I need proof for my wife that NW Translation is not correct

by Albert Einstein 118 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  reniaa

  Matthew 24:45-47 (New International Version)

  45 "Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46 It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. 47 I tell you the truth, he will put him in charge of all his possessions.

  they are parables that can discuss real issues but in a figurative way, is there one literal house and a bunch of servants or is he talking figuratively about those put in charge of the flocks doing the work while the 'Master is away' I see no conflict here.

  the sheol parables are making a point just not one about literal fiery hell but more about the the dead, both righteous and unrighteous and were they stand in God's eye's, don't get me wrong when you are dead it is eternal unless Jesus chooses to resurrect you by the power given him by God.

  Romans 6:23
  For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

  Psalm 6:5 (New International Version)

  5 No one remembers you when he is dead.
  Who praises you from the grave [ a ] ?

  Lol if we start taking parables literally in the way you would have us take them I might as well start 'baaing' and pretending to be a sheep ^^
• 

  passwordprotected

  Reniaa says;

  That Jesus has an important name does not make Jehovah's name obsolete the fact that Jesus quotes scriptures that use God's name diectly would also be against your assumption.

  Phil 2: 9 For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name

  Obviously we need to straight away remove the [other] as the translation "committee" decided they knew better what God was inspiring Paul to write and thus were adding to the inspired text, something that is forbidden and punishable by death, so we're led to believe. Once we've done that, we see that Jesus has been given the name that is above every name.

  If Jesus' name wasn't above YHWH then Paul would have said so.
• 

  passwordprotected

  Reniaa glibly states;

  Lol if we start taking parables literally in the way you would have us take them I might as well start 'baaing' and pretending to be a sheep

  Or we could start pretending that Matt 24:45-47 was really about a multi-billion dollar publishing corporation in New York.
• 

  reniaa

  lol password John 17:3

  John 17:3
  Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

  knowing God means eternal life yet you are saying knowing Jesus replaces all this? in your teaching there is no 'and' involved you make the mistake or trying to make it an either or situation YHWH or Jesus but the bible just doesn't teach this.

  I'm not arguing that we shouldn't preach in Jesus's name Jehovah's witnesses Do but there is no scriptural teaching that Jehovah is made less and shouldn't be shown to be our God. but Jesus clearly shows we should preach about God and his kingdom

  Luke 4:43
  But he said, "I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other towns also, because that is why I was sent."

  the appostles follow suit and in fact this next scripture shows it.

  Acts 8:12
  But when they believed Philip as he preached the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

  1 Corinthians 8:6
  yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

  The first century christians did not replace God with Jesus in their teachings.

  All you have on your side is the lack of name thing but that in itself cannot be confirmed because we lack the originals and the facts of God's name being removed is already there by Jews removing it from the hebrew scriptures so yes we can hypothesis that something similar happenned with greek the principle is there.

  You have no scriptorial write-up saying that Gods name should no longer be used to confirm your position.
• 

  passwordprotected

  The first century christians did not replace God with Jesus in their teachings.

  I'm not saying they did. But they didn't use the name YHWH.

  All you have on your side is the lack of name thing but that in itself cannot be confirmed because we lack the originals and the facts of God's name being removed is already there by Jews removing it from the hebrew scriptures so yes we can hypothesis that something similar happenned with greek the principle is there.

  If YHWH can't make sure that his name is in the Greek manuscripts, he can't be a very powerful or influencial, God, can he?

  Billions of people alive right now know the name Jesus, how many know the name Jehovah? Thankfully, salvation doesn't come from the name Jehovah, right?
• 

  boyzone

  lol password John 17:3 John 17:3 Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. knowing God means eternal life yet you are saying knowing Jesus replaces all this? in your teaching there is no 'and' involved you make the mistake or trying to make it an either or situation YHWH or Jesus but the bible just doesn't teach this.

  But Reniaa, didn't Jesus say "He that has seen me has seen the father also"? If jesus is the perfect representation of His father, then it can't be an either/or scenario can it?

  As Password has explained. It is Jehovah's express will that you elevate the name of Jesus! If you do not do this, you are being disobedient to Jehovah.

  By continuing to elevate YHWH and going contrary to His express wishes is the equivalent of burying your talents in the ground. When the master returns, how will you explain your disobedience?
• 

  reniaa

  hi chalam the hebrew scripture clearly states that the people he mentions enoch being one of them died, are you saying he made a mistake under inspiration here?

  experiencing death is different from saying death itself because you yourself show dying is a physical experience which involves awareness of dying God removed this experience from enoch but it doesn't mean that enoch still didn't actually die as hebrews confirms that he is dead.

  in the end your viewpoint would make all the scriptures saying Jesus was the first to ascend to heaven and the first fruits of resurrection to immortality as a lie.

  The appostles did not see immortality as something they already had it was something they aimed for that only Jesus could give them by his sacrifice.

