Posts by Poppy520

63

Hell Exists

by Poppy520 in

many people of all denominations are beginning to believe that hell does not exist - but the bible supports the claim that it does.

examine this verse, one under nkjv and the other nwt:.

nkjv - matthew 25:46, "and these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.".

See man yes! Exactly! You DO have a moral compass! You DO know right from wrong!... because you're made in the image of God and God exists. Naturally, with God being real, you would have a moral compass wouldn't you? Because God is real, the rapist is wrong, the thief is wrong, and lying is bad. What I'm saying is how do YOU justify YOUR moral compass ABOVE someone else's moral compass. YOU say God ISN'T real - so what do you say to the man who loves to go around raping people, a serial rapist, who believes what he is doing is right? How do you tell him that he is wrong?? Because isn't that HIS truth?

14

“...in the name of our Lord Jesus” explanation please?

by Jules Saturn in

i am looking for someone to please clear this up.

there are scriptures like in the 1 corinthians chapter 5 that refer to jesus as “our lord jesus”.

the lord is jehovah, why does that scripture in 1 corinthians refer to the lord as jesus?

Poppy520

Unfortunately, there is no Greek word for "an" or "a". When we translate to English, we have to add this into our text.
John 1:1 says in Greek, "En arche en ho Logos kai ho Logos en pros ton Theon kai Theos en ho Logos" (I'm not pretending this is off the top of my head! Haha I'm using an interlinear)
John 1:1 in English, of course, is *literally* translated, "In [the] beginning was the Word and the Word was with God (Theon) and God (Theos) was the Word."

Now, at first glance this appears to say that the Word is God, that Jesus is *not the Father* but is God.... and that would be correct. Unless you add in the english "a" before Theos, it in no way, shape, or form, reads, "a god". This is a wrong insertion from the Watchtower. They believe that because John uses two different words to describe Jesus and God (even though it's two different ways of spelling the same word) that this must mean that Jesus is lesser than God, called "a god" just as God refers to false idols as "gods". The difference however, is God makes it clear to call those idols lifeless, whereas life is found in Jesus.

There is another verse in psalms 82:6,7, which says, "I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.' But you will die like mere mortals; you will fall like every other rule." - so even in this case it isn't a very happy verse. God is speaking about the judges who were given authority from God to judge. In this verse, they are called "elohim", yet, they are not said to have eternal life, unlike our Logos who was in the beginning with Theon.

Now, this argument of two different words, "Theos" being a lesser god and "Theon" being the big G-God, doesn't hold up because there are places in the Bible where our big G-God is ascribed the title of "theos". Consider Hebrews 1:-3 which says, "God (THEOS), who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom He also made the worlds;" If you actually go on the JW website and read this verse out of the NWT, the Watchtower give examples of Theos, Jehovah, speaking to the prophets in the Old Testament. Even they acknowledge that Theos is used to describe Jehovah. Through a simple word search of "Theos", you will find many instances of it in the Bible where it is used to talk about Jehovah, places where it would be silly to translate it, "a god". Consider Matthew 22:32, "I am the God (THEOS) of Abraham, the God (THEOS) of Isaac, and the God (THEOS) of Jacob? God (THEOS) is not the God (THEOS) of the dead, but of the living." Wouldn't it be silly to translate it, "I am a lesser god of Abraham, a lesser god of Isaac, and a lesser god of Jacob? A lesser god is not the lesser god of the dead, but of the living."

So we see that John 1:1 is fair to interpret the scripture as an argument for the Trinity. The Doctrine of the Trinity does NOT hold that Jesus IS the Father and IS the Holy Spirit. No, it holds that Jesus is God and the Father is God and the Holy Spirit is God - the three are separate but God, not three Gods however. Examine Matthew 28:19, "... Baptizing in the name (singular, not "names of the...") of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit."

Mind you, I want to say that Jesus prayed to the Father as a man, coming in the form of the Son. That is why He prayed to the Father. Also, consider Isaiah, speaking of the throne room in Isaiah 6:3, "And they were calling to one another: "Holy (1), holy (2), holy (3) is the LORD Almight; the whole earth is full of his (singular) glory." And compare it with Matthew 27:46 where Jesus says, being absent from the throne room and nailed to a cross, "... My God (1), My God (2), why have You (singular) forsaken Me?"

Jesus is Lord because He is God

Edit: I forgot! 13 years before the NWT was released, Johannes Greber released has translation of John 1:1 "a god" which he literally and explicitly says that he divined this translation from spirits through contacting them in seances. He was a psychic-medium who spoke frequently to spirits. Now, we know that mediums are demonic and that this witchcraft is CONDEMNED in the Bible, Old AND New Testaments, meaning that he was given this translation from demons against the commandments of GOD (your Jehovah). Johannes Greber, according to the Watchtower, would be called an "apostate" - yet even the Watchtower, I kid you not, sites Greber as a justification for their translation of "a god". This is all public knowledge - the Watchtower organization used a satanic, apostate reference to justify their distorting of scriptures.

