by life is to short 76 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
Thanks everyone for your response on this. I know that this is nothing totally new but it does seem like they are pushing it more and more. Or maybe it is that my eyes are open now. To me it is still scary. Jim Jones and others had people believing that they were speaking for God also. Scary.
LITS
Did David Splane really say this???...
" You will listen to the voice of the Governing Body as though it is the voice of God"
I've not heard of Splane saying that, but you may be interested in a quote from WT 6-15-57 pg. 370:
"It is vital that we appreciate this fact and respond to the directions of the "slave" as we would to the voice of God."
Darth P. - Your comment gave me chills! You just never know what people are willing to do and what they will request! Especially in the position they put themselves in.
They mutilate the scriptures very badly. They are contortionists! Except to no one's amusement.
Hadit
"My dub mother is trying to get me to repent my evil apostate ways.
Tell her to quit nagging or you'll tell one of her Elders that she's not shunning You.
Hiding-
Yes, I was sitting in the audience as he ranted on for an hour. That was my last Circuit Assembly.
There is a grammatical and theological problem that arises when we attempt to translate the text at Gen 22:18. This is because of the troublesome phrase "rehe thbaraku" which is the third person plural of the verb "Barak" meanining "to bless". The "th" prefix attached to the verb alerts us to the fact that we are dealing with a form of the Hebrew verb called "the hith'pael". And herein lies the problem. How does one translate the "hith'pael" here?
The hith'pael admittedly defines a reflexive form of a verb, so when used with "bless" it certainly may be translated as "bless themselves" and as a consequence several translations do this. [Cf Rotherham's, Jerusalem, Revised Standard, and at least one Jewish translation the "Tanakh].
But does this exhaust all discussion of the hith'pael here? If that is so, then why do a very large number of translations, certainly far in excess of those listed, translate the hith'pael here as a passive - "be blessed"? [Cf the NASB, NIV, NKJV, NLT, ESV, HSCB, and a whole swathe of others.] At first glance credence may be given to the argument that this is because these translations are reading back into the text a later Christian ethic based on the NT concept of faith based salvation, and not self-works.
This does not hold water, however, because there are significantly more Jewish translations who do the same here, that is, treat the hith'pael as a passive. [Cf JPS, Harkarvi, and Leeser]. Thus it appears that there is more that can be said about this Hebraic form. It is true that the hith'pael is the reflexive form of the Hebrew verb, and whereas it it is also true that the passive use is comparatively rare, it is also true that it is not impossible.
For instance, the hith'pael form of "barak" occurs on four occasions outside of this text in Genesis, and an examination of those translations that insist on a reflexive form at Gen 22:18, shows that at best, that their understamding of this form is in a state of flux and is not set in concrete as the Watchtower would suggest.
For instance, at Ps 72:17, the JB reversed itself and rendered the hith'pael as a passive here "Be blessed". But by far the most troublesome use of the hith'pael is found at Jer 4:2. The RSV says: "Then nations shall bless themselves in him, and in him will they glory". The problem here is that the hith'pael occurs twice: with "bless" [barak] and with "hal'al" meaning to "glory", "boast", "celebrate" etc. Thus to be consistent the RSV should have said "and in him will they glory themselves" Every translation I have read ignores the reflxive form at "halal" here. Except the NW "T".
The genius who "translated" this verse in the NW"T" has it this way: "They will boast about themselves" which is more paraphrase than translation.
Again an enormous problem occurs if one is to insist on the reflexive at Lev 14. In this chapter alone, the verb "Taher" meaning to "cleanse" occurs no less than 12 times in the hith'pael, and refers to the cleansing of a leper by the priest. Whereas, technically at least, the verb could be a reflexive, contextually this becomes highly improbable, given that the text clearly informs us that it is the priest who does the cleansing, and not the leper. Thus, the leper cannot at the same time "cleanse himself" if the verb is to be applied to the priest.
