the watchtower says:.
9 while most major books of religion say very little, if anything, about god, the bible acquaints us with jehovah god and his activities.
it helps us to see the many facets of his personality.
The Hebrews were the hill-dwelling, low-caste Canaanites. In their dreaming they created mythical heroes and mythical adventures, like Moses, the Exodus, and king David.
The Arabs are also descended from the Canaanites.
The theory of "fallen man" and "original sin" is likely to have originated with Augustine.
Doug
the watchtower says:.
9 while most major books of religion say very little, if anything, about god, the bible acquaints us with jehovah god and his activities.
it helps us to see the many facets of his personality.
When did Jesus become a Christian?
Doug
the watchtower says:.
9 while most major books of religion say very little, if anything, about god, the bible acquaints us with jehovah god and his activities.
it helps us to see the many facets of his personality.
opus,
What interesting observations you create.
The different versions (Septuagint versus Masoretic, Symmachus, Theodotian, etc) reflect the biases and amendments made by the translators and copiers, right from the outset. The WTS does the same with its NWT version, which in turn is based on which OT and NT sources that it selected. Consider the enormous differences between the versions of Jeremiah in the Septuagint (LXX) and in the Masoretic Text (MT). And it is not as if there is one version of the LXX; there are several.
If the NT references from the LXX indicated that the verses being cited were "inspired" but the rest of the LXX is not inspired, what does this say of the people who created and edited the LXX? Was their "inspiration" switched on and off as they worked their way through the pile of Hebrew scrolls? And it must be noted that the Hebrew text they worked from was at least 1300 years older than the earliest Hebrew text that is available to us.
If an NT writer had to resort to the Greek text of the Hebrew ("OT") scrolls, then using the WT's logic, what does this say of the equivalent text in the Hebrew OT scrolls? Does this show that the Hebrew passage was not inspired?
Inasmuch as NT writers regularly resorted to Hebrew scrolls that were later deemed to be non-canonical, what does this say of these non-canonical writings?
Doug
the watchtower says:.
9 while most major books of religion say very little, if anything, about god, the bible acquaints us with jehovah god and his activities.
it helps us to see the many facets of his personality.
opus,
At (document) pages 22 to 26 of:
http://www.jwstudies.com/God-breathed_Scriptures.pdf
you will find a listing of allusions to and citations of non-canonical writings such as 1 Enoch throughout the New Testament, including Jesus' words at the Sermon on the Mount. See also (document) page 21 of my Study.
(I wrote "document pages" because the "PDF page" numbers are 26 to 31).
Doug
ok, is this a "new understanding" or what?
up until this point i thought that the borg refered paul as a co or do, but never gb member:.
p. 12 now, why would paul a spiritual giant who likely was a member of the first-century governing bodycall himself a miserable man?.
I discuss this in my Study at:
http://www.jwstudies.com/2013_-_Did_a__Governing_Body__govern_Paul.pdf
Although it canvasses a range of related topics, the Contents listing is hyperlinked to the body.
Another relevant Study:
http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Watchtower_s_Achilles__Heel.pdf
Doug
the watchtower says:.
9 while most major books of religion say very little, if anything, about god, the bible acquaints us with jehovah god and his activities.
it helps us to see the many facets of his personality.
“Inerrancy” refers to the words written by the original writer.
“Absolute inerrancy is therefore to be attributed to the written Word of God. This is true of the original writings, none of which are known to exist today.” (“Insight on the Scriptures”, Vol. 1, page 1206)
The scrolls were perishable and in constant use, so they were continually copied and recopied. In the process, people kept changing the contents. By the time of the New Testament writers, they had to choose between the text of the Greek Old Testament (the Septuagint) and the text of the Hebrew Old Testament.
“In a number of cases the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures evidently made use of the Greek Septuagint translation when quoting from the Hebrew Scriptures. At times the rendering of the Septuagint, as quoted by them, differs somewhat from the reading of the Hebrew Scriptures as now known. … In a few cases the quotations made by Paul and others differ from both the Hebrew and Greek texts as found in available manuscripts.” (“Insight”, Vol. 1, page 1206)
Therefore, “inerrancy” does not refer to the Bible as it exists today.
“The copies of those original writings and the translations made in many languages cannot lay claim to absolute accuracy.” (“Insight”, Vol. 1, page 1206)
This means that the “inspired” Scriptures being read by Timothy are not the “inerrant” Scriptures that were originally written. He was reading words that were “inspired” but the words were not “inerrant”.
The “inerrant” texts no longer exist, so it is impossible to know how the existing text compares with the original.
To cope with the difference between “inerrancy” and “inspiration”, certain Christians use the term “inscripturation” to describe the transmission of information to the original writers.
The “Insight” book goes as far as saying that the only parts of the Septuagint which are “inspired” are those words that are quoted by a New Testament writer.