Also, if you read what many secular Greek language scholars have to say about the NWT, they believe it is a horrible translation and not even a translation, just a distortion and perversion of an earlier translation from someone else to push their own doctrines. Also, the Watchtower made the claim that the NWT was translated through the Holy Spirit and that it is the best translation ever to exist and that there is no need for another, yet they have released three revised versions.... so perfect, huh?

63

Hell Exists

by Poppy520 in

many people of all denominations are beginning to believe that hell does not exist - but the bible supports the claim that it does.

examine this verse, one under nkjv and the other nwt:.

nkjv - matthew 25:46, "and these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.".

Poppy520

Then where do you get your perception of good and evil, cofty? Is it just up to what you believe or up to what society has determined? Is there any absolute good or evil? Because if not, you have no place to really call God evil because you have nothing solid to base that opinion on. Your morals are literally made up so who are you to say that anything is bad? What if a serial killer believes that killing is a good thing - who are you to say otherwise? There are real rape cultures which believe child prostitution is a good thing - who are you to say otherwise? Because to reject, not just God, but any higher power, you have nothing left to base your morals on except personal opinion. so are you ready to tell the little girl sold into sex slavery that her rapist isn't really wrong or right? Are you ready to tell the young woman raped by a man that he, "wasn't really wrong" and justify it by saying, "well he wasn't right either". Are you ready to be philosophically consistent? I don't think so. You're just another person angry at a God you don't believe

63

Hell Exists

by Poppy520 in

many people of all denominations are beginning to believe that hell does not exist - but the bible supports the claim that it does.

examine this verse, one under nkjv and the other nwt:.

nkjv - matthew 25:46, "and these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.".

Poppy520

Regardless of how you feel about God in the context of Hell, the scriptures - the Greek texts confirm that Hell is very real. "We go straight to the Scriptures - that's a bit self-righteous! Actually we go straight to the translations..." And isn't that what I did? Didn't I take the Greek and show you what the text says? Now I can't tell you why the original manuscripts weren't saved, we don't have any original manuscripts from Plato but we all accept what's written there. But as far as preserving the original texts, I can't tell why God didn't. I won't pretend like I can - however, I have shown you the Greek, you can do the research yourself and see that the Greek that has been offered is legit and the Watchtower's isn't. Regardless if it was inserted into scriptures or not - that is what is in the canon we have today, even the Watchtower includes it in theirs which is "The most accurate translation there is" (Even though they've had what, 3 revisions? explain that one, Watchtower!). They include it but they change the meaning of a Greek word which all greek scholars can agree is a fake translation.
Now, if there is no way to prove what was actually there and what has been added or removed, what are you following it for then? What is the point if we can just cherry pick - being unable to trust ANY of the scripture? If the scriptures are SO perverted, how can you trust anything in there? the fact is that you can't! I could argue every single scripture except the fragments from the 1st century. Oh there is something you don't agree with? Then take it out! Who cares? It probably isn't authentic anyway! and if I said sex before marriage is ok, but you show me a scripture saying otherwise, I can always just say, "Well that was probably added!" or make some claim about the greek being false or some outside influence. If we can't trust the scriptures then it is better to throw them away altogether! Man I wish this standard was held to the doctrines the Watchtower teaches. If you disagree with their doctrines then you're labeled an apostate and thrown out of the church to be shunned! They seem to place a LOT of trust in the scripture's authenticity.
Now, regardless if you believe God is a sadist, asshole, horrible judge or bloodthirsty God because of Hell, it's found in the scriptures that Hell exists and it's there. Cofty, I am by no means a Jehovah's Witness or a part of their cult - But if you think God is a sadist and evil, who do you think you are to judge God? Who do you think you are to deem what is evil and what is good? Under whose authority do you assert your opinions of good and evil?
Whatever my God says, I stand by it - because it is the truth. I know that He is a just God, as the scriptures tell us, and that He is righteousness. Everything He does is good and He nothing He does is evil - that is what the scriptures tell us. I don't see myself above Him and able to understand Him. I don't even begin to pretend that I know exactly how God works. All I have are the scriptures. But if God created Hell, and even if we throw out the argument that "people send themselves to Hell" and say that God sends the disobedient to Hell - He personally sends them to Hell for rejecting the offer of His love, then I call that righteous judgement and stand by it one hundred percent.

63

Hell Exists

by Poppy520 in

many people of all denominations are beginning to believe that hell does not exist - but the bible supports the claim that it does.

examine this verse, one under nkjv and the other nwt:.

nkjv - matthew 25:46, "and these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.".

