i want to start reading the bible more but i do not want to use the nwt.
the fact that the nwt took so many liberties makes me a little gunshy about other translations, which one would you recommend?.
-sab.
My first non-NWT was the NIV. I still read it from time to time but some of its evangelical bias irritates me in the same way that the NWT manifests doctrinal tampering. (A popular example is how "flesh" is translated as "sinful nature".)
I favor the New King James. As mentioned it follows the Majority texts which I personally think is more accurate than others. Most would disagree with this.
why is it that the story of the resurrection of lazarus of bethany only is mentioned in the book of john and not in the other three gospel accounts of the life of jesus?.
the resurrection of lazarus was a major event in the life of jesus, but three writers failed to mention it, why?.
.
Why not just let go of the false title that was added to this author's word by men who assumed that Apostle John was "the disciple whom Jesus We do know that the early church fathers that KNEW the apostles, directly, soem of them said that John was the author of the GOJ
This is a study in itself but a fascinating one. If I understand it, all of the attribution of authorship for the gospels comes, not from those who knew the apostles, but those that came after. If you are interested in such a thing the book "Jesus and the Eyewitnesses" by Richard Bauckham is a good read.
why is it that the story of the resurrection of lazarus of bethany only is mentioned in the book of john and not in the other three gospel accounts of the life of jesus?.
the resurrection of lazarus was a major event in the life of jesus, but three writers failed to mention it, why?.
.
Oh, wait. Uh-oh. Oh, please, dear DH, ... please... I am truly hoping that you are not taking such "offense" (even slightly)... on behalf of men... because you "identify" with Paul's teachings as to women?? Oh, dear one, please... say it ain't SO!
I'm not gonna answer this one. You'll have find out for yourself or ask my sisters in Christ.
riddle me this batman: .
why, in all the accounts of disfellowshipping (including my own ((got reinstated then quit))) do the elders seem more like the hypocritical, overly self-righteous pharisees than the cool refreshing temperament of jesus of nazareth?
rather than discuss, logically, at length any issues with the "accused", they badger them with points of "divine law" that i'm sure they don't adhere to as much as they demand of the congregation.
Yes most do resemble Pharisees in every way imaginable - this includes their creation of laws far beyond what is written even in the Bible, their self-serving nature, their lack of care for the "least of these", and their lack of mercy. Any outside appearance of "spirituality" or "piety" is simply their cleaning the outside of the cup and being white-washed graves.
why is it that the story of the resurrection of lazarus of bethany only is mentioned in the book of john and not in the other three gospel accounts of the life of jesus?.
the resurrection of lazarus was a major event in the life of jesus, but three writers failed to mention it, why?.
.
It's almost like you people think the Gospels harmonize with each other and couldn't contain contradictions.
Not guilty my friend. I do not believe the accounts are fictitious. I do believe that they were written by humans, who although were good intentioned, are only as good as their memory served and availability/accuracy of eyewitnesses. Consequently there are contradictions and error, but there is much truth in there too. Nevertheless like all human sources we should be cautious about putting our complete trust within. Above all else we need to look to God and Christ, the Word of God.
why is it that the story of the resurrection of lazarus of bethany only is mentioned in the book of john and not in the other three gospel accounts of the life of jesus?.
the resurrection of lazarus was a major event in the life of jesus, but three writers failed to mention it, why?.
.
2. "John" didn't play fast and loose but Lazarus himself did. Very few men mention their infirmities outright. Those who might not like them so much (i.e., foster a bit of jealousy) would, however. Thus, the other accounts that mention this "leper."
Shelby - why are you always talking down about men?
per a recent boe letter:.
-- new manual will be softcover.
-- elders can keep their old elder manual if they choose.
"loose conduct" was kind of that catch-all for everything from fondling a breast to getting into a fist-fight to not being obedient to the elders. Wonder if "brazen conduct" will be similarly used or if they will give it a definition upgrade to fit the shiny, new term.
How long before the new book goes on-line?
forget witch paragraph books not with me.
anyway lesson focussed on preaching and one paragraph mentioned matt were jesus sent mary to tell the brothers to go ahead and meet him in galilie.
11 disciples and jesus commishioned them to go therfore and make disciples, u know the rest.
Jesus instructions to the 12 are completely contrary to the manner of the preaching work of Jehovah's Witnesses. How fitting that the chapter completely ignores this explicit instruction -
Do not be transferring from house to house.
At any rate the twelve were specifically called out to preach the Good News. That is why they were named "apostles" or "sent ones". They were to be sent out to preach, this was their assignment.
Here is what Acts 6:1-6 says regarding them -
"In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Grecian Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food. 2 So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, "It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. 3 Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them 4 and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word."
They understood that is was their primary responsiblity to preach to the Good News as Jesus had trained and instructed them. In contrast others didn't necessarily have that same task. This is further testified by one of Paul's letters where he says that some were apostles and some were evangelizers.
The apostles apointed responsible men to oversee the work of looking after the poor and the widows while they continued in their ministry. In JW-land everyone is required to preach and no one looks after the poor and the widows are left to rot in nursing homes.
there are countless issues that people have with the society and which together have led to many people realizing that it is not what it claims and pretends to be.
these include things like the secret un affiliation, contradictory and hypocritical stances, (malawi vs mexico vs un/ngo), the ever changing blood policy and ever changing doctrine, failed predictions for armageddon etc, etc, etc.. but what is the consensus about what the fundamental flaw is?.
what i mean is, many jw's hear about these various issues and manage to make endless excuses for them, even though this involves gross hypocrisy and excusing the society for things they would never excuse in other religions and which the society itself has ruthless condemned other religions for over almost 100 years.
I would agree that this is the big issue. If you are facing a JC on apostasy the big item the elders really want to know above all else -- do you believe this is "god's organization". Many can attest to this.
hey guys, just wanted some feedback.
i'm going to attempt to make an app for ex jws or others who encounter jws regularly.
basically it will be a quick reference guide on arguing out of different topics that jws commonly use.. .
My suggestion would be to name it "Reasoning from the Scriptures" "Examing the Daily Text" "Theocratic Ministry School Schedule" or "Super-Duper Field Service Time Calculator 5.0" to dupe unsuspecting JW's into downloading ....
kidding.
