Posts by slimboyfat

65

Acts 20: 28 Corruption in the NWT

by Sea Breeze in

here's how this verse should read: .

take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the holy ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of god, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

- kjvhere's how it reads in the nwt: pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers, to shepherd the congregation of god, which he purchased with the blood of his own son.. here is how it reads in the kjv with the greek keyed to strong's: take heedg4337 thereforeg3767 unto yourselves,g1438 andg2532 to allg3956 theg3588 flock,g4168 overg1722 the whichg3739 theg3588 holyg40 ghostg4151 hath madeg5087 youg5209 overseers,g1985 to feedg4165 theg3588 churchg1577 of god,g2316 whichg3739 he hath purchasedg4046 withg1223 his owng2398 blood.g129 .

slimboyfat

In Acts 2:36 God’s exaltation of Jesus culminates in his being declared “both Lord and Christ”; the title κύριος carries precisely the Septuagintal resonance that the objection says Luke never entertains.

Again another subtle but important misquotation. Acts 2:36 doesn’t say Jesus was “declared” Lord and Christ at his exaltation. It says that God “has made” Jesus Lord and Christ. Firstly, nobody ever “made” God Lord, he is Lord by right. If Jesus was “made” Lord, as Acts says, then he is clearly not God, of whom this could never be said. Secondly, the author of Acts makes it extremely clear that Jesus, as Lord, is distinct from YHWH in his quotation of Psalm 110:1 where Jesus as messianic Lord (adonai) is distinct and subordinate to YHWH.

65

Acts 20: 28 Corruption in the NWT

by Sea Breeze in

here's how this verse should read: .

take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the holy ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of god, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

- kjvhere's how it reads in the nwt: pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers, to shepherd the congregation of god, which he purchased with the blood of his own son.. here is how it reads in the kjv with the greek keyed to strong's: take heedg4337 thereforeg3767 unto yourselves,g1438 andg2532 to allg3956 theg3588 flock,g4168 overg1722 the whichg3739 theg3588 holyg40 ghostg4151 hath madeg5087 youg5209 overseers,g1985 to feedg4165 theg3588 churchg1577 of god,g2316 whichg3739 he hath purchasedg4046 withg1223 his owng2398 blood.g129 .

slimboyfat

The biggest problem with the Trinitarian rendering is the one that Trinitarians are least able to face and that is that it is simply overwhelmingly unlikely on an unbiased reading of the book of Acts that its author would ever have written anything remotely like a statement about God giving “his own blood”. Because the author of the book of Acts clearly viewed Jesus and God as separate and Jesus is definitely subordinate to God throughout. In fact it has perhaps one of the lowest Christologies of any book in the NT. At one point the author asserts that the reason Jesus was able to perform miracles is because God empowered him to do so. This is as far from a Trinitarian understanding of Jesus as coequal and consubstantial with God you can get. The idea that the author who otherwise consistently differentiated and subordinated Jesus to God, nevertheless slipped in a comment in 20:28 about God himself, or God the Son in Trinitarian terms I suppose, giving his blood for humans is so farfetched and removed from the spirit of the text as it is possible to get. The variations in the text and the ambiguity of the grammar in the text are just additional reasons for discounting the Trinitarian reading. The primary reason it’s wrong is that it clearly makes no sense in a first century Christian text such as this. It’s as out of place and out of time as if it were to slip in a mention the pope or the Vikings or something else that only came around in later centuries.

24

Hebrews 1: 8 Corruption in the NWT

by Sea Breeze in

the watchtower translates this verse like this: .

but about the son, he says: “god is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of your kingdom is the scepter of uprightness.

- hebrews 1: 8 nwt.

slimboyfat

Sea Breeze there’s a much better case to be made for Jesus being called “god” here than in Acts 20:28, but even so it’s far from clear cut. Some very competent Greek scholars have agreed with the NWT reading here and on the flip side, even if Jesus is called God in this verse it’s obviously in a very qualified sense because 1) it’s quoting a verse where the king of Israel was also “god” in some sense and 2) even as “god” Jesus still has another who is “God” to him in verse 9. In Bible times it was perfectly possible to call other beings, angels and humans, gods in a qualified sense. Given that is the case why would this title be denied to God’s own Son, the most powerful being in existence next to God himself?

The whole argument of Hebrews chapter 1 is that Jesus “has become” better than the angels because he inherited a name greater than theirs. If what the author actually wanted to argue was that Jesus is in fact almighty God himself, then there seems to be a lot of beating about the bush with the angels talk, and specifying the particular ways in which Jesus has become superior to the angels. If Jesus was actually believed to be God almighty then it seems rather redundant to argue he is now superior to the angels.