Poppy520

Cofty - if you are not a Christian or a believer, I would like to ask you where you get your understanding of good and evil and why you are justified in those understandings. This is a popular argument because it is not possible to answer it without saying there is no good and evil which means Hitler wasn't wrong (just an example). If you believe in God but also believe that God is a sadist for allowing people to reject Him and go to hell, I would urge you to reexamine the severity of sin and how bad it actually is. Because to say it is unfair or wrong for God to allow people to go to Hell by rejecting His free gift of salvation and love, then you are saying, "We aren't really that bad! That wouldn't be justice if we went there!". The scriptures show us clearly that we are evil, disgusting creatures without Jesus. "No one is good but God" "If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts" ect. You can look those up yourself. Be careful who you call evil before you check our self.
As far as the abusive husband analogy, it's more like a Father saying to his son, "You can live here, because I love you, if you are willing to obey me for your own good and love me back - but you cannot live here if you hate me and bring drugs into this house, son." If the son chooses to hate his dad and choose drugs, his dad won't let him live in his home. The son is choosing hatred and drugs, therefore he is choosing to NOT live in his dad's house. You have no place to talk about a God you have no idea about here. Your comments are just destructive and have no basis or defense - they are just you pushing what you believe to be your absolute truth with absolutely no justification for your beliefs.

63

Hell Exists

by Poppy520 in

many people of all denominations are beginning to believe that hell does not exist - but the bible supports the claim that it does.

examine this verse, one under nkjv and the other nwt:.

nkjv - matthew 25:46, "and these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.".

Poppy520

So should I look for Hell elsewhere? When we want to prove something - we go straight to the Scriptures. What I have shown you is that here, Jesus specifically talks about eternal life and eternal torment - whether you want to believe the watered down "Earth is hell enough" then that is up to you - but it completely distorts the reality of how bad sin really is. When you understand how bad it really is and what the cost really is, you understand how bad you are, how much you need grace, how severe Jesus' sacrifice was, and you understand the grace that's been given to you (provided of course that you believe on Jesus and all that He is). The Old Testament does not talk about Hell, nor does it talk about humans in paradise. Heaven was not open to the world yet, which is why the Jews slept (a popular theory is Abraham's bosom) because animal sacrifice only covered unintentional sin and they were still accountable for their transgressions - they were not sanctified and could not enter heaven. But when Jesus came, and He did what He did, heaven was open - and hell was no longer just for Satan and his demons but those who have rejected Christ as well. An all loving God sends those to Hell who chose to go to Hell. Also - the Bible is the Divine Word of God and Jesus says it will never pass away and the Lord says He will preserve it. The Bible makes the claim that Hell exists - and that is enough.

63

Hell Exists

by Poppy520 in

many people of all denominations are beginning to believe that hell does not exist - but the bible supports the claim that it does.

examine this verse, one under nkjv and the other nwt:.

nkjv - matthew 25:46, "and these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.".

Poppy520

The OT talks about death as sleep because, until Jesus came to atone for the Jew's sins fully (Salvation was given to the Gentiles when the Jews rejected it, clearly found in Scripture), they could not enter heaven. Don't forget that through animal sacrifice they were only forgiven for unintentional sin and still accountable for their transgressions. If you think of it like that, then the verse about Jesus going under makes a lot more sense, because they were kind of sleeping in a way (look up Abraham's bosom, a popular teaching). But when He came, He opened heaven to us. Hell is clearly taught, I feel, even though the official Watchtower doctrine is annihilation - I think it is clear as well how they have distorted particular texts which is unarguably evident to push their doctrines which is heart breaking.

63

Hell Exists

by Poppy520 in

many people of all denominations are beginning to believe that hell does not exist - but the bible supports the claim that it does.

examine this verse, one under nkjv and the other nwt:.

nkjv - matthew 25:46, "and these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.".

Poppy520

The title was total clickbait - but I am saying that there is a basis in the Bible and evidence for a literal hell that - once you die, you either go up to heaven or down into Hell. Whether it is really fire and sulfur or outerdarkness with gnashing of teeth and wailing, I think there is actual Biblical evidence for Hell not being an expression, but an actual place where you are fully conscious after death and in torment. You really need to read Matthew 25 in context to understand Jesus is talking about the afterlife

63

Hell Exists

by Poppy520 in

many people of all denominations are beginning to believe that hell does not exist - but the bible supports the claim that it does.

examine this verse, one under nkjv and the other nwt:.

nkjv - matthew 25:46, "and these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.".

Poppy520

Many people of all denominations are beginning to believe that Hell does not exist - but the Bible supports the claim that it does. Examine this verse, one under NKJV and the other NWT:

NKJV - Matthew 25:46, "And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."

NWT - Matthew 25:46, "These will depart into everlasting cutting-off, but the righteous ones into everlasting life."