  Romans 2:7
  To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

  the problem with saying immortality comes from the start is it reminds me of another promise....

  Genesis 3:4 (New American Standard Bible)

  4 ( A ) The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die!

  the promise of not dying at all always came from Satan not God, Jehovah always made his yes mean yes and his no mean no, When God said people died he meant it and Jesus came to pay the price of that death and to destroy that death from sin that all mankind is under. immortality of soul is truly at odds with all this. immortality is a free gift from Jesus's sacrifice we did not have before.

  2 Timothy 1:10
  but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.

  Cross references:
• 

  reniaa

  Boyzone your assumption is that every other name includes Gods own but this just isn't the case God gave Jesus authority and Glory over everything but this did not include himself the scriptures are clear about this.

  1 Corinthians 15:27
  For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.

  You make an assumption but the scriptures do not back it up.

  1 Corinthians 11:3
  Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

  Romans 8:17
  Now if we are children, then we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.
• 

  passwordprotected

  Reniaa;

  Boyzone your assumption is that every other name includes Gods own but this just isn't the case God gave Jesus authority and Glory over everything but this did not include himself the scriptures are clear about this.

  Your assumption is that the word [other] is in the original Greek text.

  It isn't.

  So, the name Jesus is above every name, as the Bible shows. There is no exception. If Paul had meant, "every name, apart from YHWH", we can expect God to have inspired him to write that.

  He didn't.

  Jesus is our Saviour. Praise His Good Name.
• 

  Chalam

  Hello Reniaa,

  Been enjoying the sun down here in Bedfordshire so I am behind on your questions and stuff, little by little...

  Hope you have had some sun up in Yorkshire to :)

  OK lets see.

  good morning chalam I have a busy day so will be unable to reply much.

  Firstly I think it would be safe to say the immortality of soul and eternal torment in a fiery hell are linked. yet I can show numerous scriptures that a soul can die.

  This is a huge one! Now back to the second death? What does the scripture say?

  Revelation 20:10 (New International Version)

  10 And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

  Revelation 20:14-15 (New International Version)

  14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 If anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.

  What does it say? Those who die the second death are tormented day and night for ever. Does one have to be conscious to be tormented? Obviously.

  Let's see what Isaiah has to say about the same.

  Isaiah 66:24 (New International Version)

  24 "And they will go out and look upon the dead bodies of those who rebelled against me; their worm will not die, nor will their fire be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind."

  Once again, yes their bodies are dead but their "worm does not die". What could that be? We already know that from Revelation, they are in conscious torment.

  OK let's see what Jesus has to say, He knows "all things" as Peter says.

  Mark 9:43-48 (New International Version)

  43 If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. 45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. 47 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where
  " 'their worm does not die,
  and the fire is not quenched.'

  So what does Jesus says in verse 43? It is better to enter "life"? It is obvious that this is the afterlife. The death which comes after life is to enter Hell. Jesus' warning is dire, it is better to be physically maimed and go to paradise than to go to Hell. Now would that really be the case if, in Hell as the WT teach the dead are conscious of nothing? An unconscious grave is not really anything to worry about but a everlasting torment is. OK let me know your thoughts on this matter. You can bring scriptures such as Ez 18:4 but do they really nullify these scriptures or else add to them? My belief is the latter and that several scriptures cannot contradict several others. There is one truth.

  jesus confirmed this viewpoint

  Matthew 26:38Then he said to them, "My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death. Stay here and keep watch with me."

  so at his time a soul was the whole person though to be able to die, Jesus's words do not show a teaching of immortal soul here.

  I do not follow you reasoning here. Maybe you could help me out?

  now lets get back to Hell second death. interestly how does your teaching deal with Jesus a Good man being put in Hell a place for the wicked by your viewpoint just by dying?

  Revelaton 20:14 KJV
  
  14And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
  
  If hell was eternal, why would it be thrown into the lake of fire here?

  this whole scripture makes a conflict in your teaching.

  would God think of a fiery Hell as a real literal option

  OK, hold on. The big confusion here is that "Hell" commonly refers to the place where the unrighteous go after the first death and also after the second death. However, they are two different things, two different deaths.

  The first death is not everlasting, otherwise there would be no resurrection. The second death is everlasting as it is the final judgment.

  That is why you read that "hell" is thrown into the Lake Of Fire i.e. everyone is resurrected from the first death and judged at the Day of Judgement. Thus,

  Daniel 12:2 (New International Version)

  2 Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

  Some go to the Lake of Fire and the rest to the New Jerusalem on the new earth.

  Jeremiah 7:31 (New International Version)

  31 They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire—something I did not command, nor did it enter my mind.

  as well as the ressurrection and 1000 years reign, your teaching would have God resurrecting people and sending them straight to eternal torment in hell, literally hello/goodbye scenario, yet a 1000 year reign and another time of testing makes more sense of God's ways to give them a chance at life despite their previous situations also were do all these nations live during the 1000 years reign? 1000 year reign is a biblical teaching that your doctrines just cannot explain.