65

Acts 20: 28 Corruption in the NWT

by Sea Breeze in

here's how this verse should read: .

take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the holy ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of god, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

- kjvhere's how it reads in the nwt: pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers, to shepherd the congregation of god, which he purchased with the blood of his own son.. here is how it reads in the kjv with the greek keyed to strong's: take heedg4337 thereforeg3767 unto yourselves,g1438 andg2532 to allg3956 theg3588 flock,g4168 overg1722 the whichg3739 theg3588 holyg40 ghostg4151 hath madeg5087 youg5209 overseers,g1985 to feedg4165 theg3588 churchg1577 of god,g2316 whichg3739 he hath purchasedg4046 withg1223 his owng2398 blood.g129 .

slimboyfat

Looking at NA28 am I reading it correcting that Irenaeus has a variant here too? Which would mean that not only was aquabot wrong about the verse having no variation (in fact it’s a famously difficult text from a textual criticism perspective) but also wrong about there being no witnesses to a different ending to the verse in particular because there are Greek MSS with different wording and apparently other early witnesses such as Irenaeus too. The trouble with AI generated answers is that they look very knowledgable and competent but they just get really basic stuff wrong and unless you know the topic really well you can’t spot it. I refuse to read it at this point because although it looks convincing it’s as reliable as jelly and you’ll end up accepting stuff that is just factually wrong. Plus he has the AI tone set to condescending mode or something.

65

Acts 20: 28 Corruption in the NWT

by Sea Breeze in

here's how this verse should read: .

take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the holy ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of god, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

- kjvhere's how it reads in the nwt: pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers, to shepherd the congregation of god, which he purchased with the blood of his own son.. here is how it reads in the kjv with the greek keyed to strong's: take heedg4337 thereforeg3767 unto yourselves,g1438 andg2532 to allg3956 theg3588 flock,g4168 overg1722 the whichg3739 theg3588 holyg40 ghostg4151 hath madeg5087 youg5209 overseers,g1985 to feedg4165 theg3588 churchg1577 of god,g2316 whichg3739 he hath purchasedg4046 withg1223 his owng2398 blood.g129 .

slimboyfat

1500 words in 15 minutes 🤔

The original Greek text, supported by all extant manuscripts and early translations, clearly states that God purchased the church "with his own blood."

That is an incorrect hallucination. There are many manuscripts and versions that read differently.

65

Acts 20: 28 Corruption in the NWT

by Sea Breeze in

here's how this verse should read: .

take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the holy ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of god, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

- kjvhere's how it reads in the nwt: pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers, to shepherd the congregation of god, which he purchased with the blood of his own son.. here is how it reads in the kjv with the greek keyed to strong's: take heedg4337 thereforeg3767 unto yourselves,g1438 andg2532 to allg3956 theg3588 flock,g4168 overg1722 the whichg3739 theg3588 holyg40 ghostg4151 hath madeg5087 youg5209 overseers,g1985 to feedg4165 theg3588 churchg1577 of god,g2316 whichg3739 he hath purchasedg4046 withg1223 his owng2398 blood.g129 .

slimboyfat

Because the phrase “his own” may be an idiomatic expression meaning “his own son”.

We can relate to that in English because we have a similar idea at work in the expression, “we look after our own”. That means we look after our kin, not that we look out for just ourself.

10

The Deficient Theism of the Watchtower

by aqwsed12345 in

"for my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, says the lord.

for as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

" (isaiah 55:8-9).

slimboyfat

No, a dodgy referee at a cup final might know the outcome of a game because he fixed it ahead of time.

A skilled referee, on the other hand, knows the shape of the outcome in the sense of how long the game will last, the rules that govern the game, the permutations that could arise in the course of the game, and that one side or other will win.

Jehovah isn’t a dodgy predestinarian referee who fixed the game, he is more like a supremely skilled referee who knows, not only the rules, but perfectly and exactly every possible permutation of the game, when it will end, and what the prize will be.

10

The Deficient Theism of the Watchtower

by aqwsed12345 in

"for my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, says the lord.

for as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

" (isaiah 55:8-9).

slimboyfat

Not really. The predestinarian God only knows one possible future, whereas Jehovah knows all possible futures that are available for humans to choose from and has set up reality in such a way that allows them the freedom to do so. That is a greater God in every sense.

66

Time of the end - a TRINITY puzzler.

by BoogerMan in

(matthew 24:36) “concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the son, but only the father.".

(jesus seems to have forgotten to include the holy spirit not knowing either).

(acts 1:7) "he said to them: “it does not belong to you to know the times or seasons that the father has placed in his own jurisdiction.".

slimboyfat

I don’t know, a regular person reads the statement about the person sent not being greater than the sender and it reads like a common sense observation that the sender is obviously greater than the person being sent. A Trinitarian reads it and thinks, “well technically, they could be equal, if we ignore context, and common sense, so yeah let’s go with that, they’re equal.”

Plus there is the fact that Jesus flat out says, “the Father is greater than I”. There is that too.

10

The Deficient Theism of the Watchtower

by aqwsed12345 in

"for my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, says the lord.

for as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

" (isaiah 55:8-9).

slimboyfat

A couple of questions:

1. Who is more powerful a God who knows everything in the future whether he wants to or not, or a God who can choose what to know in the future?

2. God is all powerful, yet he does not express his power to the full extent in every place at every point in time, otherwise there would be equivalent of infinite atomic explosions everywhere all the time. If an almighty God can choose when to express his power and to what extent, can he not also do the same with regard to his knowledge of the future?