It becomes clear that the hith'pael here is used either as a middle form, "become clean" [as some translations do] or as a passive "be cleansed" [as most translations accept it]. For instance Rotherham has, at Lev 14:14, the following: "The priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear of him who is to be cleansed" While Franz in his NW Confection has: "The priest must put it upon the lobe of the one cleansing himself..."
What is said of Rotherham here can be said of all the other translations uniformily. If anything comes out of this brief research, it is that, at the very least, any argument that insists on a uniform attribution of the reflexive to the hith'apel is tenuous at best. That other factors play a part cannot be ignored. It certainly may be reflexive, but the hith'pael does have, legitimately, other syntactical applications, hence the translation of Gen 22:18 as "be blessed" cannot be ignored, except by those who are blinded by their own dogmatism.
An excellent article, availabe for download on the web, is: "Abraham, Blessing and the Nations: A Philological and Exegetical Study" by Keith Nigel Gruenberg. Though not discounting the reflexive here, he argues persuasively for the passive.
Reinforcing this view is the way the ancient versions treat Gen 22:18. The Samaritan Pentateuch, the Aramaic Targums, the LXX and the Vulgate, all use the passive at Gen 22:18.
Finally. The greatest interpreter of this text at Gen 22:18, must according to those who believe in the Holy Spirit inspiration of the Bible, be the Holy Spirit Himself. He quotes this verse through Paul at Gal 3:8, and here He unerringly placed the passive form on the verb. The irony is that even Freddy Franz, chief architect of the NW "T" recognized this. Thus what is implicit in the Hebrew is made explicit in the Greek.
The truly ironic part is that the Watchtower, supposedly a "Christian" system of belief, has to revert to the OT, Jewish tradition, to prove its point while at the same time avoiding and even ignoring the clearer revelation of the Christian NT.
This is in itself a telling indictment of the Christian pretensions of the Watchtower. They are merely Pharisees, parading about as Christ's Sheep, people about whom Jesus warned us.
All of that to say the Watchtower leaders are Pharisees, Moogie- Most Christian leaders and their denominations are that way if you want to really critique them. Geez we've got Fundamentalists parading around here who fancy themselves Christ figures.
As for the character 'Paul' and his anti-semitic rants in the Epistles you need to research the Two Views, or better yet attend a local Synagogue for some Jewish immersion.
our attitude toward Christ's spiritual brothers is a major factor that will determine how we will be judged during the coming great tribulation.
As per usual, they slip in a word to try and put forth their own brand of bullshit salvation. Matthew 25:34 outlines the expectation of a follower of Christ:
"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. "Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?' "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
Clearly, Christians are to be involved in charitable works and that does not include peddling the Craptower and Asleep! magazines on Saturday morning. If you are in a position to do so, you are expected to help feed the hungry, look after the sick and visit with the downtrodden---Christ's 'brothers'. The Governing Body members have never been "hungry" or "needed clothes" and if they're ever sick, they've got their own bloody doctors to look after them. The only one of these things that Witnesses even attempt are the 'visiting those in prison' and even that's done with an ulterior motive: to get those hours in. Witnesses on the whole, do not participate in anything "charitable" as they clearly do not view anyone outside of the Borg as a 'disciple of Jesus' and certainly not as one of his 'brothers'.
Ironically, the verses that come after this tells the fate of those who do not participate in charitable works:
"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' "They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' "He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.' "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
So if there actually is a Judgement Day, things might be a bit different for the Slobbering Body members than what they're expecting.
Matthew 12:48-50 identifies who Jesus viewed as his "brothers" and it sure as hell was not just 8 senile old power-tripping goats in New York. He identified them as everyone who doesn the will of his father:
He replied to him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother."
Mary-
Remember when the GB got brand new Cadillacs or Oldsmobiles every year....but they would try and cancel medical care for the missionaries who got sick in their foreign assignments and had to come home. rrrrr
Remember when the GB got brand new Cadillacs or Oldsmobiles every year....but they would try and cancel medical care for the missionaries who got sick in their foreign assignments and had to come home
OMG, no I didn't know they did that. What a bunch of scum sucking pigs!
