"Outside the realms" of the words meaning?

by Blotty in

i was recently doing some research and came across this curious quite from dr beduhn - i can't say how valid it is or if he actually said it (source linked).

but this got me thinking i don't think there is anything in any bible where it is a "deliberate" distortion or the words go against the "possible range of meanings the greek" could have.

i know beduhn is not considered an authority however he does have a point - if its in the range of meanings it is by no means a mistranslation & cannot be pointed out as such.

aqwsed12345

A comprehensive review of Truth in Translation by Jason BeDuhn

14

"Outside the realms" of the words meaning?

by Blotty in

i was recently doing some research and came across this curious quite from dr beduhn - i can't say how valid it is or if he actually said it (source linked).

but this got me thinking i don't think there is anything in any bible where it is a "deliberate" distortion or the words go against the "possible range of meanings the greek" could have.

i know beduhn is not considered an authority however he does have a point - if its in the range of meanings it is by no means a mistranslation & cannot be pointed out as such.

aqwsed12345

A review of Dr Jason BeDuhn’s “Truth in Translation”

92

Ecclesiastes 9:5 -"the dead know nothing at all"

by aqwsed12345 in

the narrator of the book of ecclesiastes had very little knowledge of many things that jesus and his apostles later preached.

the author does not make statements, but only wonders (thinks, observes, often raises questions, and leaves them open).

he looked at the world based on the law of moses and found nothing but vanity, as the earthly reward promised in the law did not always accompany good deeds and earthly punishment for evil deeds.

aqwsed12345

The Mortality of the Soul in the Bible?

The Holy Scriptures teach the resurrection and glorification of humans, proclaiming the transformation of their souls, their entire existence, and ultimately the whole world. While the Apostolic Creed spoke of the resurrection of the body (Lat. caro), the Nicene Creed did not delve into the "technical" details, it only anchored the hope of resurrection (people resurrect, not just some parts of them). Because the Bible's view of humanity and salvation are intertwined, any concept of the fate of the soul that is foreign to the Scriptures is always based on a perception of humanity and salvation that is also foreign to the Scriptures.

The following will discuss the idea of the mortality of the soul or the concept of "soul sleep". According to this, the soul dies along with the physical body and either perishes or remains unconscious ("soul sleep") until the resurrection. This concept is based on the Old Testament's view of humanity and has repeatedly emerged within the Western Church. Today, mainly Adventist-background and rationalist groups (like Jehovah's Witnesses, Christadelphian Community) hold this belief. They claim that their conception of the soul and its fate was originally part of Jewish-Christian faith. Therefore, in the following, we will analyze biblical passages often cited by them.

"For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same. As one dies so dies the other." (Ecclesiastes 3:19)

Claim: The human "soul" is the same as the animal's: mortal.

Rebuttal: According to Ecclesiastes, life without God is in vain. The author does not make a declaration but ponders (thinks, observes, raises questions, and leaves it open, verses 18 and 21). He does not talk about the state of man after death but about the similarity in the earthly fate of man and beast; they both eventually die (verse 19). Their bodies will become dust (verse 20), but where the "soul" of man and beast goes after death is unknown to him (verse 21). The revelation took place in a progressive manner on many topics: for example, Abraham or Solomon could have known almost nothing about the soul and its fate, Jesus said a lot, and even more was given to the apostles. Therefore, in this matter, we cannot refer to Old Testament texts without considering the later New Testament revelations. The translation "the same spirit is in each" [Heb. ruah echad laqol] can be misleading to today's reader, as the term "soul" may be understood differently than the biblical Hebrew term rúah. However, others translations are more accurate: "the same breath of life is in each." Returning to the arguments of Ecclesiastes 3, the finiteness of biological life may not lead animals but can lead humans to fear God and live their earthly lives differently through realization.

"The soul that sins shall die." (Ezekiel 18:4)

Claim: If a sinful soul can die, then the soul is mortal.

Rebuttal: Firstly, God, through the prophet, is contending against an Israeli proverb: "The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge," meaning the children are punished for their fathers' sins. Ezekiel's message is clear: everyone is accountable for their own actions before God. Secondly, the literal translation ("which soul...") is misleading, as it merely means "whoever..." It's not about one "part" of a person, the soul (which proponents of soul mortality don't even consider a separate part), but about the whole person and their personal responsibility.

In other texts, the literal translations of the Bible can be misunderstood. Acts 3:23 "And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from the people" - meaning everyone. Joshua 11:11 "And they smote all the souls that were therein with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them" - meaning everyone.

"Fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell." (Mt 10:28)

Claim: If the soul can also be "destroyed" along with the body, then the soul is mortal.

Rebuttal: Jesus is speaking to his disciples before sending them out to preach, preparing them for expected resistance (verses 23-27). He warns them not to fear men, who can only kill the body but not the soul (so they do have a soul); rather, they should fear God who can destroy both body and soul.

