Earnest

Joined

• started 51 topics
• posted 2,189 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Earnest

• 
  90

  What is Your Favorite WT Lie?

  by Sea Breeze in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i would like to start a thread on lies that the watchtower and their reps have told.

  surely we all have one or two that truly sticks out in our memories, no matter how much we would like to forget.

  my favorite wt lie: the reason they don't want to release the name of the "scholars" who worked on the new world translation is because they do not want to accept "glory and honor" from others.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Earnest

  Vanderhoven7 : It’s not clear why the writers of the 1993 Watchtower lied, but there is it in black and white.

  Didn't ya know. Nothing before 1919 counts.
• 
  28

  Pre-Nicene christians and the trinity

  by joey jojo in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this is just a quick summary that might be useful regarding the threads about the trinity currently on the board.. in 325 ce, the nicene council was called by constantine to settle schisms within the christian church.

  the argument about the nature of jesus in relation to god was one of the big problems that needed resolution.

  at first, constantine told the 2 main players, alexander and arius to sort it out between themselves, as he, constantine didnt see it as overly important.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Earnest

  aqwsed12345 : Constantine's role was that of a mediator and facilitator, not a theological arbiter.

  aqwsed12345 : Claims of political imposition or suppression of manuscripts are unfounded conspiracy theories that do not align with historical evidence.

  Constantine's Edict Against the Arians :

  In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offence, he shall be submitted for capital punishment. ..
• 
  28

  Pre-Nicene christians and the trinity

  by joey jojo in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this is just a quick summary that might be useful regarding the threads about the trinity currently on the board.. in 325 ce, the nicene council was called by constantine to settle schisms within the christian church.

  the argument about the nature of jesus in relation to god was one of the big problems that needed resolution.

  at first, constantine told the 2 main players, alexander and arius to sort it out between themselves, as he, constantine didnt see it as overly important.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Earnest

  Anony Mous : Where do you find that the teaching was wide spread and accepted?

  Wikipedia reports on this :

  Controversy over Arianism arose in the late 3rd century and persisted throughout most of the 4th century. It involved most church members—from simple believers, priests, and monks to bishops, emperors, and members of Rome's imperial family. The Roman Emperors Constantius II (337–361) and Valens (364–378) were Arians or Semi-Arians, as was the first King of Italy, Odoacer (433?–493). The Lombards were also Arians or Semi-Arians until the 7th century, the ruling elite of Visigothic Spain was Arian until 589, many Goths adopted Arian beliefs upon their conversion to Christianity, the Vandals actively spread Arianism in North Africa, the antipopes Felix II and Ursinus were Arian, and Pope Liberius was forced to sign the Arian Creed of Sirmium of 357 although the letter says he willingly agreed with Arianism. Such a deep controversy within the early Church during this period of its development could not have materialized without significant historical influences providing a basis for the Arian doctrines.

  Jerome wrote The Dialogue Against the Luciferians about 379 and there he said (chapter 19):

  [Bishop] Valens and [Bishop] Ursacius and others associated with them [i.e. Arians] in their wickedness, eminent Christian bishops of course, began to wave their palms, and to say they had not denied that He was a creature, but that He was like other creatures. At that moment the term Usia was abolished: the Nicene Faith stood condemned by acclamation. The whole world groaned, and was astonished to find itself Arian.
• 
  171

  Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.

  this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.

  the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Earnest

  aqwsed12345 : Therefore, while the Greek word ektise can mean “create,” the underlying Hebrew context allows for a broader range of meanings, including “possess.”

  The Hebrew scriptures were translated into Greek so they would be available to Jews who could not understand Hebrew, which by this time was only a liturgical language. Greek was the language used by the NT writers and it is clear from the scriptures I listed that they understood and used ektisen and ktiseos as created and creation respectively.

  I suggest that just as John, as a believing Jew, could not write "in the beginning" (John 1:1) without having Genesis 1:1 in mind, so the writer of Revelation could not write "the beginning of the creation by God" without having Proverbs 8:22 in mind. This is no "surface-level similarity". The people of that age memorised huge chunks of scripture as the written word was not as available as it is today. Their audience would always include Jews and so they would allude to OT passages, especially in connection with Christ, to show there was a continuity of faith.