“Whether the original Hebrew text contained the phrase found in the Septuagint cannot be stated with certainty. Whatever the case, God's spirit guided Paul in his quotation, and therefore these words have divine authorization. This does not mean that the entire Septuagint translation is to be viewed as inspired”. (“Insight”, Vol. 1, page 1206)
Statements in the New Testament about “Scripture” refer to the texts used by the Hebrews (the “Old Testament”).
“(Joh 10:34, 35) … (Mt 5:18) … (Mt 22:29-32: Mr 12:24) … Mt 26:54; Mr 14:27, 49. These statements of course apply to the pre-Christian Hebrew Scriptures.” (“Insight”, Vol. 1, page 1205)
2 Timothy 3:6 does not indicate which Hebrew scrolls were “Scripture”. The list (canon) of Hebrew Scriptures was not decided until at least 100 years later, probably much later.
The list (canon) of New Testament writings took the Church many centuries to achieve general acceptance, although not universally. This casts serious doubts on the veracity of the following statement:
“That the Christian Greek Scriptures were likewise presented and accepted as inspired is also clear.” (1Co 14:37; Ga 1:8, 1 1, 1 2; 1Th 2:13). (“Insight”, Vol. 1, page 1205)
Not only was there no list of New Testament writings, none of the original New Testament writings exists, only copies.
Dooug
it's about a year since i started visiting this website.
it all started with the july 15 wt last year and all the changes.
lazy me had not read it online so when one bro said to me at the hall, 'have you read all the new stuff in that issue' i didn't know what he was talking about.
Hi thedog1,
My Study on the July 15 Watchtower is available at:
http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Truth_Changes_in_the_simplified_Watchtower.pdf
and at: http://www.jwstudies.com/The_Truth_Changes.pdf
The Spanish translation is at: http://www.jwstudies.com/La_Verdad_Cambia__otra_vez___La_Atalaya__15_de_Julio_de_2013.pdf
An analysis provided by another person is at: http://www.jwstudies.com/Adjustments_to_the_July_15_2013_Watchtower.pdf
If you are really interested in changes, take a look at:
http://www.jwstudies.com/Changed_MD_and_SS_words.pdf
Doug
this thread isn't meant to go into discussing how deceptive the society has been over the translation of this passage of scripture as that has been done many times on here.
what i want to know is this - the society has inserted the word other in the collosions verses and the one in philippians (above every (other) name).
they've done this for doctrinal matters.
Truth ...,
We can rightly state that the WTS's NWT does not correctly represent the text that has been provided to it by Christendom. We can rightly say that it has allowed its theology (study of God) to influence its rendering. And for this it stands condemned - and this is a practice it follows regularly across citations of others.
However, we must always keep in mind that in amending the Scriptures according to its prejudices, it is following the practice of Hebrew and Christian redactors for at least 2500 years.
As a scroll was copied (there were not only perishable, they were in constant use), the texts were deliberately amended to make them suit the views of the period. About the 2nd century, the Jews removed all variants they did not agree with but by this time that text was severely corrupted. When the Masoretes invoked their regime of precise copying about 1000 years later, they set the corrupted text in concrete.
The text of the NT is likewise subject to opinion and interference. The Greek text used by the NWT comes from two 19th century Anglican Bishops. The KJV used a different Greek text - the "Textus Receptus". And the WTS is fully aware of disputed passages, which it does not include in its NWT. This shows how throughout the past 2000 years, people have misused their authority to get people to believe what they want the people to believe.
Further, when the 4th century Christian Church decided to create a list of accepted Scriptures, they selected those writings which it decided fitted in with their beliefs. So again we have an example of doctrine influencing the text.
The WTS is not justified in misrepresenting the text it has accepted, but it does follow millennia of tradition of playing with the text to make it say what the editor (redactor) wanted it to say.
Doug
this thread isn't meant to go into discussing how deceptive the society has been over the translation of this passage of scripture as that has been done many times on here.
what i want to know is this - the society has inserted the word other in the collosions verses and the one in philippians (above every (other) name).
they've done this for doctrinal matters.
Tiger,
Colossians is one of the letters that is considered was not written by Paul.
Only 7 of the NT missives attributed to him are considered to be genuinely by him. And of those which are, some are compilations of several letters and some are missing (Laodicea, for example).
For the first two centuries, only "heretics" such as Marcion (mid-2nd century) used Paul's writings but the church fathers did not oppose him by quoting Paul's writings. At that stage, the church considered Paul's writings were not catholic (for the church as a whole) because they were written to a particular church over a specific incident.
Doug
this thread isn't meant to go into discussing how deceptive the society has been over the translation of this passage of scripture as that has been done many times on here.
what i want to know is this - the society has inserted the word other in the collosions verses and the one in philippians (above every (other) name).
they've done this for doctrinal matters.
If you are really interested in deceptions in Colossians, you only need to look at the first word of the letter. It's a deception.
Doug