However, Jesus mentions hell as the place of destruction. This refers to the Valley of Hinnom near Jerusalem, where there was a rubbish burn in Jesus' time. In the religious literature of the centuries between the Old and New Testaments, the image of this smoky valley merged with the underworld and final judgment. Jesus once uses this conception of the underworld in a parable (Lk 16:23, Greek: Hades). In most other New Testament texts, however, hell primarily refers to the lake of fire after the final judgment, where the underworld and death are cast (Mk 9:43, James 3:6, Jude 7, Rev 19:20, 20:14). The key point is that hell will be the place of the sinners' destruction at the final judgment, so in Mt 10, Jesus is not primarily talking about the state of man after physical death or the underworld.

"The dead know nothing." (Ecclesiastes 9:5)

Claim: The dead are in an unconscious state, waiting for the resurrection.

Rebuttal: The overall message of the book (Ecclesiastes) is that life, when viewed without God, seems vain. The beginning of Chapter 9 argues that anything can happen to anyone, whether good or bad, religious or irreligious (verses 1-2). It's not just that life can be unfair; humans, with their wickedness, exacerbate the troubles, and in the end, everyone dies (verse 3). However, as long as one is alive, there is hope (verse 4). The living at least know what will happen to them: they will surely die (and stand before God), but until then, they can change their fate (which gives hope). The dead, however, know nothing and are forgotten over time (verse 5). The earthly matters they fought for fade, and whether they once loved or hated no longer matters; they no longer partake in worldly affairs (verse 6). It's not that they lack consciousness or cease to exist but that they have fallen out of this world. Therefore, the lesson, indeed God's desire, is to enjoy the fleeting life – with work, honor, love, and good spirits – while it lasts (verses 7-9). For what counts beyond is what happened on Earth.

"Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth..." (Daniel 12:2)

Claim: The dead are "asleep", i.e., they either don't exist or their souls aren't conscious, so they wait for the resurrection.

Rebuttal: Firstly, the train of thought surrounding the quoted sentence deals only with Jews, not the entire humanity. Daniel's people will indeed go through great tribulation, but the time will come, and through Archangel Michael, those whose names are written down will be saved. Then, from among those who "sleep in the dust of the earth," many will awake (Heb. quts). Not everyone, just "many", and they are distinguished only by one criterion: were they "wise" (Heb. sakal)? A wise person is one who understands the sealed text about the latter days (12:10) and chooses God's side during the time of trial.

Secondly, the imagery of "sleep" is used throughout the Bible as a euphemistic expression for death. The biblical phrase simply likens the process of dying to another externally similar experience: falling asleep. It doesn't intend to make any claims about the nature of death or the whereabouts and condition of the deceased. If we were to consistently interpret this metaphor literally, as if it speaks about the "state" of death, it would actually affirm the existence of the soul or consciousness after death. This is because a sleeping person does not cease to exist; their consciousness still operates, always dreaming, even if they don't remember it.

"Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ..." (1 Corinthians 15:18)

Claim: Death is the "sleep" of the soul, an unconscious state.

Rebuttal: The term "fall asleep" (Greek: koimaomai) in the New Testament is a euphemism for "to die", and its exact English equivalent is "passed away" (Mt 9:24, 27:52, Jn 11:11, Acts 7:60, 13:36, 1Cor 15:6,18,20,51, 1Thess 4:13, 5:10).

It should be noted that the Bible does not teach that the human soul is intrinsically immortal. However, it does teach that humans aren't just a temporary combination of body and life force: their "soul" survives physical death. This is supported by biblical examples: the spirits of those who died in Noah's time (1Pt 3:19-20) and the souls of the martyred Christians (Rev 6:9-11) or Elijah and Moses talking to Jesus (Lk 9:28-31). Paul did not consider himself synonymous with his body; that's why he wished to depart from the body and be with the Lord (2Cor 5:8). He even considered it possible that he had an out-of-body experience (2Cor 12:2-3). He only considered death as gain because being with Christ was far better than earthly service (Phil 1:23). As the Jewish saints are also alive, for God is the God of the living (Mk 12:24-27); Jesus also promised that whoever believes in Him, "though he dies, will live" (Jn 11:25).

43

Who are the 144K Male Jewish Virgins in Revelation 7?

by Sea Breeze in

no mystery here.

they are all male jewish virgins, just like scripture says.

so, why all the muck and fuss?

aqwsed12345

You can't talk about the spiritual Israel here, precisely because the spiritual Israel does not break down into "tribes." So, whoever becomes a member of the Church, or the spiritual Israel through baptism, will not be given a "tribe." Tribes are physical descendants, so referencing Bible verses that talk about God accepting the Gentiles as well doesn't fit here. This is true, but it doesn't apply here because they are also Israel, but not according to the tribe. Here, however, we're talking about Israelites by tribe.

The elect have two major groups in terms of origin, but the hope for both is the same (Ephesians 4:3-6): from the Jews (verses 4-7) and the Gentiles (from verse 9). The angel who marks God's faithful has God's sign or seal. In the past, soldiers and slaves also wore a mark. This marking reminds us of Ezekiel's prophecy, where the tau letter in the form of a cross is used for marking (9:4-6); the mark represents God's ownership. This marking is caricatured by the mark of the beast (Revelation 13:16). The word "seal" was also an early name for baptism.

Among the tribes, the tribe of Dan does not appear; perhaps intentionally, because according to Jewish belief, the Antichrist will come from the tribe of Dan. In its place is the tribe of Manasseh, Joseph's son.

