Oh. Ahhh, I get it.
Thanks Billy!
cattails
JoinedPosts by cattails
-
426
One of the Governing Body had a stroke yesterday
by AndersonsInfo inon may 19th, theodore jaracz had a stroke.
he's in very serious condition in the hospital.. that's all the information i have for now.. barb.
-
-
-
22
Apostate CO?
by Marmite inwhat would you think if a co said the following things from the platform?
during a talk entitled the spirit and the bride keep on saying "come" he goes off at a tangent talking about how from 1920 to 1925 we said "millions now living will never die".
he went into great detail about how at first the title was "may" but was changed to"will".
-
-
cattails
Hey, aka Marmite.
We just had this talk by a CO sub.
He didn't mention anything about the Millions.
Sure sounds strange to point that out. It is one of the things that woke me up about the Society.
We have the green cover booklet of that name in the local KH library. When going over the Revelation
book this last time I took the Millions booklet and photocopied it and brought it to the bookstudy.
I got all kinds of strange looks for doing it. I'm sure that CO probably was given strange looks too.
Maybe he's out to smoke out any independent thinkers who are thinking of looking into the Society's past.
-
41
Were there 200 JW's disfellowshipped in 1980 all at once - in Cleveland, Ohio?
by BonaFide ini have some old notes from a 1981 circuit assembly.
brother frank bartell was the district overseer.
i am pretty sure its 1981 or 1982.. anyway, in his last talk he said that there was a terrible situation in cleveland ohio the previous year (1980).
-
-
cattails
I remember Bro Bartell in the 1990s. Very prim and proper.
He didn't like kids much and I was told to stay away from him.
Something like that story would have gone right over my head
but I'm sure adults would have remembered. How does one ask
about this discreetly... Awkward.
-
1
July 2009 Awake! - A Question
by passwordprotected indoes anyone actually have it yet?
here in glasgow there's still no sign of it..
-
-
cattails
Yeah, been picked up at local KH by Mom.
-
34
Warning - Independent thinking alert - shut down all systems
by donny ini have a jw in my employ and he is overall a good person, but i am frequently reminded how controlled a jw mind is when it comes to reason.
i was in my office with my jw associate when another co-worker (cw) came in and they got into a discussion of bible versions.
it went like this.. cw - well i use the king james version most of the time.
-
-
cattails
Exactly Mary. The pronunciation in Hebrew doesn't matter today because even Hebrew pronunciation has changed over the years.
Jehovah is an English approximation, maybe not as near as Yahweh to the ancient pronunciation, but neither is Jesus to Yeshua
or Jeremiah to Yeremyahu or even Isaiah to Yeshayahu. I don't know what "friggin stupid lengths" Outlaw is going to "argue
about something that's not even a huge deal." All I've noticed is that he sure likes to get me going and I find him insulting and
demeaning, but nobody is saying anything about it.
Did the early Christians know and use the name of God? It was part of their own names so I don't see how it would
be such a big deal. But out of respect for God they wouldn't pronounce it, yeah it was going beyond the scriptures but
I'm sure none of the Am-haarets knew much about the scriptures than what they gathered from the Levites and priests
teaching when they went to worship.
I find it fascinating that there are connections to words like Jove, and that Jupiter sounds like a corruption of Deus Pater.
Even the Samaritans said their temple was dedicated to Jove. Of course just like with the stories of the flood there's a
lot of exaggeration and embelishment that oral telling can put into stories.
There are records of rabbis discussion what to do with the Scriptures used by Christians because they contained the Name.
And that hints that the Early Christians disn't follow the superstitions attached to the Name. Also there's the text of Matthew
by a Jewish commentator who talks about the Name (ha Shem) being in the text of this Gospel.
But as a detached observer, does it really matter that much to me whether back in the first century they were vocalizing
God's name according to the way the High Priest enunciated it? No. It doesn't matter to my beliefs and the here and now.
Some people say Kate others call me Cat, still however you say it I know who my friends are.
Faith in God and Christ are of a personal nature.
Not some sort of orthopraxis by a hierarchichal religious organization.
-
34
Warning - Independent thinking alert - shut down all systems
by donny ini have a jw in my employ and he is overall a good person, but i am frequently reminded how controlled a jw mind is when it comes to reason.
i was in my office with my jw associate when another co-worker (cw) came in and they got into a discussion of bible versions.
it went like this.. cw - well i use the king james version most of the time.
-
-
cattails
> Sorry for the Double post guys!..I could`nt get the first one to edit properly.......................OUTLAW
Poor you. Sounds like you can't even edit your own posts.
BTW The spelling of Jehovah couldn't be spelled the same because there was no such thing as a letter J.
I'm part Mexican, from Texas. You don't need to tell me how Jesus is pronounced in Spanish. It just proves my point.
But you can't reason because you're a stalking megalomaniac who's been allowed to bully people in this forum.
-
34
Warning - Independent thinking alert - shut down all systems
by donny ini have a jw in my employ and he is overall a good person, but i am frequently reminded how controlled a jw mind is when it comes to reason.
i was in my office with my jw associate when another co-worker (cw) came in and they got into a discussion of bible versions.
it went like this.. cw - well i use the king james version most of the time.
-
-
cattails
Alltimejeff, no offense but that wasn't my point dude!
> The name Jesus,has been used since the time of Jesus..And ..Well before....
Outlaw, you're so wrong. The letter J is a medieval letter before that there was only I.
IESUS is the Latin form of Yeshua in Hebrew and Iesous in Greek. How could there
be an English name with English spelling in use before Jesus time? You must be joking...
