Hi everyone here is something I think is wrongly translated in the NW Bible, and it bothers me. “You cannot be drinking the cup of Jehovah and the cup of demons; you cannot be partaking of ‘the table of Jehovah’ and the table of demons.”—1 Cor. 10:21, NW. VS another (more common?) translation "Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of demons: ye cannot partake of the table of the Lord, and of the table of demons."-1 Cor. 10:21 ASV Now reading this in context the auther in this case Paul is telling first century Chirstians to flee from idol worship. And a few verses before this he says: "16. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a communion of the body of Christ? 17. seeing that we, who are many, are one bread, one body: for we are all partake of the one bread.". Clearly to me that is what he means later when he is talking about the "cup of the Lord" and the "table of the Lord" while the NW verse makes seem to be talking about the alter which is called the "table of Jehovah" in the Hebrew Scriptures. That would not make scence though because to my knowledge none of those called Christians at that time would be serving at a Temple and thus there would be no "alters of Jehovah" for the to partake of at that time, as the Christian movement was a verging away from the Jews of Isreal. The only table for the Christians to partake of then would be the Communion meal. AKA the last supper or the Eucharist or Lords evening meal.) Is this a good conclusion, I after looking hard into it believe it to be. Corey
Table of who???
by Core88 7 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Leolaia
Another example of how interpolating "Jehovah" in the NT destroys the sense of the text.
-
Neo
Right on! The context could not be more obvious. Of course Paul is talking of the Lord's evening meal when he refers to "the cup of the Lord" and "the Lord's table."
Luke 22:30 is recorded as being uttered in the night of the institution of the Eucharist. It reads: "that ye may eat and drink at my table (trapezes mou) in my kingdom; and ye shall sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." This is the eschatological "table of the Lord" (trapezes kuriou, 1Co 10:21), antecipated in the communion meal discussed in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11.
One thing leads to another: if Kyrios in verse 21 refers to Jesus, to whom does the subsequent "Lord" in verse 22 refer?
1Co 10:21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.
1Co 10:22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?This last verse is an unambiguous allusion to Deuteronomy 32:16,21 LXX, where the same verb (provoke to jealousy, parazeloumen) is used and applied to Yahweh:
Deu 32:16 They moved him to jealousy with strange gods; With abominations provoked they him to anger.
Deu 32:21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; They have provoked me to anger with their vanities.1 Corinthians 10 is pretty much linked to Deuteronomy 32:
Deu 32:17 They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.
1Co 10:20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.Deu 32:37 And he shall say, Where are their gods, their rock in whom they trusted,
Deu 32:38 Which did eat the fat of their sacrifices, and drank the wine of their drink offerings? let them rise up and help you, and be your protection.
1Co 10:21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.Deu 32:18 Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee.
1Co 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.Ironically, the "provoking to jealousy" verse in Deu 32 is also quoted in Rom 10. That chapter just happens to be the well-known passage where the NWT interpolates "Jehovah" where "Lord" should be read. "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Rom 10:13,19).
-
Core88
Thank you Neo. It seems a little more clear to me now as to why the Society would not want you thinking that the Lord mentioned there refers to Jesus, if that text has an old testament counter part refering to Yahweh. The more I really look at the New Testament the more clearly it becomes that the writers where more or less teaching that Jesus is God...there are other places too that have caught my eye, maybe I'll go into those later I am very tierd now. Do you believe in the trinity what religion are you now Neo...if any? I have thought that maybe the Islamic view of God is right because the "oneness" feels right based upon my background as a JW, but when I look into the Bible which I trust more, also because of my JW background I find it truly supports the Trinity WAY more than I was ever lead to believe and that feels right too. I just don't know where to go from here in my view? I keep coming to things in my research that say "this is the truth the Trinity", but it's hard to change your mind set after so many years! I too really find the idea of partaking in the Eucharist, to be an exiting one, but I don't want to do it for the wrong reasons. With the weight put on it in scripture, the different beliefs as to weather or not it turns into flesh and blood, and my long held beleif that I will not be going to heaven and am not one of the ones "chosen" to partake of the bread and wine, I don't know if I am ever going to be partaking of it in good conscience. Thanks again. Corey
-
yaddayadda
Very good research!
"The more I really look at the New Testament the more clearly it becomes that the writers where more or less teaching that Jesus is God"
Not at all. The synoptic gospels in particular give no evidence for such a conclusion. The NT writers are, however, clearly of the view that Jesus is God's divine son and is worthy of worship and reverence of a type similar to that which was formerly exclusively given to the one God, Jehovah. The earliest form of Christianity was strictly monotheistic - but it took on a binitarian shape through accommodating worship (of a sort) of Jesus along with God the Father. It does not mean that Jesus has eclipsed his heavenly Father (God) or that God has suddenly metamorphasied into three persons; rather, it means that Jesus can be given worshipful reverence, not as God, but as the majestic Lord of all creation who is now sitting alongside God. -
Core88
I am intrested in your view, on the Trinity. I growing up a JW have never considered it as true and yet I get a kind of peace of mind when I think of Jesus being God. And I find it hard to think of anyone else being worthy of this "worshipful reverence" then the ONE GOD alone. For Jesus himself proclaimed this to the Devil at Matthew 4:10 "Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." Moreover whom do you then personly beleive Jesus to be, hopfull not Micheal the Archangel, which after taking a look into that I don't see how that matches up with the Bible however that is what JW's believe and I guess what I believed for so long...although now that I think about it I don't think that I ever was consciencely convinced of that. Umm? But anyway I hope I am not coming across as a know it all because that's just it, I don't! ANd that's a hard thing to say after living life KNOWING, I had the "TRUTH whole TRUTH and nothing but the TRUTH"....so help me GOD! Personaly I don't know if Jesus is God or the first Angel or a man or some mix of all three or none of those things at all. However I do think that the Trinity makes more sence then I thought it did, and that goes for some of the arguments I have heard that support it. (SOME not ALL) Anyway thanks for the feedback, I enjoy these free and open dicussions on the board! Corey
-
Abandoned
Hey buddy, I'm not a big fan of the bible, so I can't think of anything to add, but I will bump this back to the top for you.
-
found-my-way
This is just my two cents
I dont believe that there is a trinity per se, (God the father, god the son, god the holy spirit) but rather that perhaps that Jesus and God(YHWH) might be the same person....but like you, I am open-minded to all views and opinions