Thus, the lineage of Dan, which especially marked itself with idolatry, is excluded, implying that all those who resemble them, those who love the world more than God, will share their fate and won't be part of the elect. Idolatry first appeared in Dan's lineage (Judges 18), and Jeroboam's calf was in his territory (1 Kings 12:30). Dan is not counted among the rest in the Book of Chronicles (1 Chronicles 4–8). Instead of the tribe of Ephraim, Joseph appears because Ephraim divided the unity of Israel. So, the 144,000, marked from every tribe of Israel, represent the Jews converted to Christianity. Then verse 9 continues:

"After this, I saw a huge crowd, too large to count, from every nation, tribe, people, and language standing in front of the throne and the Lamb."

Lest anyone think that the elect are only Christians converted from Jews, John is shown an even larger Christian army from the Gentiles, indicating that it's mainly the Gentiles who populate the Church, as the army of the chosen converted from the Gentiles is vast. The contrast is clear:

In Revelation 7:4, only those "from the tribes of the sons of Israel" (from the tribes originating from Jacob's 12 sons) are mentioned. In contrast, Revelation 7:9 speaks of "every nation, tribe, people, and language." Note: for the sons of Israel, tribes are mentioned [since Israel was divided into tribes], while for the Gentiles, nations, peoples, and languages are discussed.

The symbolic number in 7:4 also expresses that since "their minds were blinded, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away." (2 Corinthians 3:14-16). Therefore, the number of Jewish converts to Christianity is negligible compared to the converted from the Gentiles (7:9), who make up a great multitude.

The numbers and symbols in the Book of Revelation have led many astray over 2000 years, so it's essential to understand that this is just an expressive tool for conveying theological truth. The meanings of the numbers found in the Book of Revelation are:

One-first: exclusivity, primacy, dignity
Three and a half: limited time, defined period
Four: universality
Six: perfection, in a negative sense
Seven: completeness, perfection in a positive sense
Twelve: Israel, the entirety of the chosen people
Thousand: multitude, large number

See: https://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Revelation_Numbers.htm

The numbers and symbols shed light on the theological truth God wanted to convey: this world will end, God will judge everything, then create a new world.Different tribal lists were not entirely consistent even in the Old Testament. Indeed, this fact shatters your attempt to entirely bracket the 144,000 Israelites. Because if the absence of the tribe of Dan did not bother the author of the Chronicles (even though only the Jews were the chosen people at that time), then today, when only a part of the chosen people are of Jewish origin, why should the omission of the tribe of Dan disturb us in accepting the Israelite origin of the 144,000 as John writes it?

"And I heard the number of those who were sealed. One hundred and forty-four thousand from all the tribes of Israel were sealed." (Revelation 7:4)

It's hard for you to resist the clear teachings of the Bible and to reach far with the "leaping" Watchtower tactic for ideological ammunition when it's close to you in the Book of Revelation. The tribe of Joseph indeed existed, divided into two half-tribes: Ephraim, Manasseh. Basic things the Watchtower has to deny. In Numbers 2:17, the Levites marched in good order between Gad and Ephraim.

There is also a list in which the tribe of Joseph appears, and Levi too:

"These shall stand on Mount Gerizim to bless the people, when you have crossed over the Jordan: Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Joseph, and Benjamin. And these shall stand on Mount Ebal to curse: Reuben, Gad, Asher, Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali." (Deuteronomy 27:12-13:)

You have to realize that God freely rearranged the twelve tribes even in the Old Testament. Here is a summary of the tribe lists. There may be inaccuracies in it, but the overall picture is sure to confuse the simple Jehovah's Witness who, blindly following his brochures, wants to exploit the Old Testament listings as something clear against the list in Revelation.

http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/History-12Tribes.htm

The Watchtower Society claims that exactly 144,000 make up the heavenly hope class of believers. The 144,000 cannot be literally Jewish because (1) the tribal list does not match the Old Testament lists, (2) the tribe of Joseph never existed, (3) Dan and Ephraim are missing from it, (4) and the Levites were not counted as a separate tribe.

The Society overlooks several pieces of biblical information. More than two dozen tribe lists can be found in the Old Testament, only three of which match perfectly, and some are even incomplete (e.g., Deut. 33). According to the Bible, Joseph was Jacob's son, so he was indeed the founder of one of the 12 tribes. Tribe lists usually mention one of his two sons: Ephraim or Manasseh. The Revelation 7 list is unprecedented only in that both Joseph and Manasseh (father and one of his sons) appear as separate tribes. The reason is clearly the omission of Dan, who became an idolater (Lev. 24:11, Judges 18:1.30, 1 Kings 12:28-29), and Ephraim (Judges 17, Hosea 4:17). Levi is included because, although he had no land, he was originally Jacob's son and counted as a separate tribe by blood. Finally, it should be noted that in Moses' blessing, both the tribe of Joseph and the tribe of Levi are included (see Deut. 33). Perhaps they missed that in Revelation 7, the 144,000 are not yet in heaven but are on the earth. God's plagues and the earthly disaster can only be released after they are marked, sealed, to protect them from or during the plagues. It makes sense that they will all survive the great tribulation, or at least its beginning, doesn't it? But then how can they be identified with the "anointed" of the entire 2000 years, as the Society does? How have they been continuously called since the 1st century, and only about 9,000 remain today when all 144,000 are on the earth before and at the beginning of the "great tribulation"?

