Thanks Smiddy for the thread. Quite interesting to read eveyone's take on the subject. Terry, thanks for your contribution. Good manners rule! Not only what you say, but how you say it. I also second Blondie's contribution. Discussion - Dialogue - Debate. In a perfect world that would be the answer, similar to the debates on BBC, sometimes heated, yet civilized.
Posts by Vidqun
-
51Is this a discussion forum or a debating forum , which is it ?
by smiddy indo you get confused sometimes whether this site is a discussion forum or a debating forum ?.
just asking.
whats your thoughts.. smiddy.
-
-
-
114
What is truth?
by Heisenberg inwell, i have been lurking on this site for several months and i recently decided to join as a member.
i have made several observations and would like to make a few comments.. first, i am perplexed by the attitude of many on this site that are either former or active (but apostate) jws.
they seem to have a strong hatred for the wts and also for rank and file jws.
-
-
Vidqun
Richard, why is it that churches in general do not fall back on the two-witness rule? First of all, it is part of the Mosaic Law, which had been cancelled by Jesus (cf. Col. 2:13, 14). Secondly, if you look at the context where it was used by both Jesus and Paul, you will see that it has nothing to do with crime, especially pedophilia. Here’s the scriptures. Note the context:
15 Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established.
(Mat 18:15-16 NWT)
11 I have become unreasonable. YOU compelled me to, for I ought to have been recommended by YOU. For I did not prove to be inferior to [YOUR] superfine apostles in a single thing, even if I am nothing. (2Co 12:11 NWT)
20 For I am afraid that somehow, when I arrive, I may find YOU not as I could wish and I may prove to be to YOU not as YOU could wish, but, instead, there should somehow be strife, jealousy, cases of anger, contentions, backbitings, whisperings, cases of being puffed up, disorders.
21 Perhaps, when I come again, my God might humiliate me among YOU, and I might mourn over many of those who formerly sinned but have not repented over their uncleanness and fornication and loose conduct that they have practiced.
NWT 2 Corinthians 13:1 This is the third time I am coming to YOU. At the mouth of two witnesses or of three every matter must be established.
2 I have said previously and, as if present the second time and yet absent now, I say in advance to those who have sinned before and to all the rest, that if ever I come again I will not spare,
3 since YOU are seeking a proof of Christ speaking in me, [Christ] who is not weak toward YOU but is powerful among YOU. (2Co 12:20-13:3 NWT)
-
114
What is truth?
by Heisenberg inwell, i have been lurking on this site for several months and i recently decided to join as a member.
i have made several observations and would like to make a few comments.. first, i am perplexed by the attitude of many on this site that are either former or active (but apostate) jws.
they seem to have a strong hatred for the wts and also for rank and file jws.
-
-
Vidqun
Why is the issue of shunning a problem? If the bible was very clear about who should be shunned and how this should be done, would that be more acceptable to you? Human society has always shunned people that do not conform to the rules. If you commit a crime, you may be punished by being sent to jail and excluded from society until you 'repent' by changing your attitude. Who determines these rules? In many lands, adultery and homosexuality are still punishable by death or jail. It is up to each group of people to decide the rules and the consequences for breaking them. Wasn't the great schism of the Catholic church an act of shunning?
Firstly, Paul did not disfellowship those that criticized him, i.e., the so-called “superfine apostles.” Read 2 Cor. 13:10 to see what he had in mind. Interestingly, Paul asked whether some of them had started ruling prematurely (cf. 1 Cor. 4:8)? Secondly, the GB claims to be “the faithful and discreet slave.” Would you say “judgment” is part of the commission of “the faithful and discreet slave”? By the way, is God not the ultimate judge, and did he not defer judgement to the Son (Acts 17:31)?
Allow me to list the main scriptures the GB of JWs apply to judge, condemn and disfellowship individuals. Judge for yourself whether these are applied correctly. Note the one in 2 John deals with the antichrist. How many of those do you know?
15 Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established.
17 If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector. (Mat 18:15-17 NWT)
9 In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators,
10 not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, YOU would actually have to get out of the world.
11 But now I am writing YOU to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.
(1 Cor 5:9-11 NWT)
7 For many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
8 Look out for yourselves, that YOU do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that YOU may obtain a full reward.
9 Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son.
10 If anyone comes to YOU and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into YOUR homes or say a greeting to him.
11 For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works. (2 John 1:7-11 NWT)
9 I wrote something to the congregation, but Diotrephes, who likes to have the first place among them, does not receive anything from us with respect.
