Posts by Vidqun

1

JWs conference centre in Denmark

by Vidqun in

this is a turnup for the books.

coincidence, or are they falling back to their roots?.

.

Vidqun

This is a turnup for the books. Coincidence, or are they falling back to their roots?

17

Where did Enoch go - God transferred him?

by Fisherman in

god did not take the lives of the wicked contemporaries of enoch, instead he took the life of enoch.

and that seems like a great injustice to deprive innocent enoch of life instead of killing the wicked.

—i said seems.. a man goes to get surgery but first they give him an opiate like narcotic and he falls asleep gladly and with pleasure and euphoria.

Vidqun

Here's the NET footnote of John 3:13. Quite comprehensive and gives the different readings (for those who have an interest in textual criticism):

tc Most witnesses, including a few important ones (A[*] Θ Ψ 050 ƒ1, 13 Û latt syc,p,h), have at the end of this verse "the one who is in heaven" (ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ho on en to ourano). A few others have variations on this phrase, such as "who was in heaven" (e syc), or "the one who is from heaven" (0141 pc sys). The witnesses normally considered the best, along with several others, lack the phrase in its entirety (î66, 75 ‌א‎‏‎ B L T Ws 083 086 33 1241 pc co). On the one hand, if the reading ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ is authentic it may suggest that while Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus he spoke of himself as in heaven even while he was on earth. If that is the case, one could see why variations from this hard saying arose: "who was in heaven," "the one who is from heaven," and omission of the clause. At the same time, such a saying could be interpreted (though with difficulty) as part of the narrator's comments rather than Jesus' statement to Nicodemus, alleviating the problem. And if v. Joh 3:13 was viewed in early times as the evangelist's statement, "the one who is in heaven" could have crept into the text through a marginal note. Other internal evidence suggests that this saying may be authentic. The adjectival participle, ὁ ὤν, is used in the Fourth Gospel more than any other NT book (though the Apocalypse comes in a close second), and frequently with reference to Jesus (Joh 1:18; Joh 6:46; Joh 8:47). It may be looking back to the LXX of Exo 3:14 (ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν). Especially since this exact construction is not necessary to communicate the location of the Son of Man, its presence in many witnesses here may suggest authenticity. Further, John uses the singular of οὐρανός (ouranos, "heaven") in all 18 instances of the word in this Gospel, and all but twice with the article (only Joh 1:32 and Joh 6:58 are anarthrous, and even in the latter there is significant testimony to the article). At the same time, the witnesses that lack this clause are very weighty and must not be discounted. Generally speaking, if other factors are equal, the reading of such MSS should be preferred. And internally, it could be argued that ὁ ὤν is the most concise way to speak of the Son of Man in heaven at that time (without the participle the point would be more ambiguous). Further, the articular singular οὐρανός is already used twice in this verse, thus sufficiently prompting scribes to add the same in the longer reading. This combination of factors suggests that ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ is not a genuine Johannism. Further intrinsic evidence against the longer reading relates to the evangelist's purposes: If he intended v. Joh 3:13 to be his own comments rather than Jesus' statement, his switch back to Jesus' words in v. Joh 3:14 (for the lifting up of the Son of Man is still seen as in the future) seems inexplicable. The reading "who is in heaven" thus seems to be too hard. All things considered, as intriguing as the longer reading is, it seems almost surely to have been a marginal gloss added inadvertently to the text in the process of transmission. For an argument in favor of the longer reading, see David Alan Black, "The Text of Joh 3:13, " GTJ 6 (1985): 49-66.

17

Where did Enoch go - God transferred him?

by Fisherman in

god did not take the lives of the wicked contemporaries of enoch, instead he took the life of enoch.

and that seems like a great injustice to deprive innocent enoch of life instead of killing the wicked.

—i said seems.. a man goes to get surgery but first they give him an opiate like narcotic and he falls asleep gladly and with pleasure and euphoria.

Vidqun

"By faith Enoch was taken up so that he did not see death, and he was not to be found because God took him up. For before his removal he had been commended as having pleased God" (Heb. 11:5 NET).

Jesus stated categorically: "No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven– the Son of Man" (John 3:13 NET).