The 144,000 are about the converted Jews; the Society believes they cannot be Jews because the list of tribes does not match one of the Old Testament lists, but on the one hand, only three of the twenty tribe lists in the Old Testament match (!), and on the other hand, Dan and Ephraim are missing because of idolatry. It only differs in two respects and for good reason. This does not exclude that Chapter 7 talks about Israel. In fact, it specifically talks about the tribes of Israel. Whoever does not belong to a tribe is not Israel. Dan's tribe does not appear among the tribes, perhaps because according to Jewish belief, the Antichrist comes from the tribe of Dan. In its place is the tribe of Manasseh, the son of Joseph. So the tribe of Dan, which distinguished itself by idolatry, is excluded, meaning that all those who resemble it, love the world more than God, share its fate, and will not have a part in the election. Idolatry first reared its head in the tribe of Dan (Judges 18) and was in its district during Jeroboam's calf (1 Kings 12:30). Dan has not been counted with the others since the Book of Chronicles (Chron. 1: 4-8). Instead of the tribe of Ephraim, Joseph is mentioned because Ephraim divided Israel's unity.

Here we are talking about the converted members of physical Israel, which is divided into "tribes". So, whoever becomes a member of the church, that is, spiritual Israel, through baptism, will not receive a "tribe". The tribes are physical descendants.

There are two major groups of elect in terms of origin, but the hope for both is the same (Eph 4:3-6): from the Jews (verses 4-7) and the Gentiles (from verse 9). The angel who marks God's believers has God's sign, his seal.

This is a detailed discussion about the biblical concept of the 144,000 and its interpretation, particularly as presented by the Watchtower Society.Dan, the fifth son of Jacob, was born from Rachel's maid, Bilhah. According to Genesis 46:23, when Dan came to Egypt with his father and brothers, he had only one son. We can read this very briefly: "And the son of Dan was...” and then follows the name: “Hushim". In contrast, the youngest son, Benjamin, already had ten children by then. However, two hundred years later, after the tribe of Judah, Dan was the largest in terms of numbers (Numbers 1:27, 39). The number of Judah's warrior men was 74,600, while Dan's was 62,700. So, the tribe of Dan represented a very significant force. According to Numbers 10:25, it also played a prominent role in the camp order. He was one of the four main flag bearers and provided security for the army as a rear guard.

Without the Israelites, the tribes would not be mentioned separately. How could the tribe of Joseph never have existed? Israel, Joseph's both sons were adopted by him, and he gave them his name (Israel) (Genesis 48:1-22).

"Now, therefore, your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh will be mine, just as Reuben and Simeon are mine." (Genesis 48:5)

Israel adopted Joseph's two sons, so Joseph formed a double lineage. This duality emphasized that Israel (Jacob) accepts both as if they were his. Joseph received the right of the firstborn, primarily for Ephraim and secondarily for Manasseh. However, this duality helped a lot in tribal allocations. Since Levi (under the Old Covenant) did not receive a tribal inheritance, the twelve tribes remained with Ephraim and Manasseh counted as separate tribes. They received separate inheritances and their own territories. Thus, a 13th tribe emerged. This distribution can be seen in Numbers 10, where the western group consisted of Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, i.e., Rachel's sons.

This tribal distribution will change according to prophecies and reflects the modified system given in Revelations. Firstly, in Revelation 7, Levi is also listed among the tribes. Why? Because the Levitical priesthood was a temporary priesthood (Heb. 11:20), which became obsolete with the establishment of the Melchizedek order. Within the framework of the New Testament, Levi returned to the tribes and, along with the other tribes and grafted in Gentiles, they can all be part of this new Melchizedek priesthood through faith. Manasseh is separate because he received a separate inheritance. Joseph is therefore represented by Ephraim, who also has the primacy between the two brothers. What is strange for many is the absence of the tribe of Dan from the list. According to prophecies, Dan merges with Ephraim, so he is also represented under Joseph! (Which, by the way, has already happened in history to some extent in practice). Furthermore, the merged Dan Ephraim gives the last organized warning of the end times (Jeremiah 4:15) before the appearance of the two witnesses.

So, the tribes in Revelations are already listed according to the millennial (which can also be called the Melchizedek order) system. In Ezekiel 48, this has changed to a completely reversed order. Dan is one of the three tribes whose primary birthright promises only come into effect with the coming of the Messiah. (the other two are Issachar and Zebulun, who will call the peoples to Jerusalem) Dan will be the judge of the tribes. That's why Genesis 49 says: "I have waited for your salvation, O Lord!". In the new millennial tribal distribution according to Ezekiel, Dan will take his post at the eastern gate with Joseph and Benjamin, Rachel's sons, as a judge. (Then Dan will be at the forefront, and Judah will be the rear guard). The Messiah will come through this eastern gate, and this gate is the place of judgment. Also, in Genesis 10, Levi is not listed in the marching order, but he appears in the gate distribution! So, the order in Revelation reflects the Messianic system, that's why the list deviates from the temporary, better-known marching order. The tribes will be led back to the promised land in a much more massive exodus that dwarfs the Egyptian one.

