For Bethelites & Gileadites Only

by The Searcher 7 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  The Searcher

  "Who really is the faithful and discreet slave".... (Matt. 24:45)

  When discussing John 1:1 with trinitarians, we always refer to the original Greek, and inform them that the verse speaks of the Word being 'a' god, not 'the' God, because the definite article 'ho' is not used in his case. (the)

  When discussing John 1:1 with trinitarians, we always refer to the original Greek, and inform them that the verse speaks of the Word being 'a' god, not 'the' God, because the definite article 'ho' is not used in his case. (the)

  Should we not then use 'a' instead of 'the' at Matthew 24:45, as some other translations do?

  Because the definite article isn't in that verse either, and changing it to 'a' puts the verse in a totally different light!

  Comfortingly, the Scriptures (without any ambiguity when speaking of "slaves") clearly show that all who wish to serve Jehovah and exercise faith in His son's ransom, are regarded as slaves. There are not two classes of slave, only one! Reason on this single example of "slaves",

  " For the kingdom of God does not mean eating and drinking, but [means] righteousness and peace and joy with holy spirit. For he who in this regard slaves for Christ is acceptable to God and has that we might be slaves in a new sense by the spirit, and not in the old sense by the written code." (Rom. 14:17,18)

  then using your CD ROM and your reasoning abilities, research all the occurences of "slave" & "slaves".

  The Christian Greek Scriptures were not written "primarily for those with the heavenly hope", and you know it!

  "Who really is a faithful and discreet slave?"
• 

  The Searcher

  "Who really is the faithful and discreet slave".... (Matt. 24:45)

  Should we not then use 'a' instead of 'the' at Matthew 24:45, as some other translations do?

  Because the definite article isn't in that verse either, and changing it to 'a' puts the verse in a totally different light!

  Comfortingly, the Scriptures (without any ambiguity when speaking of "slaves") clearly show that all who wish to serve Jehovah and exercise faith in His son's ransom, are regarded as slaves. There are not two classes of slave, only one! Reason on this single example of "slaves",

  " For the kingdom of God does not mean eating and drinking, but [means] righteousness and peace and joy with holy spirit. For he who in this regard slaves for Christ is acceptable to God and has that we might be slaves in a new sense by the spirit, and not in the old sense by the written code." (Rom. 14:17,18)

  then using your CD ROM and your reasoning abilities, research all the occurences of "slave" & "slaves".

  The Christian Greek Scriptures were not written "primarily for those with the heavenly hope", and you know it!

  "Who really is a faithful and discreet slave?"

  When discussing John 1:1 with trinitarians, we always refer to the original Greek, and inform them that the verse speaks of the Word being 'a' god, not 'the' God, because the definite article 'ho' is not used in his case. (the)
• 

  Splash

  In Mt 24:45 it does actually read 'The' faithful... whereas in john 1:1 it does not use the word 'the'.

  Mt uses the greek word 'Ho' - 'The'.

  Splash.
• 

  EndofMysteries

  I looked in interlinear, I do not see what you are talking about, and the reasoning they use I do not recall being the way you just described it.
• 

  leaving_quietly

  Ex-bethelite here (many years ago).

  It depends on which base manuscript is used. The Emphatic Diaglott does use 'ho' at Matt 24:45. It also uses it at John 1:1, but that was describing 'the word' (it translates it as 'a god was the word'.)

  Interestingly, though, not to get off on a tangent for John 1:1, the Diaglott translates the first part of the verse literally "In a beginning was the word", and verse to "This was in a beginning with the God." Notice the NWT puts the word "the" in brackets: "In [the] beginning was the Word" and "This one was in [the] beginning with God." Kinda seems like translators do whatever they want with these.

  See also:

  http://interlinearbible.org/matthew/24-45.htm

  http://interlinearbible.org/john/1-1.htm
• 

  The Searcher

  Sorry folks. just my little experiment to see how quickly some folks might respond to a slight against their accepted thinking, but refuse to concede to Bible truths which highlight 'given' false reasonings.
• 

  EndofMysteries

  Everywhere in the hebrew scriptures, where it says things such as "and God said to them" it's generally written as "and the god said to them".
• 

  Bobcat

  In my resources, I can't find any manuscript evidence that would support "a" faithful slave. The article before "faithful and discreet slave" is uncontested.

  However, the parable begins with a rhetorical question of which there are many examples in Matthew. (Mt 6:27; 7:3, 9; 12:11; 18:12; 21:28; as well as the other gospel accounts) To argue that Jesus is making a specific distant future assignment by asking a rhetorical question to his then audience is nonsensical.

  Or look at it from the first century perspective. He had already made assignments of the 12 apostles. So, if Jesus is asking, 'Who is going to be put in charge?', what would be the effect on the apostles? In fact, Peter's question in Luke 12:41 already assumes that the apostles were the chosen leaders of the disciples. And so, Peter asks if Jesus' illustration in verses 35-40 (about being hard-working slaves) applies only to them, or does it branch out to all the disciples. Jesus' parable of the faithful slave, begun with the rhetorical, 'who really is such a slave?', naturally would cause all disciples to ponder there own faithfulness.

  Concerning the phrase, "Who really is ...", there is an interesting footnote in Darrell Bock's commentary on Luke (BECNT p.1178) that says, "On the syntax, see [I. H.] Marshall 1978: 540 and Black 1967: 118-19, who argue that the Greek structure reflects a Semitic idiom: "If there is a steward, ... he will be blessed when ..." "

  Unfortunately, I don't have either of the references mentioned. Marshall's is available on Google Books as a review, but page 540 is not one of the pages reviewable. It would be interesting to see what they say.

  Concerning "really" (Greek ara; Strong's #686), in the question, "who really is ...", BDAG says, "freq[uently] in questions which draw an inference fr[om] what precedes; but oft[en] simply to enliven the question." In Luke (12:42) it is in response to Peter's question, "Lord, are you saying this illustration (from Luke 12:35-40) to us or also to all?"

  Take Care