The Ugly Truth about Jesus 2nd Presence

by Amazing1914 111 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  AlanF

  Non-scholar stereotypically wrote:

  : Your sloppy exegesis of Mark 13:4 and Luke 21:7 is apparent from your failure to analyze the essentials of these two verses in your attempted criticism of the NWT.

  Really. Words, words, words. As usual, nothing but empty words. Nothing behind them. No exegesis, no discussion, no argumentation. Nothing. Typical of the JW apologist.

  You've completely ignored several dozen lines of careful exegesis in my post above. The fact that you ignore all of it proves that you're an incorrigibly lousy excuse for a scholar.

  : The translations that you selected show immediacy but that differs from the careful rendering in the NWT which refer to a determined event to be fulfilled.

  It's not careful. It's simply wrong, as I demonstrated in the above post and further demonstrate below.

  : The key expression is the modifying verb melle followed by the infinitive in both verses.

  Right, which is why every translation I'm aware of other than the substandard NWT renders the verses properly. The fact that you don't know of any translation beside the NWT that supports the NWT rendering is obvious: if you knew of any, you'd refer to it.

  : The reference works show that melle means be destined, inevitable along with other meanings- Bauer,1979,p.500-1.

  As usual, you're a liar. Bauer's (1979) specifically proves my point on page 501. Under various subheadings we find:

  c. with the present infinitive. . .

  a. be about to, be on the point of hemellen teleutan he was at the point of death (Aristot. in Apollon. Paradox. 27...) . . . hemellen eauton anairein he was about to kill himself Ac 16:27. . . Occasionally almost=begin hemellon graphein Rv 10:4 hotan melle tauta sunteleisthai panta when all these things are (or begin) to be accomplished Mk 13:4; cf. Lk 21:7; Rv 10:7.

  The examples that Bauer's gives are precisely those that I gave in my post above, and so Bauer's fully proves my point. The latest (2000) version of Bauer's has virtually identical information. How can you possibly be so stupid as to miss this? Do you really think that I, or anyone else on this board capable of participating in this discussion, are so stupid as to be swayed by your transparent lies and atrociously bad scholarship? Given the mental state of most JWs, you probably get away with such lies and intellectual intimidation in your local congregation, but not here.

  : Also, in NIDNTT, Vol1, p.326 it says:

  : 2. mello means must, to have to, to be certain to, in the context of events which happen according to the will and decree of God and which are thus necessary, certain and inevitable,,,It occurs in the context of Gods action in grace and judgement (Mark 13:4...). A careful parsing of the verb and the infinitive will prove that the translations -destined to occur and destined to come to a conclusion are entirely accurate and do not demonstrate the immediate action that you propose.

  I don't now have in my possession NIDNTT, but I'll soon have a copy. Since every time you've made some false claim about some scholarly reference, I've shown that you've misrepresented what it says, just as you did in your post here, I'll now give you the opportunity to retract what you've claimed and tell the truth. If you don't, then of course, as soon as I receive my copy of NIDNTT I'll post the full truth about what it says. Do you have the intellectual honesty (or even the intelligence?) to back down now, before you're once again shown to be a sham scholar at best, and a liar in the main?

  : I await with great interest your translation of the 24 NT examples of parousia if you dare.

  You've got to be kidding! I have in my personal library at least 50 Bible translations. I've already seen that only a tiny fraction -- in particular, the NWT, The Emphatic Diaglott and Rotherham's, are about the only translations that the Watchtower can use in its support. While I'm doing this research, I challenge you to come up with other translations that support the NWT's rendering. You won't be able to find much -- guaranteed.

  AlanF
• 

  gumby

  The fact that you ignore all of it proves that you're an incorrigibly lousy excuse for a scholar.

  Nah.....he's just a guy who's afraid to let go of his security blanket cuz he's scared the boogieman will get him. "Truth has nothing to hide".....I always liked that saying.

  Gumby
• 

  scholar

  Alan F

  My reference to Bauer's lexicon is correct because I stated that melle means be destined, inevitable along with other meanings which are referred under the same heading B or the second letter in the Greek alphabet. Bauer's translation when all these things are (or begin) to be accompished is in agreement with the NWT rendering are destined to occur and are destined to come to a completion.In such examples there is no hint of immediacy as shown by popular and inaccurate translations which have failed to show the nuance of meaning indicated with this verb followed by the infinitive. Again the NWT stands supreme as it is in accordance with Greek Grammar.

