  

  Notice what I failed to type in is not the definition of parousia, but only a related subject. Of course Christ's coming at Armageddon is a related subject. But it is not the definition of parousia as expounded by Merrian Webster and is not included in that definition by that dictionary. AlanF is an slyly intellectual one all right. He will slyly mislead you away from God's people if he can with his all wise 'intellect' and big sounding words of confusion. But I'm sure that the honest readers are able to examine the information for themselves and see thru the rhetoric of AlanF.
• 

  fjtoth
• 

  thirdwitness

  Translations for Philippians 2:12 where the word parousia occurs.

  New International Version
  Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed--not only in my presence,

  The New Revised Standard Version
  Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed me, not only in my presence,
  
  The Revised Standard Version
  Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence
  
  The KJV Strong's Version
  Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence
  
  The NAS Strong's Version
  So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence
  
  Young's Literal Translation
  So that, my beloved, as ye always obey, not as in my presence
  
  Today's New International Version
  Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed--not only in my presence

  Webster's Bible Translation
  Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence
  
  New world translation
  Consequently, my beloved ones, in the way that YOU have always obeyed, not during my presence

  There are many more translations that could be shown. Here they all translate parousia as presence. The NWT consistently translates parousia as presence in every occurence. Just as it consistently translates nephesh and psyke as soul. Just as it consistently translates hades and sheol as hades and sheol. Your attempts at discrediting the WT publications for translating parousia as presence makes evident what your agenda is. If the WT had translated it as coming you would have taken the other side of the argument Just as you would have the 40 year desolation of Egypt if it had disproved 607.Your only purpose is not to give impart truth to anyone but to discredit JWs and as usual you have failed in your sad attempts. Misery loves company and you seem to be trying to get more weepers and gnashers to keep you company.
• 

  hillary_step

  ThirdWitness,

  One definition of parousia is the "arrival or visit of a king."

  Yes, and that is the correct definition contextually at Matthew 24:3. What you would suggest is that Christ arrives as King, then somehow arrives again. This is why modern Biblical scholars universally accept that in this instance the parousia related to the arrival of Christ at the end of the age. Why are you trying to place a meaning on the word 'arrival' beyond that which can sensibly be sustained.

  The WTS repeatedly invokes the definition of W.H.Vine to bolster their arguments regarding a long-term presence of Jesus being spoken of at Matthew 24:3, cleverly avoiding informing the readers that Vine was actually an adventist with an agenda himself. Were you aware for example that W.H. Vine, years before Rutherford plaigerized his work, interpreted the League of nations as being pictured by one of the 'beasts' in the Book Of Revelation?

  Like many people versed in the subject of theology, Vine was not able to leave his adventist agenda aside when he wrote. In that he reminds me of the numerous JW apologists who pepper this Board from time to time.

  The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised (Harold K. Moulton, Zondervan Publishing House, 1978) indicates on p. 311 that parousia is related to pareimi, which has various meanings including to be beside, to be present, to be come (p. 307). ;

  Alan has acknowledged very early on in this debate that the parousia can mean different things in different cintexts, as can numerous words in our own language, and that context defines the understanding of the application of parousia at Matt 24:3. I note in your quotation above you cunningly omit highlighting the other meaning of parousia, the one accepted by all modern scholars as applying to matt24:3, the one that unhinges the WTS. I am sure lurkers are not as stupid as you hope.

  Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon (2nd edition, 1979) says ...On the one hand the word served as a cult expression for the coming of a hidden divinity, who makes his presence felt by a revelation of his power, or whose presence is celebrated in the cult… On the other hand, parousia became the official term for a visit of a person of high rank, especially of kings and emperors visiting a province…

  You seem to be unaware of the fact that you are shooting yourself in the foot as the definitions above clearly side with the universally accepted translation of the parousia at Matt 24:3, not the version on which the WTS floats its ship of fools. It is quite clear that your ability to understand what you research is very limited, and the limits begin and end, not with the truth, but in the direction the WTS chooses to send your mind.

  Expository Dictionary of Bible Words (Lawrence O. Richards, Zondervan Publishing House, 1985, p. 65) says of parousia that “the word means ‘presence’ or ‘coming’ and emphasizes both the idea of ‘being there’ and the idea of ‘having come.’ . . .

  Yes, the word parousia can mean this, but what you have failed to mention is that the same publication acknowledges that in Matt 24:3, the verse in discussion, it does NOT apply the parousia in such a fashion - highly dishonest of you.

  We are just beginning this discussion and both Alan and I have much information to add. Keep reading and keep learning.

  HS
• 

  jayhawk1

  Witless said,

  AlanF prides himself on being an all wise intellect. Anyone disagreeing with him of course is a lying moron. He says a lot of intellectual words that really don't say anything at all in disproving JWs.

  For example, he quoted all the sources about parousia. Here are a few of them that support the definition used by the WT:

  One definition of parousia is the "arrival or visit of a king."

  I guess now all you have to prove is Jesus' arrival as King. Where is he again? Invisable you say! Really... That's funny, when I was 4 years old, I had an invisable friend too!
• 

  hillary_step

  Saki,

  One thing is for sure... you can't beat AlanF's intellectual insults!

  Do you have anything of value to add here Saki? ThirdWitness has a band of rattled cheerleaders supporting him behind the scenes, he does not need a grown man in a vibrant cobalt blue tutu, with attractive contrasting yellow pom-poms for moral support, I am sure. HS