https://www.jw.org/en/whats-new/books-of-titus-and-philemon-study-edition-now-available-online/.
Wonderment:
The Revelation book? How long will that take? The Revelation book might be their biggest challenge yet.
It also will collect notes from previous publications. But given the changes in their most recent Ezekiel commentary along with other nonsense about Gog, the ‘king of the north’, etc, I wouldn’t be too surprised if a new attempt at a Revelation commentary might be in the making.
https://www.jw.org/en/whats-new/books-of-titus-and-philemon-study-edition-now-available-online/.
Most of the ‘study notes’ repeat information in other publications so it’s not a as though it’s quite the mammoth effort it’s portrayed to be. I think they release the Study edition gradually to make JWs think they’re always getting something new despite the very limited number of ‘new releases’ compared to years ago.
has this question ever been raised before by jehovah`s witnesses?
and what`s the significance, if any ?.
smiddy3:
Was Jesus the Messiah circumcised ?No. Whilst there was probably one or more itinerant rabbis who form a basis for stories about Jesus, “Jesus the Messiah” didn’t exist, and therefore was not circumcised.
according to the bible all humans male and female have inherited sin because of adam and eve`s disobedience to god .. god may have impregnated mary with a life force , however it was still sinful mary who gave birth to jesus after nine months in her body who is /was supposedly without sin ?.
mary must have passed on some of her sinful state to jesus having been in her womb for the past nine months , surely.
and there is nothing in the bible / scripture to say otherwise ?.
Fisherman:
Nope. Given Jesus’s miraculous birth, it’s not magic, it’s God’s Holy Spirit
‘Holy Spirit’ Is an entirely unverifiable and poorly defined concept with no inherent meaning, and for any practical purpose is indistinguishable from ‘magic’. And there is no evidence that Jesus’ birth was in any way ‘miraculous’ (another euphemism for ‘magic’).
according to the bible all humans male and female have inherited sin because of adam and eve`s disobedience to god .. god may have impregnated mary with a life force , however it was still sinful mary who gave birth to jesus after nine months in her body who is /was supposedly without sin ?.
mary must have passed on some of her sinful state to jesus having been in her womb for the past nine months , surely.
and there is nothing in the bible / scripture to say otherwise ?.
Basically , their answer is ‘magic’. The original 1988 version of Insight said under the entry for Jesus:
Since actual conception took place, it appears that Jehovah God caused an ovum, or egg cell, in Mary’s womb to become fertile, accomplishing this by the transferal of the life of his firstborn Son from the spirit realm to earth. (Ga 4:4) Only in this way could the child eventually born have retained identity as the same person who had resided in heaven as the Word, and only in this way could he have been an actual son of Mary” … “From the results revealed in the Bible, it would appear that the perfect male life-force (causing the conception) canceled out any imperfection existent in Mary’s ovum, thereby producing a genetic pattern (and embryonic development) that was perfect from its start.
The entire passage was deleted in the 2018 revision.
what do you guys think of the evangelicals theory about babylon the great and the last pope...just starting this big book out of curiosity...like 500 pages...it seems there is a lot of different thinking from the borg.
'Babylon the Great' was actually first-century Rome.
Hope you didn't pay for the book.
the wt org claims that the lamb's marriage will happen after armageddon, despite the fact that revelation 19 very clearly says that the lamb's marriage happens after the destruction of babylon the great.
and that after the lamb's marriage he with heavenly armies will go to destroy the wicked.. the wt claims that the order of events in revelation 19 is not really in that order referring to psalm 45. but i can't find in psalm 45 any explicit contradiction to revelation 19. .
paragraph 10 in the following article shows the wt org's view point:.
Kosenen:
By the way, the WT has also completely misunderstood what Babylon the Great represents. You are welcome to visit my website where I try to explain these things.
As have you. 🤦♂️
12 when did jesus appoint the faithful slave over his domestics?
to answer that, we need to go back to 1914—the beginning of the harvest season.
as we learned earlier, at that time many groups claimed to be christian.
Disillusioned JW:
I merely made a correct statement. Perhaps you are the one who manifested confirmation bias when you incorrectly implied that I had manifested confirmation bias. It appears that you read into post more than what I stated in my post.
Ho hum... 🙄 I also made correct statements. I did not say that you had necessarily ascribed anything special, but I correctly pointed out that to do so would be fallacious.
12 when did jesus appoint the faithful slave over his domestics?
to answer that, we need to go back to 1914—the beginning of the harvest season.
as we learned earlier, at that time many groups claimed to be christian.
Disillusioned JW:
Hey Jeffro, regarding their 1919 teaching of "The ‘Jews to be restored to their homeland’ is literal' is something they got right
They didn’t ‘get it right’ due to any special knowledge, nor due to anything magical about the Jews or the source material. Jews and Christians both had a vested interested in working towards ‘restoring the Jews to their homeland’, which is therefore unremarkable. Ascribing anything special to the Bible Student belief is an example of confirmation bias.
12 when did jesus appoint the faithful slave over his domestics?
to answer that, we need to go back to 1914—the beginning of the harvest season.
as we learned earlier, at that time many groups claimed to be christian.
They were pleased with a small band of loyal Bible Students who showed that their heart was with Jehovah and his Word.
Why exactly would 'Jesus and his Father' be 'pleased' with this particular minor Adventist denomination that was basically indistinguishable from similar Adventist sects? In 1919 when supposedly 'selected', the 'Bible Students' taught that:
