Posts by Oroborus21

16

"I have been" or "I am" for John 8:58

by JW Ben in

?revised english bible, 1989, margin.

the present indicative, accompanied by an adverbial expression denoting duration and referring to past time, is sometimes used in greek,...to describe an action which, beginning in past time, is still in progress at the time of speaking.

(?am?, in the present tense) at john 8:58, because of its being accompanied by and expression of past time, (prin abraam genesthai) ?before abraham to become?,) should be rendered, in english, in the perfect tense.

Oroborus21

The point of the scriptures is so very simple that it is too often not ony misunderstood but misapplied by persons.

I will make it extremely simple for you:

THE BIBLE IS NOT ITSELF THE REVELATION ABOUT GOD TO MANKIND.

THE BIBLE IS A RECORD OF THE REVELATION ABOUT GOD TO MANKIND.

One must therefore be very cautious about being overly concerned about specific wording, scriptures or passages (nor do I need to add that it is pure folly to base entire doctrines on the turning of a phrase, word or tittle).

Try to see the big picture and you won't go wrong.

-Eduardo

26

Jesus Christ! Is this a contradiction?

by observador in

the other day while rereading the scriptures about the last supper, i spotted something that is very interesting.. mathew 26:23 reads:"in reply he said: "he that dips his hand with me in the bowl is the one that will betray me.".

the above doesn't make much sense to me because it implies that one would have to give himself away by doing exacly what jesus said the betrayor would do.

now, look at how john words the same event in john 13:26:"therefore jesus answered: "it is that one to whom i shall give the morsel that i dip".

Oroborus21

Jeez Louise,

What is so difficult to understand?

Here is what happened:

Jesus had some bit of bread and the little cup of olive oil, he dipped the bread and gave it to Judas or perhaps just offered the cup over to Judas and Judas took the bread out of the cup and ate. No one thought anything about it at the time, even though Jesus evidently said something about the one who is "sharing his bowl" or (in other words) the one he is giving the morsel to will be the betrayer or is the betrayer.

At least a decade later or even more in the case of John, when it seems necessary that it is important to write down an account of Jesus life and sayings, Matthew and John both relate their take on what happened. Keep in mind that this is many many years since.

John remembers and writes things pretty straightforward but with special emphasis on the fact that they realize NOW that Jesus identified Judas before he betrayed him (thus highlighting Jesus divine powers of prescience which is in line with John's whole view of Jesus of highlighting his divinity). John's recollection is that Jesus said in answer to Peter's question of "tell us who the betrayer is" that Jesus said "it is the one to whom I give the morsel to eat and that he gave it to Judas."

Mathew, who is more concerned about preserving the Jewish tradition and emphasizes the Jewishness of Jesus records the situation a little differently. As Matthew recalls it, Jesus said one of them was about to betray him, they each ask essentially "It isn't me is it?" (No doubt they are very puzzled and as the scripture said "grieved" to think that they might be the one to betray Jesus, so I wanted to know). Matthew recalls that Jesus said something along the lines of "its the one that dips the morsel in this bowl" . Matthew leaves the act of Jesus actually passing the morsel or the bowl with the morsel over to Judas implied but records Judas's question "It isn't me Lord" immediately following Jesus's words.

Remember these guys were writings many many years after the fact and each had their own slightly different personal philosophy about what was important about Jesus. The two accounts are not a contradiction.

We don't have to worry about whether one account is more accurate than the other, whether they are both correct or maybe whether they both got it wrong.

The point of the scriptures is so very simple that it is too often not ony misunderstood but misapplied by persons.

I will make it extremely simple for you:

THE BIBLE IS NOT ITSELF THE REVELATION ABOUT GOD TO MANKIND.

THE BIBLE IS A RECORD OF THE REVELATION ABOUT GOD TO MANKIND.

One must therefore be very cautious about being overly concerned about specific wording, scriptures or passages (nor do I need to add that it is pure folly to base entire doctrines on the turning of a phrase, word or tittle).

Try to see the big picture and you won't go wrong.

-Eduardo

63

Memorial experiences 2005 thread

by Jez in

lets put all of our memorial stories/thoughts on one thread.

mine: 45 mins.

quick and boring.

Oroborus21

Good Idea:

I went to the Memorial, yay 34 in a row. I thought it probably started at 6:30 but it started at 6 so we were a bit late, missed about 20 minutes of the talking in the beginning.

It was over in a heartbeat and we left immediately. My wife looked fabulous in her skin tight black pants and red leather jacket, my daughter we dressed nicely actually, and I wore suit pants, jacket and blue dress shirt NO TIE!!!!! I think this may be the first meeting that I ever attended without a tie! (not counting the Wester Ties, aka bolos that I used to wear sometimes). Afterwards, I told my wife that I would like to go to a few more meetings now and then but I won't be wearing a tie.

bad, bad Eddie!

-Eduardo

REally though it was a hour in and out and very painless

(no jokes please)

other comments:

A few weeks ago, we were laying in bed and I mentioned to my wife that "the Memorial is coming up soon" she rolled over and said "Who died?"

----

I am predicting that the number of Anointed drops below the 8000 mark this year. Any wagers?

