Posts by slimboyfat

41

John 20: 28 in the NWT Calls Jesus God

by Sea Breeze in

in answer thomas said to him: “my lord and my god!

- john 20: 28 nwt.

why don't jehovah's witnesses believe jesus is god when he is called that in their own bible?.

slimboyfat

Thank you for engaging so deeply and respectfully with these mysteries.

Good for them, but there is nothing respectful or deep about you continuing to spew your AI garbage all over the forum while expecting others to provide genuine and thoughtful responses. You are not just inconsiderate you are a pernicious parasite spreading nonsense masquerading as genuine conversation. What if others treated you the same way you treat them? The forum would consist of nothing but AI responses to other AI posts. A complete farce.

41

John 20: 28 in the NWT Calls Jesus God

by Sea Breeze in

in answer thomas said to him: “my lord and my god!

- john 20: 28 nwt.

why don't jehovah's witnesses believe jesus is god when he is called that in their own bible?.

slimboyfat

I have, many times. It misrepresented Raymond Brown repeatedly. It said Brown didn’t think textual issues were important in Acts 20:28. Brown actually said the complete opposite that textual variants are the most important factor causing uncertainty in Acts 20:28. Then in response it said another thing Brown never said, and another, and on and on it goes. It’s completely unreliable and a complete waste of time.

41

John 20: 28 in the NWT Calls Jesus God

by Sea Breeze in

in answer thomas said to him: “my lord and my god!

- john 20: 28 nwt.

why don't jehovah's witnesses believe jesus is god when he is called that in their own bible?.

slimboyfat

Well, for one thing it just makes you look ignorant and hypocritical to criticize AI when all search engines now employ it.

Search engines throw up good information and bad with no pretence of having vetted it for you. AI on the other hand stitches together truths and lies in a plausible narrative that makes it impossible to determine what parts can be trusted and what parts are complete garbage. The AI summary that search engines offer is very brief and focussed, but even it comes with an appropriate warning about unreliability:

AI responses may include mistakes. Learn more
How AI Overviews work
AI Overviews use generative AI, which is a type of artificial intelligence that learns patterns and structures from the data it is trained on and uses that to create something new. While exciting, this technology is rapidly evolving and improving, and may provide inaccurate or offensive information. AI Overviews can and will make mistakes.
Think critically about AI Overview responses. Explore results from multiple sources to fact-check important info.

It might be practical to quickly double check one piece of information from an AI search summary that is usually just a sentence or two. It is totally impractical to check each and every source in thousands of words of AI text on this forum to find out which parts are being grossly misrepresented as invariably some of it is.

61

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

I cannot find a Hebrew word that equates to "beget" in Prov. 8: 25. even if there is one, What does the personification of wisdom have to do with anything?

Early Christian writers habitually applied this passage to Jesus, including the words “created” and “begets” as equivalents. In fact it’s one of the most often quoted OT passages for Jesus in the ante-Nicene literature. The claim I was responding to was that creation and begetting were not equivalent. In this passage in the LXX and for all those early Christians who quoted it they were treated as equivalent. It was later that a sharp distinction was drawn to support the Trinity.

41

John 20: 28 in the NWT Calls Jesus God

by Sea Breeze in

in answer thomas said to him: “my lord and my god!

- john 20: 28 nwt.

why don't jehovah's witnesses believe jesus is god when he is called that in their own bible?.

slimboyfat

I have no idea whether the AI is making good points or not and neither do you. In order to determine whether the points it makes are accurate or spurious would require hours of checking sources and reading the argument carefully. Have you done that? Just because it looks plausible and sophisticated is no guarantee it isn’t laced with inaccuracies and garbage logic as it has been in the past. Why should anyone take the hours required to verify or refute these AI posts when the poster himself offers this AI slop generated in a matter of seconds. Does he even read the AI garbage before he posts it? So why should I waste my time on it? No thanks.

41

John 20: 28 in the NWT Calls Jesus God

by Sea Breeze in

in answer thomas said to him: “my lord and my god!

- john 20: 28 nwt.

why don't jehovah's witnesses believe jesus is god when he is called that in their own bible?.

slimboyfat

More AI generated crap.

61

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

“Begotten” does not mean “created” in either Second-Temple Jewish discourse or Nicene theology

Begotten is equivalent to creation in Proverbs 8 where they are used interchangeably - a passage that early Christians used to apply both descriptions “created” and “begets” to God’s creation of the prehuman Jesus in Greek.

22 The Lord created me as the beginning of his ways, for the sake of his works.

23 Before the present age he founded me, in the beginning

24 Before he made the earth and before he made the depths, before he brought forth the springs of the waters,

25 before the mountains were established and before all the hills, he begets me.

41

John 20: 28 in the NWT Calls Jesus God

by Sea Breeze in

in answer thomas said to him: “my lord and my god!

- john 20: 28 nwt.

why don't jehovah's witnesses believe jesus is god when he is called that in their own bible?.

slimboyfat

Your response reveals a fundamental misunderstanding both of the biblical data and of the theological categories …

Bla bla and your response, Aquabot, reveals that you are still spewing out AI garbage all over the place with no regard for other posters or for the truth for that matter. Go away if you have nothing to say for yourself, will you? Not this garbage that you haven’t even verified for yourself whether it’s accurate or a pile of intelligent-looking, but utterly vacuous crap dressed flowery language. Over 1600 words in ten minutes, you’re not even pretending any more to write this stuff are you? Are you even reading it before you post it?

41

John 20: 28 in the NWT Calls Jesus God

by Sea Breeze in

in answer thomas said to him: “my lord and my god!

- john 20: 28 nwt.

why don't jehovah's witnesses believe jesus is god when he is called that in their own bible?.

slimboyfat

Sea Breeze, as early as Justin and Origen, Christian writers have recognised that Jesus is called “god” without the article in John 1:1 in a lower sense than God and that there is a huge difference between the two. (I can share the quotes but you perhaps know them already.)

If you claim that Jesus is God almighty at the same time as being the “Son of God”, then you are not really accepting the term “Son of God” at face value because of course the Son of God is distinct and subordinate to God in any reasonable, non dogma-driven understanding of the term.

41

John 20: 28 in the NWT Calls Jesus God

by Sea Breeze in

in answer thomas said to him: “my lord and my god!

- john 20: 28 nwt.

why don't jehovah's witnesses believe jesus is god when he is called that in their own bible?.

slimboyfat

The fact that John used both the term: "Son of God" and "God" in the same book to refer to Jesus tells us that both are referring to Jesus' deity.

The fact that Jesus is the Son of God means that Jesus is not that God whose Son he is, to most reasonable people using language in its ordinary sense. The fact that this has been confused by thousands of years of dogma that says Jesus can be God almighty and the Son of God at the same time shouldn’t alter that simple reality. If the conclusion that the apostle John himself reached was that Jesus is the Son of God then that should be good enough for us too.

So what did John mean when he reported Thomas addressed Jesus as “my Lord and my God” in 20:28? There are various possibilities. A popular candidate among recent scholars is that John was making the point that Christians look to Jesus as their leader rather than Caesar, and the reason he chose this wording is because the emperor Domitian was called “Lord and God” around the time the gospel was written. This is a good contextual reading of the significance of the passage. Trying to shoehorn 4th century Christology into the gospel of John against the conclusion of the author himself that Jesus is “the Son of God” may seem plausible at the level of proof texting, but it’s not good exegesis.