So you can see off the bat that there is a difference - but first, before we look at "punishment" and "cutting-off", let's look at the Greek word for "everlasting/eternal". This Greek word is "aoinion". This word literally means just that - everlasting or eternal. Where else are do we see it used?

1 Peter 5:10, "But may the God of all grace, who called us to His eternal glory by Christ Jesus,after you have suffered a while, perfect, establish, strengthen and settle you."

The word "eternal" here is that very same Greek word. So, unless you are willing to argue God's (Jehovah) glory is not eternal, indicating that there was once a time when our God (specifically, Jehovah) was not glorious, we have to accept that the word literally means "eternal". (Yes, I know the Greek word used here is "Theos" which is used to describe Jesus/ the Wordin John 1:1, However, if you examine Hebrews 1:1, you will see that Jehovah is titled "Theos" as well. Hebrews 1:1

NWT - Hebrews 1:1 "Long ago God (Theos) spoke to our forefathers by means of the prophets on many occasions and in many ways."

They then cite many Old Testament verses of (specifically) Jehovah speaking to prophets. Verses they list are Exodus 24:3, Numbers 12:8, and Jeremiah 7:25 - clearly indicating that "Theos" can be used for "Jehovah".This being said, it is entirely just to make this argument regarding Jehovah's glory being eternal).

So, having established the true meaning of the word eternal/everlasting in these verses, let's move on to the bigger difference between NKJV and NWT. The word that the NWT uses for "cutting-off" and the NKJV uses for "punishment" is the word "kolasin". The world literally translates to "punishment, torment". Nowhere does this word have the meaning, "cutting-off". Watchtower says for this word in Matthew 25:46, "That is, from life. Lit., "lopping off; pruning." This is flat out WRONG and dishonest. EXAMINE this verse under two different translations:

NWT - 1 John 4:18, "There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts fear out, because fear *restrains us* (kolasin). Indeed, the one who is fearful has not been made perfect in love."

NKJV - 1 John 4:18, "There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves *torment* (kolasin). But he who fears has not been made perfect in love".

Now, what I don't see is the NWT being consistent in their translations (more like interpretations!) and saying, "... because fear prunes us" or "... because fear lops us off". That is because fear torments us. I wouldn't even argue that fear cuts us off - indeed it does hold us back and restrains us from fully receiving all that God has for us - but that isn't what this verse is saying! It is saying that fear kolasin us! It torments us!

If we now go back to Matthew 25:46, and read it with this understanding, that there are some who will go into kolasin aionion, that is eternal (like God's glory) punishment (or even torment), then we have here grounds for a Biblical argument, Biblical evidence, and a Biblical basis for the existence of an eternal, conscious Hell.

9

Does the Watchtower favor interpretation over translation, especially in the case of Exodus 15:3?

by Poppy520 in

exodus 15:3, "the lord is a man of war: the lord is his name.

" kjv, esv, asv.. exodus 15:3, "jehovah is a powerful warrior.

jehovah is his name.

Poppy520

Exodus 15:3, "The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name." KJV, ESV, ASV.

Exodus 15:3, "Jehovah is a powerful warrior. Jehovah is his name." NWT as well as many others including NIV.

Exodus 15:3, "The LORD is a man of war, the LORD [is] his name." Interlinear.

I found that, the literal translation is indeed, "man of war" as the word used for "man" here is "’îš" which literally means, "man/male/human" not only according to online resources but as well as a Jewish brother who speaks Hebrew as his native tongue.

So, this being said, the literal translation is indeed "man of war" and not "warrior" - this is a fact. Although a "man of war" is indeed a "warrior", translating this phrase to "warrior" would be an interpretation because of what the original text says which could be considered altering scripture or being untrue to the original Hebrew. It cannot be argued that this is not an interpretation, it is clearly one.

If YHWH/Jehovah is called a "man of war", this could either be literal or a dangerous metaphor which could be taken as literal if the doctrine of the Trinity is false, which poses a problem if Christ is not seen as a Third Part. If Christ is seen as a Deity, then this verse harmonizes in favor of the Trinity in saying that "YHWH is a *man* of war", which the majority (that I am not favoring as neither true or untrue) argue that Jesus was fully human and fully God.

Is it fair to interpret "man of war" as "warrior" or is that being untrue to the original Hebrew? Because many arguments for the Trinity lie fully in interpretation and speculation, for whether it is has legitimate scriptural basis or not.

If some translations of the Bible are relying on interpretation (not just the NWT), does that pose a problem for other places of the Bible that have been translated in favor of interpretation? I am not attempting to favor NKJV or KJV but am favoring the literal, interlinear scripts - the original Hebrew.

**I am not arguing one way or the other, in favor of either but simply looking for different viewpoints**