65

In Response to Anony Mous regarding the 144,000 and other questions...

by EasyPrompt in

still, you hold onto false teachings of the wtbts which are only there for the enrichment of its chiefs.. as pointed out, the rest of the book of revelation is figurative, yet you hold that the number 144,000 is literal.

the wtbts currently says that this number is limited to those running the wtbts and that anyone claiming to be part of it outside that self-selecting group could be mentally ill.. by what reasoning (not from wtbts origin) do you believe only 144,000 people will be ‘saved’, and how do you know who is part of this self-selected group, given virtually no other religious denomination does even remotely believe in the literalism of revelation.

do they have to be jws?

aqwsed12345

You can't talk about the spiritual Israel here, precisely because the spiritual Israel does not break down into "tribes." So, whoever becomes a member of the Church, or the spiritual Israel through baptism, will not be given a "tribe." Tribes are physical descendants, so referencing Bible verses that talk about God accepting the Gentiles as well doesn't fit here. This is true, but it doesn't apply here because they are also Israel, but not according to the tribe. Here, however, we're talking about Israelites by tribe.

The elect have two major groups in terms of origin, but the hope for both is the same (Ephesians 4:3-6): from the Jews (verses 4-7) and the Gentiles (from verse 9). The angel who marks God's faithful has God's sign or seal. In the past, soldiers and slaves also wore a mark. This marking reminds us of Ezekiel's prophecy, where the tau letter in the form of a cross is used for marking (9:4-6); the mark represents God's ownership. This marking is caricatured by the mark of the beast (Revelation 13:16). The word "seal" was also an early name for baptism.
Among the tribes, the tribe of Dan does not appear; perhaps intentionally, because according to Jewish belief, the Antichrist will come from the tribe of Dan. In its place is the tribe of Manasseh, Joseph's son.

Thus, the lineage of Dan, which especially marked itself with idolatry, is excluded, implying that all those who resemble them, those who love the world more than God, will share their fate and won't be part of the elect. Idolatry first appeared in Dan's lineage (Judges 18), and Jeroboam's calf was in his territory (1 Kings 12:30). Dan is not counted among the rest in the Book of Chronicles (1 Chronicles 4–8). Instead of the tribe of Ephraim, Joseph appears because Ephraim divided the unity of Israel. So, the 144,000, marked from every tribe of Israel, represent the Jews converted to Christianity. Then verse 9 continues:

"After this, I saw a huge crowd, too large to count, from every nation, tribe, people, and language standing in front of the throne and the Lamb."

Lest anyone think that the elect are only Christians converted from Jews, John is shown an even larger Christian army from the Gentiles, indicating that it's mainly the Gentiles who populate the Church, as the army of the chosen converted from the Gentiles is vast. The contrast is clear:

In Revelation 7:4, only those "from the tribes of the sons of Israel" (from the tribes originating from Jacob's 12 sons) are mentioned. In contrast, Revelation 7:9 speaks of "every nation, tribe, people, and language." Note: for the sons of Israel, tribes are mentioned [since Israel was divided into tribes], while for the Gentiles, nations, peoples, and languages are discussed.

The symbolic number in 7:4 also expresses that since "their minds were blinded, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed because only in Christ is it taken away. Even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away." (2 Corinthians 3:14-16). Therefore, the number of Jewish converts to Christianity is negligible compared to the converted from the Gentiles (7:9), who make up a great multitude.

The numbers and symbols in the Book of Revelation have led many astray over 2000 years, so it's essential to understand that this is just an expressive tool for conveying theological truth. The meanings of the numbers found in the Book of Revelation are:

One-first: exclusivity, primacy, dignity
Three and a half: limited time, defined period
Four: universality
Six: perfection, in a negative sense
Seven: completeness, perfection in a positive sense
Twelve: Israel, the entirety of the chosen people
Thousand: multitude, large number

The numbers and symbols shed light on the theological truth God wanted to convey: this world will end, God will judge everything, then create a new world.Different tribal lists were not entirely consistent even in the Old Testament. Indeed, this fact shatters your attempt to entirely bracket the 144,000 Israelites. Because if the absence of the tribe of Dan did not bother the author of the Chronicles (even though only the Jews were the chosen people at that time), then today, when only a part of the chosen people are of Jewish origin, why should the omission of the tribe of Dan disturb us in accepting the Israelite origin of the 144,000 as John writes it?

"And I heard the number of those who were sealed. One hundred and forty-four thousand from all the tribes of Israel were sealed." (Revelation 7:4)

It's hard for you to resist the clear teachings of the Bible and to reach far with the "leaping" Watchtower tactic for ideological ammunition when it's close to you in the Book of Revelation. The tribe of Joseph indeed existed, divided into two half-tribes: Ephraim, Manasseh. Basic things the Watchtower has to deny. In Numbers 2:17, the Levites marched in good order between Gad and Ephraim.

There is also a list in which the tribe of Joseph appears, and Levi too:

"These shall stand on Mount Gerizim to bless the people, when you have crossed over the Jordan: Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Joseph, and Benjamin. And these shall stand on Mount Ebal to curse: Reuben, Gad, Asher, Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali." (Deuteronomy 27:12-13:)

You have to realize that God freely rearranged the twelve tribes even in the Old Testament. Here is a summary of the tribe lists. There may be inaccuracies in it, but the overall picture is sure to confuse the simple Jehovah's Witness who, blindly following his brochures, wants to exploit the Old Testament listings as something clear against the list in Revelation.

http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/History-12Tribes.htm

The Watchtower Society claims that exactly 144,000 make up the heavenly hope class of believers. The 144,000 cannot be literally Jewish because (1) the tribal list does not match the Old Testament lists, (2) the tribe of Joseph never existed, (3) Dan and Ephraim are missing from it, (4) and the Levites were not counted as a separate tribe.

The Society overlooks several pieces of biblical information. More than two dozen tribe lists can be found in the Old Testament, only three of which match perfectly, and some are even incomplete (e.g., Deut. 33). According to the Bible, Joseph was Jacob's son, so he was indeed the founder of one of the 12 tribes. Tribe lists usually mention one of his two sons: Ephraim or Manasseh. The Revelation 7 list is unprecedented only in that both Joseph and Manasseh (father and one of his sons) appear as separate tribes. The reason is clearly the omission of Dan, who became an idolater (Lev. 24:11, Judges 18:1.30, 1 Kings 12:28-29), and Ephraim (Judges 17, Hosea 4:17). Levi is included because, although he had no land, he was originally Jacob's son and counted as a separate tribe by blood. Finally, it should be noted that in Moses' blessing, both the tribe of Joseph and the tribe of Levi are included (see Deut. 33). Perhaps they missed that in Revelation 7, the 144,000 are not yet in heaven but are on the earth. God's plagues and the earthly disaster can only be released after they are marked, sealed, to protect them from or during the plagues. It makes sense that they will all survive the great tribulation, or at least its beginning, doesn't it? But then how can they be identified with the "anointed" of the entire 2000 years, as the Society does? How have they been continuously called since the 1st century, and only about 9,000 remain today when all 144,000 are on the earth before and at the beginning of the "great tribulation"?

The 144,000 are about the converted Jews; the Society believes they cannot be Jews because the list of tribes does not match one of the Old Testament lists, but on the one hand, only three of the twenty tribe lists in the Old Testament match (!), and on the other hand, Dan and Ephraim are missing because of idolatry. It only differs in two respects and for good reason. This does not exclude that Chapter 7 talks about Israel. In fact, it specifically talks about the tribes of Israel. Whoever does not belong to a tribe is not Israel. Dan's tribe does not appear among the tribes, perhaps because according to Jewish belief, the Antichrist comes from the tribe of Dan. In its place is the tribe of Manasseh, the son of Joseph. So the tribe of Dan, which distinguished itself by idolatry, is excluded, meaning that all those who resemble it, love the world more than God, share its fate, and will not have a part in the election. Idolatry first reared its head in the tribe of Dan (Judges 18) and was in its district during Jeroboam's calf (1 Kings 12:30). Dan has not been counted with the others since the Book of Chronicles (Chron. 1: 4-8). Instead of the tribe of Ephraim, Joseph is mentioned because Ephraim divided Israel's unity.

Here we are talking about the converted members of physical Israel, which is divided into "tribes". So, whoever becomes a member of the church, that is, spiritual Israel, through baptism, will not receive a "tribe". The tribes are physical descendants.

There are two major groups of elect in terms of origin, but the hope for both is the same (Eph 4:3-6): from the Jews (verses 4-7) and the Gentiles (from verse 9). The angel who marks God's believers has God's sign, his seal.

This is a detailed discussion about the biblical concept of the 144,000 and its interpretation, particularly as presented by the Watchtower Society.Dan, the fifth son of Jacob, was born from Rachel's maid, Bilhah. According to Genesis 46:23, when Dan came to Egypt with his father and brothers, he had only one son. We can read this very briefly: "And the son of Dan was...” and then follows the name: “Hushim". In contrast, the youngest son, Benjamin, already had ten children by then. However, two hundred years later, after the tribe of Judah, Dan was the largest in terms of numbers (Numbers 1:27, 39). The number of Judah's warrior men was 74,600, while Dan's was 62,700. So, the tribe of Dan represented a very significant force. According to Numbers 10:25, it also played a prominent role in the camp order. He was one of the four main flag bearers and provided security for the army as a rear guard.

Without the Israelites, the tribes would not be mentioned separately. How could the tribe of Joseph never have existed? Israel, Joseph's both sons were adopted by him, and he gave them his name (Israel) (Genesis 48:1-22).

"Now, therefore, your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh will be mine, just as Reuben and Simeon are mine." (Genesis 48:5)

Israel adopted Joseph's two sons, so Joseph formed a double lineage. This duality emphasized that Israel (Jacob) accepts both as if they were his. Joseph received the right of the firstborn, primarily for Ephraim and secondarily for Manasseh. However, this duality helped a lot in tribal allocations. Since Levi (under the Old Covenant) did not receive a tribal inheritance, the twelve tribes remained with Ephraim and Manasseh counted as separate tribes. They received separate inheritances and their own territories. Thus, a 13th tribe emerged. This distribution can be seen in Numbers 10, where the western group consisted of Ephraim, Manasseh, and Benjamin, i.e., Rachel's sons.