  I do not draw the same conclusion as you do with this scripture. I understand God is saying what they have done did not enter His mind, not the idea of the second death.

  The point of interest is that the enemy delights in burning sons and daughters in fire but God does not. The bible says the Lake of Fire was created for the Devil and his cohorts, not for man and His will is that none should perish.

  The problem with the eternal fiery torment in Hell second death is it creates to many conflicts with actual bible teachings.

  I do not find contradiction. Jeremiah 7:31 is not a problem to me for example.

  You use a lot of Jesus's parables to try and make a case of a literal hell but parables are not literal and not meant to be taken as such! Look at the lazarus story if we believe that is literal.... the righteuos while in heaven can hear all the tormented cries of the eternally damned burning away forever forgive me but that doesn't paint a pretty picture of people running around happy listening to screams and cries of others not just daily but actually forever.

  If you believe it is just a parable then you should examine what a parable is. Let's look at one.

  Matthew 13:24-30 (New International Version)

  The Parable of the Weeds

  24 Jesus told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25 But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26 When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.

  27 "The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?'

  28 " 'An enemy did this,' he replied.
  "The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?'

  29 " 'No,' he answered, 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.' "

  So to you verse 30 to you is symbolic and part literal i.e. the wheat will be gathered into Jesus' barn you take to be literal but the burning of weeds is only symbolic right? To me that is nonsense, both are symbolic, prophetic and when it comes to pass (the Day of Judgment) will become literal. However, let's see, they already asked Jesus about this parable.

  Matthew 13:36-43 (New International Version)

  The Parable of the Weeds Explained

  36 Then he left the crowd and went into the house. His disciples came to him and said, "Explain to us the parable of the weeds in the field."

  37 He answered, "The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.

  40 "As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.

  Now Jesus clearly explains each of these things in the parable in literal terms, Himself, angels, the world, the righteous, the unrighteous, the devil, the end of the age. Now, do you think it then make any sense to explain the "weeds in bundles to be burned" with something else symbolic?

  Hell is usually pictured a underground place with demons and pitchforks eternally tormenting humankind and a grinning horned Devil on some kind of throne but the bible clearly shows they will be fellow prisoners as well as death and hell itself. Who torments them then? will it be angels with pitchforks? lol you see the problem of taking symbolic hell as literal?

  What bible verses do you have for that picture of Hell? The bible is my guide, not a cartoon devil or a cartoon hell. Do you think that the common perception in the world of Hell and the devil being benign and somewhat cutesy actually has any correlation with the warning of Jesus or the rest of the scriptures I have presented?

  Matt 10:28 And do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; but rather be in fear of him that can destroy both soul and body in Ge·hen´na.

  Regarding this text, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (edited by C. Brown, 1978, Vol. 3, p. 304) states:“Matt. 10:28 teaches not the potential immortality of the soul but the irreversibility of divine judgment on the unrepentant.” Also, Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (revised by F. W. Gingrich and F. Danker, 1979, p. 95) gives the meaning “eternal death” with reference to the Greek phrase in Matthew 10:28 translated “destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.” Thus, being consigned to Gehenna refers to utter destruction from which no resurrection is possible

  utter destruction here clearly stated is the point in the scripture and this fits neatly with death and hell itself being destroyed completely there will be no need for them eventually.

  There are many commentators and many opinions regarding scripture. That does not make every theological doctrine you read correct, as Paul says, our knowledge is partial. Test what you read. Above all the Holy Spirit is my Counselor and others come second.

  just out of interest why would Jesus resurrect to physical life a girl and lazarus when they were clearly righteous/loved and by your understanding in heaven surely they are better off were they were?

  Good question! Let's see.

  Mark 5:35-36 (New International Version)

  35 While Jesus was still speaking, some men came from the house of Jairus, the synagogue ruler. "Your daughter is dead," they said. "Why bother the teacher any more?"

  36 Ignoring what they said, Jesus told the synagogue ruler, "Don't be afraid; just believe."

  John 11:4 (New International Version)

  4 When he heard this, Jesus said, "This sickness will not end in death. No, it is for God's glory so that God's Son may be glorified through it."

  John 11:14-15 (New International Version)

  14 So then he told them plainly, "Lazarus is dead, 15 and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe.

  John 11:25-26 (New International Version)

  25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; 26 and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

  So what was the point of the miracles? Likely, it was not principally for the benefit of those who died (unless they were unrighteous) but for those who witnessed and her testimony of the miracles to believe.

  John 14:11 (New International Version)

  11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves.

  So ask the Counselor if I am telling you truth or lies.

  John 14:26 (New International Version)

  26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

  Pray and ask Him! The Father has sent Him to teach you everything you need to know and remind you of Jesus' words. Believe the scripture and the words of Jesus, they are truth and life.

  All the best,

  Stephen