-Ed

8

WTBTS Memorial Date In Error

by El Shadi in

jw
friends

it is apparent that the watchtower society has decided to follow babylon the great in its celebration of jesus death and resurrection by following the "ecclesiastical full moon" rather than the "astonomical full moon".

the date of easter

prior to a.d. 325, easter was variously celebrated on different days of the week, including friday, saturday, and sunday.

Oroborus21

ACTUALLY I MISSPOKE: JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES CELEBRATE THE MEMORIAL ON THE DAY OF THE FIRST FULL MOON (NOT NEW MOON) THAT FOLLOWS THE VERNAL OR SPRING EQUINOX. Following the Jewish custom/calendar of beginning days from evening to evening, Nisan 14 begins sundown on March 24, i.e. today.

This info from the net:

Friday, 3/25
Full Moon, 3:58 p.m.
This is the first Full Moon after the March Equinox, and as such helps determine the date of Easter, which this year is March 27. See the Naval Observatory page for an explanation: http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/easter.html.

-Eduardo

18

Didn't Go to the Memorial

by Undecided in

jw
friends

i thought about going to see how many of the old pub.

i would know at the memorial.

when the time came to get ready to go i had this feeling of anxiety so i just kept watching tv.

Oroborus21

I did, I thought it probably started at 6:30 but it started at 6 so we were a bit late, missed about 20 minutes of the talking in the beginning.

It was over in a heartbeat and we left immediately. My wife looked fabulous in her skin tight black pants and red leather jacket, my daughter we dressed nicely actually, and I wore suit pants, jacket and blue dress shirt NO TIE!!!!! I think this may be the first meeting that I ever attended without a tie! (not counting the Wester Ties, aka bolos that I used to wear sometimes). Afterwards, I told my wife that I would like to go to a few more meetings now and then but I won't be wearing a tie.

bad, bad Eddie!

-Eduardo

REally though it was a hour in and out and very painless

(no jokes please)

13

Would'nt it be great if they had to read our letters outloud to the cong...

by ButtLight in

jw
friends

just reading a few of the da'd letters, it would just be so cool if they had to read them out loud when they announced it!!!!!!!

can you imagine what the reaction would be?

Oroborus21

Instead of writing just one letter and sending or giving it to the Elders, makes copies for everyone and place them on their cars during the meeting (probably at least a few will get read or atleast it will be interesting)

By the way, the REAL reason that the Elder's stopped distributing mailing lists of everyone in the congregation and ordered everyone to destroy theirs (during the Mid 1990s) is that some were sending their DA letters by mail to everyone in the congregation. Of course, I found it humorous that the official rationale was supposedly because if persecution started the "authorities" could get a hold of the list of members by coming across these address lists and "use it against us". That was a joke.

-Eduardo

51

Star Trek: Enterprise

by Big Tex in

my local upn station keeps moving enterprise around.

sometimes it's on friday, sometimes it's on wednesdays, sometimes it's not on at all.

so as a result i haven't watched more than a couple of espisodes this season.

Oroborus21

I think this is what episode guides are for. Go to startrek.com.

-Eduardo

16

New Mexico or Amarillo Circuit

by Sparkplug in

jw
friends

hey...is anybody on here from nm?

i have not seen anyone from the state post?

i wonder if nm has computers yet?

Oroborus21

Hey Sparkplug,

that is cool. Yeah I had a huge Crush on her, though she was brunette when she left Carlsbad. her dad was an EMT and would sometimes come dressed in his uniform to the meeting and his pager would go off and he would have to go out. CAn you believe some people looked down on him for that. Anyway they moved to Albuquerque. I heard her dad died of cancer or some serious illness. I wish I had stayed in touch with her, she was pretty cool.

-Eduardo

16

New Mexico or Amarillo Circuit

by Sparkplug in

jw
friends

hey...is anybody on here from nm?

i have not seen anyone from the state post?

i wonder if nm has computers yet?

Oroborus21

Hey Rnumbers.

then you most likely met or know of either my dad, also named Eduardo Leaton (SR) he would have been the PO of the Spanish Congregation may you have heard of my Uncle Richard.

take care,

eduardo jr.

8

Anyone here a lawyer that knows about liability of property

by kls in

jw
friends

.

this is what i need to know , i have 18 acres and my son who is 26 asked me if he friend could come here and ride his 4 wheeler, well i said no not till the ground gets hard .

then i started to think when i had horses i was careful and had people sign an agreement that if they were hurt riding on my property that they would not sue me for injuries, my question is if i had my son's friend sign a contract not to sue me in case of injury would that hold up if he would get hurt or would a contract just be worthless and i probably should just tell my son and his friend no, its not worth getting sued over.. .

Oroborus21

Well sure. After all the biggest fact of all is that anyone can "bring a claim" for anything in the world. Whether such claim gets past a summary judgment motion or motion to dismiss or ultimately prevails is of course what the law is all about.

All you can do is decide whether or not you feel comfortable taking any risk at all. If you do then minimize your risk and that is all that you can do. There is nothing that is so iron-clad that it forestalls a challenge. (Gulp! I hate to bring it up but just look at the Terri Schiavo case. The law was always on the husband's side, even after all the state rulings came down and the Supreme Ct denied cert 3 times, yet the parents still pressed for relief in the federal courts, etc. etc. Nothing prevents a lawsuit/petition/motion from being filed or even initially reviewed, unless it isn't completed correctly :-) and even then sometimes it is ok.)

-Eduardo