Posts by JosephMalik

16

Interesting Conversation

by CC Ryder in

jw
friends

i had an interesting conversation at work yesterday while on break.

two work mates of mine started to talk about the jw missionaries who were taken captive in the philipines.

one guy didn't understand why they would take a jw hostage.

Be sure to tell them that the two witness rule does not apply to criminal cases. This is why Christ allows the governments to exist and rule. Give Ceasar's things to Ceasar should be the rule instead of two witnesses. The verses that apply are:

Col. 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Such governments and authorities then should investigate criminal activity not the congregation, after all they were created for Him and by Him for this very purpose, to keep order on this earth until He returns.

Joseph

15

When did you realised that everything had changed?

by In_between_days in

jw
friends

in life, there are certain pivotal moments when you realise that every thing has changed dramatically.

it's a breathtaking and overwhleming feeling.

you may think back to who you were on this day a year ago, compared to who you are now - the contrast is incredible.. i find change in viewpoints and thinking evolves slowly, over a long period of time, you dont know the change is taking place until one day, you realise for one stunning minute that you are everything that you never were.

JosephMalik

I would also like to take this opportunity to apologise to the readers for my consistant keystroke errors and spelling mistakes. I am a very quick and innacurate typist, and never have the time to proof read my work - sorry, you'll get used to it. Whenever I read through what i've typed i'm always going: "Oh gawwwd...."

In_between_days,

Say, I do this all the time. It is almost a trademark. I have just been kicking the posts out the door and let the reader sort is all out, but lately I have been trying harder.

One thing though, In some of the discussions on the board I found an error in my work that I was able to corrrect without anyone noticing. Its been there for years. Yet I would have taken my lumps and thanked anyone bringing it to my attention.

Joseph

37

The word, "Jehovah"

by Dia in

.

i just read that the name, 'jehovah' was created 700 years ago by a catholic monk who took the vowels from the word, 'lord' and combined them with the letters yhwh (the unpronounceable, biblical term for god).. anyone ever heard this or know a credible source for this info?.

now here's potentially something to share with your next visiting jw!.

JosephMalik

funkyderek,

I think it can be shown that Matthew used the Greek translation of the Hebrew in several places. The problem still is did this translation contain the name as there really is no proof that it did. And most text read in the temple at the time were acrostics. This means that the texts contained the first word of a text and the first letter of each succeeding word, so that the reader would have to fill in the rest from memory. This is why some marveled that someone not educated in their shools could even read the texts in the first place.

John 7:15 And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned?

The real evidence is that the name does not appear in any reliable manuscripts and another argument can be made that it was added in some obscure translations or copies instead of being deleted and so the argument never ends.

Joseph

7

"I said, 'You are "gods";

by Smitty in

psalms 82:6 -- "i said, 'you are "gods"; .

in your opinion, who does this scripture apply?

offer scriptural support if you can.

JosephMalik

NeonMadman,

Even if the Jews believed he was claiming to be God, such use was scriptural and proper as already shown so they had no basis for stoning Him. That was our Lord's very defense against them. They were wrong, and shown to be wrong like this: John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? Case closed. Such use was scriptural and acceptable even though our Lord did not make such a claim. As to the trinity and those supporting it, most will not accept this concept that our Lord himself brought to our attention. It always existed in the Law but few grasped the significance until this explanation. And Hebrews 1:8 demonstrates the same thing in a positive way as well as this Psalm originally applied to their Kings. And deity is not trinity. It also is a variable that must be understood in context so this term properly applies to our Lord as well.

Joseph

Edited by - JosephMalik on 23 August 2002 9:30:8

7

"I said, 'You are "gods";

by Smitty in

psalms 82:6 -- "i said, 'you are "gods"; .

in your opinion, who does this scripture apply?

offer scriptural support if you can.

JosephMalik

NeonMadman,

Yes, much better. The "little god" idea is bunk of course. Shows how little they understand of scripture. Contexual use however is something else entirely. And as a term of authority (after all God is not a name) it can be applied to others in a context suitable for them in a way that is either good or bad. This does not make many gods challenging the true God. The Son could be our God because the true God authorized him to act as such without contradiction since this Son is not attempting to be true God, but simply acting in this capacity to or for us in His behalf. Such authority and term (God) then can be granted to others as it was to Moses. Context however is so subtle sometimes that we confuse such use and the result is trinity or some other outrageouse concepts.

Joseph

18

Most cool Jw leader ?

by haujobbz in

jw
friends

thinkin about all the jw leaders back to the very roots of jws starting i was trying to think who was the genuine and truthful of the lot who could it have been:.

charles taze russell.

rutherford.