  When a Jew read John 1:1 they would immediately think of Genesis 1:1. When they read Revelation 3:14 they would immediately think of Proverbs 8:22. It doesn't matter how Athanasius and the post-Nicene fathers interpreted it. What matters is how the writer of Revelation and his immediate audience understood it, and the evidence is quite clear about that.
  
• 
  171

  Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.

  this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.

  the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Earnest

  Nathan Natas : How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

  Interesting question, especially if angels are not in material form. This is discussed in Notes & Queries, Volume 63, Issue 1, where the writer suggests the query about how many angels might sit on a needle's point was first raised in the 16th century as a critique of medieval angelology because it makes a pun on ‘needless point’. He writes (p.385) :

  … they fell to Disputations about the time of their Creation; whether it were before, or with the visible World; whether on the first day, or when they were created. Touching their Orders, what, and how many they were, their number, whether more fell or stood: whether they did occupie a place; and so, whether many might be in one place at one time; and how many might sit on a Needles point; and six hundred such like needlesse points.

  I do believe I have seen some of those needlesse points discussed on this very thread.

  But while many of these points are needless and mere speculation, the substance of the thread which relates to Jesus Christ being "the beginning of the creation (ktiseōs) by God" is relevant because it impinges on the shema : (Deuteronomy 6:4) "Jehovah our God is one Jehovah".

  This expression "the beginning of the creation by God" (he arche tes ktiseos tou theou) echoes Proverbs 8:22 (LXX) "Lord [referring to Jehovah] created me the beginning of his ways" (kurios ektise me archen hodon autou), and so the meaning of this verse in Proverbs reflects on the meaning of the verse in Revelation.

  There has been ample discussion whether ektise means created/made or possessed but I would suggest the most sensible course is to see how it is used elsewhere in the Bible. These are the places they occur in scripture, apart from Proverbs 8 and Revelation 3.

  Mark 10:6 from [the] beginning of creation (arkhes ktiseos) ‘He made them male and female’.

  Mark 13:19 a tribulation such as has not occurred from [the] beginning of the creation which God created (arkhes ktiseon hen ektisen ho theos)

  Romans 1:20 For his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world’s creation (ktiseos kosmou) onward

  Romans 8:19 For the eager expectation of the creation (tes ktiseos) …

  Colossians 1:15 He is … the firstborn of all creation (prototokos pases ktiseos)

  1 Timothy 4:3 … commanding to abstain from foods which God created (ho theos ektisen)

  Hebrews 9:11 when Christ came as a high priest … through the greater and more perfect tent not made with hands, that is, not of this creation (ou tautes tes ktiseos)

  2 Peter 3:4 … all things are continuing exactly as from creation’s beginning (ap arkhes ktiseos)

  Revelation 10:6 and by the One … who created (hos ektisen) the heaven and the … earth and the … sea

  There seems to be a common theme.

  It is true that the Hebrew word used in Proverbs 8:22 (qanani from qanah) conveys the idea that God acquires or possesses creation by virtue of his creative power (Genesis 14:19,22). So “formed me” (NLT), “possessed me” (ESV), “created me” (BSB), “made me” (ISV) are all acceptable translations of Proverbs 8. But we need to ask out of all these nuances of the word qanah, why did the Greek translators of Proverbs choose ektise which clearly means create if we are to accept how the Bible uses it. We simply don’t know. But it was this Greek translation which was read and used by the writers of the NT as can be seen by the allusion in Revelation 3:14. We also know this because the quotations of Proverbs 8 by various writers in the first four centuries almost always use this translation. See Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian , Origen, Methodius, Dionysius , Augustine, Eusebius , Socrates, Theodoret, Athanasius, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory Nazianzen, Basil, John of Damascus , Ambrose.

  Certainly, some of these believed the trinity and argued for it at Nicaea and elsewhere. That is not my point. My point is that every one of these church fathers, both ante and post-Nicaea, accepted that Proverbs read that Wisdom was created AND they accepted this referred to Christ. Some of them also argued, as you have done, that it didn’t really mean that God created Christ or they said it only applied to his human existence. All of that is interpretation. And you are as entitled to your interpretation as much as anyone else. We come back to dancing on pins. But the clear statement of (LXX) scripture is that Wisdom was created, and so this reflects on the meaning of Revelation 3:14 as well. No wonder some good scribe (of Sinaiticus) wanted to remove it.
• 
  18

  Meeting attendance

  by Farmer Jim1 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  for those still in the organization what is your meeting attendance like these days?.

  when i left in 2017 there were around 80 publishers and the average meeting attendance was 70..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Earnest

  Vanderhoven7 : The last report by the coward organization was 70,000 are disfellowshipped a year, with 2/3 NEVER returning after freeing themselves from the cult and its false doctrine.