  Also, you may find it rewarding to consult EDOTNT,1991, Vol.2, p.403 which indicates that mello means intend, be about to, will, be destined to, consider, hesitate,delay. Further, on page 404 it highlights the fact that this verb in question is used in a eschatological context or to the event of the end Mark13:4 (cf. Luke 21:7).

  scholar
• 

  AlanF

  Non-scholar said:

  : My reference to Bauer's lexicon is correct because I stated that melle means be destined, inevitable along with other meanings which are referred under the same heading B or the second letter in the Greek alphabet.

  There's absolutely no doubt now that you're a moron. The meanings that I quoted are absolutely clear. With respect to the NT usage in Mark 13:4 etc., you're wrong. Period.

  If you disagree, then by all means quote from Bauer's and show precisely what this reference said that proves what you claim.

  You won't do this, because you know perfectly well that what I presented in my previous posts is exactly what Bauer's and other references state. Verbatim.

  : Bauer's translation when all these things are (or begin) to be accompished is in agreement with the NWT rendering are destined to occur and are destined to come to a completion.

  Wrong. You again (and interminably, it seems) demonstrate zero competence in the English and Greek languages. I need not repeat the material I wrote above that you've carefully ignored.

  : In such examples there is no hint of immediacy

  What examples? Bauer's has none with respect to what you claim. If you think that Bauer's does, then by all means post the examples.

  : as shown by popular and inaccurate translations which have failed to show the nuance of meaning indicated with this verb followed by the infinitive. Again the NWT stands supreme as it is in accordance with Greek Grammar.

  A substanceless assertion backed up by zero evidence and contradicted by virtually all Bible translations. You have no evidence whatsoever, beyond the demonstrably wrong NWT rendering, that your claim is right. If you think it is, then once again (I seem to have to repeat this interminably) post your evidence. Not claims, but evidence.

  : Also, you may find it rewarding to consult EDOTNT,1991, Vol.2, p.403

  What a friggin shitty scholar you are. You post things like "EDOTNT" as if all readers know what such technical jargon means. Once again, proof of a sham scholar who wants to rely on credentials rather than good arguments. If you had any integrity at all as a scholar, not to mention as a Christian, you'd post careful references so that all readers would easily be able to look them up. But this is an ongoing problem with you. You have no clue about how to post good source references; neither do you want to because they inevitably prove your arguments wrong. But this isn't as bad as your inability to understand source references.

  Nevertheless, I have no doubt that whatever "EDOTNT"is, it states precisely the opposite of what you claim. If you can manage to post an intelligible reference, I'll get hold of it and ream your ass with the truth.

  : which indicates that mello means intend, be about to, will, be destined to, consider, hesitate,delay.

  That's essentially what I already said, you moron!

  : Further, on page 404 it highlights the fact that this verb in question is used in a eschatological context or to the event of the end Mark13:4 (cf. Luke 21:7).

  What of it?

  AlanF
• 

  scholar

  Alan F

  Why do you not post page 501 of Bauer's lexicon so that others may see the matter for themselves. You ignore the fact that Bauer has listed be destined as a legitimate meaning of mello and you cannot discern the nuance of this Greek passage. The fact of the matter is that no Greek scholar would say that the rendering of the NWT in these two texts is inaccurate. Further, the AV version translates Mark 13:4 as "'when all these things are fulfilled"" and Luke 21:7 as "'when these things shall come to pass"' which are in agreement with the NWT showing no immediacy.

  I challenge you to disprove the NWT renderings by Greek grammar and to present your translation of parousia in the 24 times it occurs in the NT.

  scholar
• 

  ozziepost

  So then, scholar, how long must Jesus be present but have to wait? Is it now "understood" to be 120 years?

  No matter how much you protest, you cannot avoid the difficulty that you have, a 'reigning' King who does nothing!!!

  I much prefer the true Christian Jesus whose 2nd coming is awaited with keen anticipation.

  Ozzie
• 

  scholar

  ozziepost

  The coming of our LORD is yet still future and simply marks his parousia or presence which began in 1914 inicated by reliable Bible chronology and the fulfillment of the Sign that the Master gave to his disciples on Mount Olives. It is important to clearly understand that parousia means presence and that is why true Christians believe in his parousia as a reality and not something that causes confusion. Such Christians are not troubled by the theological dilemma called the Delay of the Parousia which is based on the false premise that our Lord and Savior only comes without any parousia. Perhaps you should consult DLOTLNT,1997, Vol.3.,pp.856-75 at Moore Theological College Library.

  scholar
• 

  AlanF

  Non-scholar wrote:

  : Why do you not post page 501 of Bauer's lexicon so that others may see the matter for themselves.

  There's no need. You posted some stuff about it; I didn't dispute it; therefore I implicitly agreed that Bauer's gives "destined" as one definition. But that's really not the point. The point is that Bauer's explicitly disallowed "destined" because it applied the meaning "be about to" to Mark 13:4, Luke 21:7 and Rev. 10:7.

  You seem to think that just because a lexicon shows several different definitions of a word, any of those definitions can be stuck willy-nilly into a Bible passage. Well it doesn't work that way. Context determines the allowed meanings. And I showed above how the context of these passages does not allow the meaning "destined" for melle.

  : You ignore the fact that Bauer has listed be destined as a legitimate meaning of mello

  Wrong. I gave a detailed explanation of why that meaning cannot be applied to Mark 13:4 and Luke 21:7.

  Of course, you've entirely ignored the fact that the NWT inconsistently translates the exact same Greek phrase hotan melle in these passages and in Rev. 10:7.

  : and you cannot discern the nuance of this Greek passage.

  Oh? And I suppose the scholars responsible for Bauer's, along with the hundreds of scholars whose apparently unanimous opinons disallow "destined" in the passages in question, are ignorant of the nuances? Get real.

  : The fact of the matter is that no Greek scholar would say that the rendering of the NWT in these two texts is inaccurate.

  Of course they would. The fact that no other Bible translation supports the NWT's rendering proves it.

  : Further, the AV version translates Mark 13:4 as "'when all these things are fulfilled""

  Good lord! You can't even manage to quote the AV (KJV) properly. The online Bible web site "Bible Gateway" ( http://www.biblegateway.com/ ) has:

  "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign when all these things shall be fulfilled?"

  : and Luke 21:7 as "'when these things shall come to pass"'

  I'm glad to see that you got that one right.

  : which are in agreement with the NWT showing no immediacy.

  Wrong. Those renderings still show immediacy, although it's not entirely evident from the outmoded English. This is easy to prove by noting how the KJV renders the exact same phrase in Revelation 10:7:

  "But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound"

  The NWT has, "when he is about to blow his trumpet". The sense of immediacy is therefore obvious.

  Nevertheless, a number of more modern Bible translations contain renderings along the lines of the KJV's, but they still retain a sense of immediacy even though they don't explicitly contain the word "about". This is easy to see with an example:

  Suppose Jose owns a company in San Francisco. Mark is the manager of its field office in Chicago. Jose calls Mark one day and they have the following dialog:

  Jose: Mark, I'll be arriving in Chicago for an inspection in May.

  Mark: Ok. When are you coming?

  Jose: I don't know at this point. I won't know until the last minute.

  Mark: Well, how can I tell when you're going to show up?

  Jose: I'll call you just before I go to the airport.

  When Mark says, "how can I tell when you're going to show up?" it's obvious that he wants to know when Jose is about to arrive. He's not asking whether Jose is destined to arrive, because Jose just told him that he's destined to arrive. I.e., Jose just told him that it was inevitable that he would arrive, so it would be both redundant and disrespectful to Jose for Mark to ask for further confirmation that he was going to arrive in May. So the sense of the question "how can I tell when you're going to show up?" is exactly the same as the sense of "how can I tell when you're about to show up?" but is completely different from "how can I tell when you're destined to show up?"

  Furthermore, the latter form doesn't even make sense in English. If you invite someone to your home and he says he doesn't know exactly when he'll get there, and you really want at least an idea of when, and you ask him, "How can I tell when you're destined to show up?", his probable reaction would be to say, "What? I don't understand your question." People just don't speak that way. It's gobble-de-goop.

  Now non-scholar, I know that your English comprehension is poor, but do try to make an effort to understand these examples. It's just not that hard. At least, not for people not brain-damaged by years of immersion in Watchtower-think.

  AlanF
• 

  AlanF

  So, non-scholar, when are you destined to tell us what "EDOTNT" is? Or is this another of your imaginings?

  AlanF
• 

  toreador

  Scholar wrote:

  :Perhaps you should consult DLOTLNT,1997, Vol.3.,pp.856-75 at Moore Theological College Library.

  What the heck is DLOTLNT?

  Tor