JosephMalik

jjrizo,

My guess from what I have heard about him is that Farkle is correct. Perhaps some of this will come out in the book.

Joseph

7

"I said, 'You are "gods";

by Smitty in

psalms 82:6 -- "i said, 'you are "gods"; .

in your opinion, who does this scripture apply?

offer scriptural support if you can.

JosephMalik

A reading of the entire psalm will show us that the verse in question was part of a rebuke by God of the judges of Israel, who had exalted themselves above the people, and who were not providing justice as they were expected to. They are called "gods" in a sarcastic sense, because they have arrogated godlike authority to themselves. That they are "gods" in no real sense is evident from the following verse (verse 7), which says: But you will die like mere men; you will fall like every other ruler."

NeonMadman.

Your answer was good except for the comment that they are not gods in a real sense. They were gods to Israel and called or identified as such in this very Psalm. Just as the Kings of Israel were also called Gods they are gods by the position they held with the people. Jesus could be called God based upon this as he was a prophet and teacher with a following as well. This is why our Lord could use such texts in His defense. This use of this word to designate people who have authority is a valid scriptural point and the fact that such leaders will die like men does not alter their status. None of this should be confused with other uses of this term God where the Supreme Being is being addressed. In such cases there is but one true God. But in the world there are many gods and many Lords and such use is scriptural.

1 Corinthians 8:5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

A truth clearly established in scripture and by this Psalm in fact. Then notice the context change in the next verse.

:6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

So we no longer have such prophets to guide us as Israel did but are being guided now by the Father as true God and one the one Lord Jesus Christ. This lesson to the Corinthians was aimed at those taking the lead in Corinth and spreading false teachings among the brothers there making more of themselves then they should (living as gods and lords among the brothers). So the use of the term God regarding humans is quite valid and proper. It also properly applies to Christ as our King.

Joseph

18

Most cool Jw leader ?

by haujobbz in

jw
friends

thinkin about all the jw leaders back to the very roots of jws starting i was trying to think who was the genuine and truthful of the lot who could it have been:.

charles taze russell.

rutherford.

JosephMalik

jjrizo.

Hey jjrizo, the way I hear it Maria wrote most of the books not Russell. Hopefully there will be a book out soon that will detail the life of Maria, written by someone that has been in the news lately.

Joseph

37

The word, "Jehovah"

by Dia in

.

i just read that the name, 'jehovah' was created 700 years ago by a catholic monk who took the vowels from the word, 'lord' and combined them with the letters yhwh (the unpronounceable, biblical term for god).. anyone ever heard this or know a credible source for this info?.

now here's potentially something to share with your next visiting jw!.

JosephMalik

Now, if Matthew did indeed write to the Jews in their own language, he would certainly have used God's name as it was in the Septuigent.

bchamber,

I have no problem with using the name Jehovah as it is grandfathred in by common use. But the point that I was bringing out about Matthew and other Gospel writers is quite valid. They kept to strict Jewish tradition and often used the word heavens in place of the word God. So there is no reason to even think that Matthew used God's name even if it appeared in the Septuigent. The very existence of the apostle Paul picked from among a persecuter of the faith demonstrated the fact that qualified disciples were lacking at the time for this very reason. He fought against apostles and Jewish Christians alike to correct such wrong thinking in his day. This historical struggle is enough to counter such thinking as it raged for well over 20 years.

Joseph

37

The word, "Jehovah"

by Dia in

.

i just read that the name, 'jehovah' was created 700 years ago by a catholic monk who took the vowels from the word, 'lord' and combined them with the letters yhwh (the unpronounceable, biblical term for god).. anyone ever heard this or know a credible source for this info?.

now here's potentially something to share with your next visiting jw!.

JosephMalik

bchamber,

On the Septuigent and all that. None of this matters much since the Gospels do not always quote our Lord's words exactly. They wrote to their audience and often changed words and phrases which is easily shown. It was the message that mattered the truth of what He said and nearly all Christian Jews, even the apostles still believed in the Law and customs of the Jews. They follwed the same suprstitions and used phrases like "kingdom of the heavens" to substitute for "kingdom of God. This pretty much kills most arguments that they used the sacred name. It still conveys the truth but shows they did not use the sacred name. They did this for at least 14 years after the resurrection and most longer. It all boils down to speculation once again. Really all one knows for sure is there is no positive evidence upon which we can draw to make this leap that the name appeared in the NT texts.

Joseph

.