  According to the news report on jw-dot-org (November 13, 2024) there was a "43.2 percent increase in those who returned to Jehovah, with 65,816 who were reinstated" in the 2024 Service Year Report. There is a thread on this here.
  
• 
  90

  What is Your Favorite WT Lie?

  by Sea Breeze in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i would like to start a thread on lies that the watchtower and their reps have told.

  surely we all have one or two that truly sticks out in our memories, no matter how much we would like to forget.

  my favorite wt lie: the reason they don't want to release the name of the "scholars" who worked on the new world translation is because they do not want to accept "glory and honor" from others.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Earnest

  Sea Breeze : Simply being told what a student must accomplish in order to be invited to Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar, is certainly not the same as “being offered the privilege of going to Oxford or Cambridge in England under the Rhodes plan”

  Since you (Sea Breeze) quoted from Franz's autobiography ((in the article “Looking Back Over 93 Years of Living” for the May 1, 1987, Watchtower magazine), I'm surprised at what you missed out. Franz went on to say :

  I have never regretted that, shortly before the announcements by the educational authorities regarding the outcome of the examinations for the Cecil Rhodes Scholarship, I wrote a letter to the authorities and advised them that I had lost interest in the Oxford University scholarship and that they should drop me from the list of contestants. This I did even though my professor in Greek at the university, Dr. Joseph Harry, informed me that I had been chosen to receive it. [My italics]

  As regards Franz's study of Greek at the University of Cincinnati, Franz writes in his autobiography :

  To the continued study of Latin, I now added the study of Greek. What a blessing it was to study Bible Greek under Professor Arthur Kinsella! Under Dr. Joseph Harry, an author of some Greek works, I also studied the classical Greek. I knew that if I wanted to become a Presbyterian clergyman, I had to have a command of Bible Greek. So I furiously applied myself and got passing grades.
• 
  29

  WT vs Norway - WT sends letter to the goverment saying they have now changed their practice on DF. Asks for their funding back

  by liam in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  disfellowshipping is slowly fading into the night.. last efforts to survive.. https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/1gh3ilq/wt_vs_norway_wt_sends_letter_to_the_goverment/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Earnest

  Earnest : It could be genuine as these errors are not impossible but I think unlikely.

  I have now received a copy of the letter from the Norwegian Ministry of Children and Families and can confirm it is genuine.
  
• 
  29

  WT vs Norway - WT sends letter to the goverment saying they have now changed their practice on DF. Asks for their funding back

  by liam in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  disfellowshipping is slowly fading into the night.. last efforts to survive.. https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/1gh3ilq/wt_vs_norway_wt_sends_letter_to_the_goverment/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Earnest

  St George of England : If this letter is genuine, did the WT Society make this blunder or is it the translator?

  I noticed that blunder too, St George. It is in the "original" copy of the letter which makes me wonder whether the letter is genuine. The email address at the top left is also not normally shown in Watchtower letters to the Norwegian government. The signature is a bit different to Pedersen's usual signature (leaving out the 'n' in Jørgen). It could be genuine as these errors are not impossible but I think unlikely.
  
• 
  171

  Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.

  this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.

  the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Earnest

  Blotty, the language in the Bible isn't unique in some way but was also used by the people contemporary with the writers. The numerous Greek papyri found at Oxyrhynchus (in Egypt) help us to understand how certain Greek words were used in the NT. When there is more than one meaning to a word then, of course, you have to understand it in context.

  The Bible lexicon which you quote (Thayer's) says that in the Bible ktizo means "to create: of God creating the world, man etc" but it is also means in a figurative sense "to found [or build or make] a city" as at 1 Esdras 4:53 :

  "...and that all who came from Babylonia to build [or, make] the city [κτίσαι τὴν πόλιν] should have their freedom"