10 That is why, if I come, I will call to remembrance his works which he goes on doing, chattering about us with wicked words. Also, not being content with these things, neither does he himself receive the brothers with respect, and those who are wanting to receive them he tries to hinder and to throw out of the congregation.
11 Beloved one, be an imitator, not of what is bad, but of what is good. He that does good originates with God. He that does bad has not seen God.
12 Demetrius has had witness borne to him by them all and by the truth itself. In fact, we, also, are bearing witness, and you know that the witness we give is true.
(3 John 1:9-12 NWT)
-
62
Your explanation for a total contradiction in the New World Translation.
by Johnny Brown in"for if you publicly declare with your mouth that jesus is lord,+ and exercise faith in your heart that god raised him up from the dead, you will be saved.
10 for with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration+ for salvation.
11 for the scripture says: no one who rests his faith on him will be disappointed.+
-
-
Vidqun
Jhine, my guess would be that they used the Greek Septuagint most of the time. In most copies the Tetragrammaton had been replaced by kyrios and theos, which would have been part of the Hellenization program instituted by the Seleucids, which the Maccabees fought against. By then Hebrew was effectively a dead language. Aramaic and Greek were spoken by the man in the street. That's why the Aramaic Targums came into being. Mishnaic Hebrew was still spoken by the rabbis and priests, but not understood by the masses. Very few could read or write Biblical Hebrew. The apostle Paul had a rabbinic background, so he would resort under the few. We know he was interested in "scrolls and (ancient) parchments" (similar to the Dead Sea Scrolls, no doubt), for he tells Timothy to bring them to him (2 Tim. 4:13). -
62
Your explanation for a total contradiction in the New World Translation.
by Johnny Brown in"for if you publicly declare with your mouth that jesus is lord,+ and exercise faith in your heart that god raised him up from the dead, you will be saved.
10 for with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration+ for salvation.
11 for the scripture says: no one who rests his faith on him will be disappointed.+
-
-
Vidqun
For those that are interested is this age-old dispute, you should look into the Arian Controversy. According to the evidence, I, personally, would have sided with Arius, which would make me an Arian, therefore a heretic in the eyes of the Church:
The Arian controversy describes several controversies between the priest and theologian Arius and the Church Father, Bishop Athanasius, related to Christology which divided the Catholic Church from before the Council of Nicea in 325 to after the Council of Constantinople in 381 into two opposing theological factions. There was no formal schism, but instead it remained an internal conflict in the Church. The most important of these controversies concerned the substantial relationship between God the Father and Jesus Christ.
The early history of the controversy must be pieced together from about 35 documents found in various sources. The Trinintarian historian Socrates of Constantinople reports that Arius first became controversial under the bishop Athanasius of Alexandria, when Arian made the following syllogism: he said, "If the Father begat the Son, he that was begotten had a beginning of existence: and from this it is evident, that there was a time when the Son was not. It therefore necessarily follows, that he had his substance from nothing".
Bishop Alexander of Alexandria was criticised for his slow reaction against Arius. Like his predecessor Dionysius, he has been charged with vacillation. The question that Arius raised had been left unsettled two generations previously. Therefore Alexander allowed the controversy to continue until he felt that it had become dangerous to the peace of the Church. Then he called a council of bishops and sought their advice. Once they decided against Arius, Alexander delayed no longer. He deposed Arius from his office, and excommunicated both him and his supporters, etc. (See Wikipedia)
-
62
Your explanation for a total contradiction in the New World Translation.
by Johnny Brown in"for if you publicly declare with your mouth that jesus is lord,+ and exercise faith in your heart that god raised him up from the dead, you will be saved.
10 for with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration+ for salvation.
11 for the scripture says: no one who rests his faith on him will be disappointed.+
-
-
Vidqun
Johnny, I think it is too soon for you to go off your meds. -
62
Your explanation for a total contradiction in the New World Translation.
by Johnny Brown in"for if you publicly declare with your mouth that jesus is lord,+ and exercise faith in your heart that god raised him up from the dead, you will be saved.
10 for with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration+ for salvation.
11 for the scripture says: no one who rests his faith on him will be disappointed.+
-
-
Vidqun
I concur with what Leaving_quietly said. I thought a few additional thoughts might be in order. As to their translation “Jehovah,” many comments have been made and many books and articles written. Here the Committee became stuck in the time warp of the early twenties when the name “Jehovah” was popular. In the mean time this name has gone out of vogue to be replaced by “Yahweh.”