This tribal distribution will change according to prophecies and reflects the modified system given in Revelations. Firstly, in Revelation 7, Levi is also listed among the tribes. Why? Because the Levitical priesthood was a temporary priesthood (Heb. 11:20), which became obsolete with the establishment of the Melchizedek order. Within the framework of the New Testament, Levi returned to the tribes and, along with the other tribes and grafted in Gentiles, they can all be part of this new Melchizedek priesthood through faith. Manasseh is separate because he received a separate inheritance. Joseph is therefore represented by Ephraim, who also has the primacy between the two brothers. What is strange for many is the absence of the tribe of Dan from the list. According to prophecies, Dan merges with Ephraim, so he is also represented under Joseph! (Which, by the way, has already happened in history to some extent in practice). Furthermore, the merged Dan Ephraim gives the last organized warning of the end times (Jeremiah 4:15) before the appearance of the two witnesses.

So, the tribes in Revelations are already listed according to the millennial (which can also be called the Melchizedek order) system. In Ezekiel 48, this has changed to a completely reversed order. Dan is one of the three tribes whose primary birthright promises only come into effect with the coming of the Messiah. (the other two are Issachar and Zebulun, who will call the peoples to Jerusalem) Dan will be the judge of the tribes. That's why Genesis 49 says: "I have waited for your salvation, O Lord!". In the new millennial tribal distribution according to Ezekiel, Dan will take his post at the eastern gate with Joseph and Benjamin, Rachel's sons, as a judge. (Then Dan will be at the forefront, and Judah will be the rear guard). The Messiah will come through this eastern gate, and this gate is the place of judgment. Also, in Genesis 10, Levi is not listed in the marching order, but he appears in the gate distribution! So, the order in Revelation reflects the Messianic system, that's why the list deviates from the temporary, better-known marching order. The tribes will be led back to the promised land in a much more massive exodus that dwarfs the Egyptian one.

43

Who are the 144K Male Jewish Virgins in Revelation 7?

by Sea Breeze in

no mystery here.

they are all male jewish virgins, just like scripture says.

so, why all the muck and fuss?

aqwsed12345

21

What does this even mean?

by Blotty in

"the son is born of the father by generation, but generation should not be understood in the everyday sense.

the son is derived from the father through pure spiritual generation, through the unlimited sharing of his essence.

so, the birth of the son is an intellectual activity of god.".

aqwsed12345

Revelation 3:14 - Jesus Christ as the 'archē' of God’s creation

21

What does this even mean?

by Blotty in

"the son is born of the father by generation, but generation should not be understood in the everyday sense.

the son is derived from the father through pure spiritual generation, through the unlimited sharing of his essence.

so, the birth of the son is an intellectual activity of god.".

aqwsed12345

In connection with dropping the F-bomb... How about Proverbs 15:1, 2 Tim. 2:25, Titus 3:2? ;-)

21

What does this even mean?

by Blotty in

"the son is born of the father by generation, but generation should not be understood in the everyday sense.

the son is derived from the father through pure spiritual generation, through the unlimited sharing of his essence.

so, the birth of the son is an intellectual activity of god.".

aqwsed12345

The Divine Name

21

What does this even mean?

by Blotty in

"the son is born of the father by generation, but generation should not be understood in the everyday sense.

the son is derived from the father through pure spiritual generation, through the unlimited sharing of his essence.

so, the birth of the son is an intellectual activity of god.".

aqwsed12345

By the way, it's somewhat ironic that Nicene theology is accused of having been created under the influence of "Greek philosophy", when in reality, the CONTENT of Nicene theology was not influenced by any philosophy. They only utilized concepts found in philosophy to ARTICULATE the revealed truth. In contrast, subordinationism, and especially Arianism, had its specific content influenced by Greek philosophy.

Subordinationism is a speculative idea about the doctrine of the Trinity by some 2nd-3rd century Christian writers, and it is still closer to Nicene theology than to Arianism. They conceived of the Son and the Holy Spirit in some subordinate degree to the Father. They imagined the origin of the Son as the Father having eternally conceived His Word (Logos), but only pronounced it in creation (this is the so-called two-stage Logos theory). They were influenced by Greek philosophy in their speculation, which talked about different degrees of emanation from the divine. We must also consider that these pre-Arian theologians viewed the Son's subordination more from a soteriological-grace perspective, not on the plane of existence, meaning it only manifests in the created world, our world. Internal Trinitarian origins probably influenced them too. Anyone who is born or originates can somehow be considered lesser than the one from whom they originate. The clarification of concepts and theology only took place in debates with monarchians, Marcionites, and Arians when the Church Fathers recognized and articulated that the divine persons differ only in their relations to each other, not in their possession of existence.