No, judging by the rest of your post, you're starting to sound abusive and disgusting me!
If there are any Moderators reading this thread, either deal me out of this missery
or deal with Outlaw's stalking and tell him outright to stop the bullying. Aren't there any means
to have the forum software block abusive posters from view... There have been certain
newbies who just disappeared. Can that happen to Outlaw too? If not you might as well
do me under too. Who wants this ignorant abuser following you from post to post?
Since Wikipedia was suggested here's the info:
The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 8, 1910 edition, page 329, states: “Jehovah, the proper name of God in the Old Testament."
The name Jehovah is used by Jehovah's Witnesses as the personal name of God in English, although the religion recognizes and encourages the use of equivalent names in other languages. [9] [10] [11] Witnesses do not believe that Jehovah is the original pronunciation of the Name, but rather that Jehovah is a commonly used, faithfully translated form of the original Hebrew Name. [12] They give the following position:
The truth is, nobody knows for sure how the name of God was originally pronounced. Nevertheless, many prefer the pronunciation Jehovah. Why? Because it has a currency and familiarity that Yahweh does not have. Would it not, though, be better to use the form that might be closer to the original pronunciation? Not really, for that is not the custom with Bible names. To take the most prominent example,consider the name of Jesus. Do you know how Jesus' family and friends addressed him in day-to-day conversation while he was growing up in Nazareth? The truth is, no human knows for certain, although it may have been something like Yeshua (or perhaps Yehoshua). It certainly was not Jesus. [13] [5])
Jewish tradition teaches that YHWH has the vowel points of Adonai , but the vowel points of these two words are not precisely the same, and scholars are not in total agreement as to why YHWH does not have the precise same vowel points as Adonai has.
The use of the composite "shewa" "hatef segol" in cases where "Elohim" is to be read has led to the opinion that the composite "shewa" "hatef patah" ought to have been used to indicate the reading "Adonay." [ 5 ]
Transcriptions of YHWH similar to "Jehovah" occurred as early as the 13th century.
- c. 1106: Ieve : Petrus Alphonsi [ 18 ]
- 1278: Yohoua/Jehova [ 19 ] : Raymond Martin (Raymundus Martini) [ 20 ]
- 1303: Yohouah/Jehova : Porchetus de Salvaticis [ 21 ] .
- 1428: Iehoua/Ihehoua/Iehova/Ieoa : Nicholas of Cusa
- 1514: Iehova : Jacques Lefèvre d'Étaples
- 1516: Iehoua : Peter Galatin (Galatinus) [ 22 ]
- 1526: Iehouah : Martin Luther
- 1526: Iehova : Sebastian Münster
- 1530: Iehouah : William Tyndale [ 23 ]
- 1531: Iehouah : Michael Servetus
- 1531: Iehouah : Cardinal Thomas de Vio Cajetanus
- 1543: Iehova : Leo Judae
- 1546: Jehovah : Paulus Fagius
- 1560: Iehouah : Geneva Bible
- 1557: Jehovah : Calvin
- 1557: Iehova : Robert Estienne
- 1569: Iehouah : Casiodoro de Reina
- 1575: Jehova : Tremellius
- 1593: Jehova : Marcus Marinus
- 16th cent.: Jova [ 24 ]
- 1611: Iehovah : King James Version
- 1627: Iehovah : Henry Ainsworth
- 1671: Jehovah : 1671 [OT] / 1669 [NT] edition of the King James Bible
The editors of the Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon write that the pronunciation "Jehovah" was unknown until 1520 when it was introduced by Galatinus but since then the research has brought new light on the matter showing "that Galatinus did not introduce the pronunciation Jehova, but only defended it against those who pronounced Jova" and that "the pronunciation Jehova was current in [Galatinus'] time." [ 25 ]
-
47
New Guidelines for this Forum - Please take notes
by BonaFide inwe are happy to inform you of some rule changes on this forum.
we do not want to give the impression they are rules, so we will use the term guidelines.
at present, some are using this forum to express their own opinion.
-
-
cattails
It maybe tongue-in-cheek, but I think BF is exposing the
truth about JWN by sarcastically using a "Candide" approach.
-
13
Did you ever experience caution or fear at being introduced to a brother with a beard?
by cattails indid you ever experience caution or an uneasy fear when being introduced to a brother with a beard?.
for years everytime i met someone introduced to me as bro so-and-so who might have a beard (and there weren't that many times), my here-comes-trouble radar turned on.. .
i would be very cautious in talking to this brother.
-
-
cattails
Did you ever experience caution or an uneasy fear when being introduced to a brother with a beard?
For years everytime I met someone introduced to me as Bro So-and-so who might have a beard (and there weren't that many times), my Here-comes-trouble radar turned on.
I would be very cautious in talking to this brother. But at school or at work, seeing and meeting someone with a beard was no big deal.
It's really strange how the WT Society could implant this feeling? Was it just me or did someone else feel this?
-
34
Warning - Independent thinking alert - shut down all systems
by donny ini have a jw in my employ and he is overall a good person, but i am frequently reminded how controlled a jw mind is when it comes to reason.
i was in my office with my jw associate when another co-worker (cw) came in and they got into a discussion of bible versions.
it went like this.. cw - well i use the king james version most of the time.
-
-
cattails
You're just trying to get a reaction out of me, aren't you, OUTLAW?
You can't admit you're wrong and turn the discussion into an 'ad feminam' attack.
Do you know the difference? Why isn't it Yahshuah like the Messianic Jews spell it?
What's the point of discussing anything intelligent with you, OUTLAW? Waste of time!