What might assist you in your studies, is taking note of the style of NT writers. In this case, Paul quotes from a variety of verses in the OT. Verse 11 is a quote from Isaiah 28:16 (LXX → Greek Septuagint), which points to the Messiah. As has been pointed out, verse 13 is a quote from Joel (2:32 LXX), indicating YHWH. However, in our current copies of the LXX “lord” is used and not the Tetragrammaton.
If only the Committee stuck to their guns to only replace “lord” with the Tetragrammaton (= YHWH) at those places which are indicated as OT quotations. Unfortunately they decided to replace it in some instances where it is clearly not referring to the Tetragrammaton, e.g., the Lord’s day. Here the NT differentiates between the Lord’s (Jesus’) day, and the Lord’s (YHWH’s) day.
-
114
What is truth?
by Heisenberg inwell, i have been lurking on this site for several months and i recently decided to join as a member.
i have made several observations and would like to make a few comments.. first, i am perplexed by the attitude of many on this site that are either former or active (but apostate) jws.
they seem to have a strong hatred for the wts and also for rank and file jws.
-
-
Vidqun
Heisenberg, glad to see you're still around. What do you know about Christian neutrality (cf. James 4:4)? Are you aware that as a Witness, you're not even allowed to be a member of Y.M.C.A. You should not take sides in politics and you're not allowed to vote. As the saying goes, the Christian finds himself in the world, but is no part of the world (cf. John 18:36). Some spent years in jail because of their Christian neutrality. In Malawi the brothers and sisters had to endure torture and death for refusing to buy a political card.
Yes, the common excuse of the Witnesses is "they are part of the UN and OSCE in order to do good to the brothers." But what about one’s Christian neutrality? Is it only applicable to some (the R&F) and not to others (the leaders)? Is that not a clear case of double standards? You say you’ve read CoC, then you should know about the Mexico-Malawi scandal.
A good example is the nation of Israel. What happened to them when they made alliances with the nations? The prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah had a lot to say about it.
Do yourself a favor and study what the publications have to say about Christian neutrality. See who they identify as “the disgusting thing causing desolation” (cf. Dan. 11:31; Matt. 24:15) and “the beast that ascends out of the abyss” (cf. Rev. 17:8). The Revelation-Climax book (pp. 196 - 198) has a few very interesting paragraphs and illustrations on “the mark of the beast.” If you have access to the book, look it up.
So what do you think will happen when you confront the brothers with these enlightening facts (from their own publications). Yes, you’ve guessed it. You are disfellowshipped. Don’t you think there’s something wrong with an organization that is afraid of the truth?
-
114
What is truth?
by Heisenberg inwell, i have been lurking on this site for several months and i recently decided to join as a member.
i have made several observations and would like to make a few comments.. first, i am perplexed by the attitude of many on this site that are either former or active (but apostate) jws.
they seem to have a strong hatred for the wts and also for rank and file jws.
-
-
Vidqun
One must practice what one preaches. This is especially true of religion. If you find out a religious group says one thing and practices another, that would be hypocritical. E.g. if you call the UN "the disgusting thing causing desolation" and "the beast that ascends from the abyss" and you join them for the sake of a library card, there is something seriously wrong with your reasoning.
When they say they care about children and also protect the pedophiles that prey on them, then the time has come for you to examine yourself and your religion. Perhaps your religion is straying from the truth. What are you going to do about it? Are you going to go with the flow, or are you going to make your reservations known? By the way, if you choose to go with the flow, you will remain in good standing with the organization. However, if you choose to make your reservations known, you will be disfellowshipped.
-
27
How can I ever leave this cult?
by Julia Orwell ini've been out nearly two years but it's not out of me.
i am on school holidays now til february so i thought without work to worry about i can come off my medication.
i phased it slowly, starting in early november to avoid the physical side effects of coming down.
-
-
Vidqun
Hi Julia, good to hear from you. Do yourself a favor and try to seperate your meds regimen from the cult and its activities. Do not go off your meds completely. That's always a bad idea, not only for you but also for your loved ones. See your doctor and with his consent experiment by taking less, even halving the dose, until you find a middle course: minimum side-effects, maximun functionality. Unfortunately we are not be able to help those on the inside, until they decide to help themselves. Keep in mind, they believe they are God's gift to humanity, and that their ways are superior. So, in a very warped and twisted way they think they are doing good. We can only sympathize with them.