Arius, moreover, mainly taught in Antioch, one of the contemporary centers of Aristotelian philosophy: Arius learned from Aristotle that a difference in name implies a difference in subject. The apple is not the tree, so the Father is not the Son. If the distinction between the apple and the tree were not real, both could be given the same name. On the other hand, if the Father and the Son must be distinguished by name from each other, it is obvious that they are not the same. For Arius, this meant that if the Father is God, then the Son cannot be God in the same sense. He can be divine, but his divinity is either partial or derived. (See Gerald Bray: Creeds, Councils and Christ—Did the early Christians misrepresent Jesus?, Rossshire, England, Mentor Books, 1997, p. 106)

Interestingly, Jehovah's Witnesses still argue against the Trinity using Aristotle's logic applicable to the natural world. The early church fathers, in any case, fought against polytheism just as strongly as they did against Arianism, seeing it as a variant of polytheism. Surprisingly, despite claims to the contrary, Arianism was closer to the philosophy of Plato and Gnostic speculations, not to Trinitarianism. The Platonic and Gnostic view does not tolerate the idea of God becoming man because they don't believe He can be related to the created material world. They believed that the "demiurge", a being between God and man, the first created "divine" being, created the material world which they deemed inherently evil. Against this, it was the Trinitarians who defended the ancient Biblical belief that only God Himself is the creator. It's also no coincidence that the late Roman emperors leaned towards Arianism, traditionally considering themselves semi-divine. It was much harder for them to accept Trinitarianism, which sharply separated the sole Creator from all other creatures.

Hence Arius' starting point was rationalist philosophy and speculation. The Antiochenes were followers of Aristotelian wisdom, mainly focusing on the interpretation of writings and preferring the literal meaning; they leaned towards rationalism. The founder of the school was Lucian of Antioch, a disciple of Paul of Samosata, and the teacher of Arius. Arius was an Alexandrian presbyter who, following in the footsteps of his teacher Lucian, the founder of the Antiochene catechetical school, forcefully asserted the unity of God in his work "Thalia" around 318.

According to him, the one true God (ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων θεός) cannot share His nature because He is simple; nor can He beget, because a begotten God is a contradiction. Consequently, the Son, who is a different person from the Father, was not born of the Father's essence but was made (γενητός, not γεννητός) by Him, a creation (κτίσμα) and came into existence from nonexistence (ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων ἐστίν); there was a time when He did not exist (ἧν ποτε, ὃτε οὐκ ἧν). But He was created before all "other" creatures, and God created through Him; thus, He is an intermediate and mediating being between God and the world; like the aeons that emanate from divinity according to the Gnostics, but Arius believed the Logos encompasses these non-worldly, non-divine aeons, the pleroma (cf. Col. 1:19).

So it was from this speculation that Arius derived his teaching, and only afterwards did he look for "evidence" from the Scriptures, such as Proverbs 8:22, ambiguously translated in the Septuagint.

Arius had two particular followers who sought to set up a theological system using Aristotelian dialectics: Aetius of Antioch and Eunomius of Cyzicus. They regarded being unoriginate as a divine basic property and applied it only to the Father. This implied that the Son and the Holy Spirit, having their origin in the Father, could not be coequal with Him, but are mere creatures. They didn't consider what the Western fathers emphasized from the beginning: that being unoriginate refers to the divine essence itself, which all three persons equally possess, and are one with it. The difference is only in the relations between the persons. The Son is begotten of the Father in such a way that the Father communicates his entire essence to him, not in time or sequentially, but in eternal existence.

The Father is the originless (unbegotten) primal principle in divine life; the Son is born from Him. But this begetting and birth should be conceived in the eternal, unchanging spirit. Insofar as the Son is also the Word, the Logos, His birth from the Father should be thought of in the image of expressing a word. The Father has known Himself eternally; there is nothing in His essence that He does not grasp, hence He can express Himself in a single, eternal Word such that the Word remains in Him and fully reflects Him. Yet He is the expresser, and the Son is the expressed Word. But because this expressed Word is the perfect image of the Father and contains the entire divine essence, its derivation can be called birth. Since cognition is the work of the intellect, we can say that the birth of the Son comes about through intellectual activity.

God Himself is life and activity, but nothing new arises in Him; He cannot change. But if the Son is His Word, coeternal with Him, then He surely expressed Himself in Him. He encapsulated His entire essence in this word, for as an infinite spirit, He fully knows and can express Himself. The expressed word, therefore, is consubstantial with Him, remains in Him, yet stands opposed to Him, like the expressed stands against the expresser, like the Son stands against the Father. Thus, the persons are distinguished only by their opposition in origin, but the divine nature or essence is not divided by this. The Father thus begets the Son, sharing His entire essence with Him, rather than giving something of Himself.

To understand the reality of the persons, attention must also be paid to the relation, the relationship between them. In created things, relationships arise subsequently: a man becomes a father when he has a son, and this fatherhood is accidental, not identical with essence. However, God did not first exist and then subsequently beget the Son; instead, He has from eternity, as He necessarily knows and expresses Himself. In the Trinity, the real mystery is that in the Father, the relation referring to the Son is not accidental, but intrinsically identical with the essence. Here we encounter an "existing relation," and in this lies the reality of the persons. Fatherhood as a relation faces sonship, therefore differs from it, yet neither differs from the divine essence itself, so the distinctness of the persons does not divide the unity of the Godhead. Thus, we encounter the wonderful unity and richness of absolute existence and relative existence, which does not occur in the created world.

aqwsed12345

Posts by aqwsed12345