According to a dictionary definition Gr. "taken up" means "removal to another place" or "of the taking up" or "taking away." The same dictionary gives two options for "death": 1) Natural death. 2) Death as a penalty (BDAG). That means he did not die a natural death or he was taken somewhere and kept in limbo. The latter would appeal to a Catholic. I would go for the first option according to the following: "And Enoch walked with God, and he was not; for God took him" (Gen. 5:24 JPS).

147

Smoking gun GB can’t get out of this one

by Mikejw in

here in 2022 if anyone says anything against the vaccines even a little bit you are almost apostate.. someone once mentioned all vaccinated sports stars collapsing and someone else said not to speak badly about the gb or by extension jehovah.. the gb can’t get out of this one, it’s gone too far.

it’s now the case that if you speak against the vaccines you are speaking against the gb and by extension jehovah .

Vidqun

Talking of patents, one cannot patent a natural occurring substance or organism (US Supreme Court).

That means the following are man-made:

147

Smoking gun GB can’t get out of this one

by Mikejw in

here in 2022 if anyone says anything against the vaccines even a little bit you are almost apostate.. someone once mentioned all vaccinated sports stars collapsing and someone else said not to speak badly about the gb or by extension jehovah.. the gb can’t get out of this one, it’s gone too far.

it’s now the case that if you speak against the vaccines you are speaking against the gb and by extension jehovah .

Vidqun

Even MSM is noticing:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1566353548983541761

147

Smoking gun GB can’t get out of this one

by Mikejw in

here in 2022 if anyone says anything against the vaccines even a little bit you are almost apostate.. someone once mentioned all vaccinated sports stars collapsing and someone else said not to speak badly about the gb or by extension jehovah.. the gb can’t get out of this one, it’s gone too far.

it’s now the case that if you speak against the vaccines you are speaking against the gb and by extension jehovah .

Vidqun

Bartolomeo, I prefer to think for myself, leaning on my own conscience and decision making ability. This is why: Isaiah (2:22 NET) warns: “Stop trusting in human beings, whose life’s breath is in their nostrils. For why should they be given special consideration? ”This is in line with Jeremiah’s quote (17:5):“This is what Jehovah has said, Cursed is the able-bodied man who puts his trust in earthling man and actually makes flesh his arm, and whose heart turns away from Jehovah himself.” Yes, governments, kings, religious leaders, important people and the super rich cannot be trusted. They do not have the interests of the people at heart, but are focused on their own interests. The psalmist reinforces the argument: “Do not put YOUR trust in nobles, Nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs. His spirit goes out, he goes back to his ground; In that day his thoughts do perish” (Ps. 146:3, 4). Or phrased differently: “Do not trust in princes, or in human beings, who cannot deliver!” (Ps. 146:3 NET). These scriptures are now more relevant than ever. Do not be a lemming and do not drink the Kool-aid.

147

Smoking gun GB can’t get out of this one

by Mikejw in

here in 2022 if anyone says anything against the vaccines even a little bit you are almost apostate.. someone once mentioned all vaccinated sports stars collapsing and someone else said not to speak badly about the gb or by extension jehovah.. the gb can’t get out of this one, it’s gone too far.

it’s now the case that if you speak against the vaccines you are speaking against the gb and by extension jehovah .

Vidqun

Bartolomeo, perhaps view this from another angle. Look at Rev. 6:8. The fourth living creature introduces a fourth charging horse: “And I saw, and, look! a pale horse; and the one seated upon it had the name Death. And Hades was closely following him. And authority was given them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with a long sword and with food shortage and with deadly plague and by the wild beasts of the earth” (Rev. 6:8). The wild beasts here does not refer wild animals, but governmental authorities, including their armies, navies and air forces, involved with warfare, blockades and sanctions, e.g., Beast from the earth (false prophet) and Beast from the abyss (scarlet-colored wild beast). These will be responsible for the death of a fourth of the world’s population. This they will accomplish with the help of war with a resulting famine, an acute energy crisis, a pre-planned endemic and population control through gene therapy. If this does apply to our time, the leaders of Jehovah’s Witnesses find themselves on the wrong side of the fence. It seems as though they have thrown their weight behind the beasts.

147

Smoking gun GB can’t get out of this one

by Mikejw in

here in 2022 if anyone says anything against the vaccines even a little bit you are almost apostate.. someone once mentioned all vaccinated sports stars collapsing and someone else said not to speak badly about the gb or by extension jehovah.. the gb can’t get out of this one, it’s gone too far.

it’s now the case that if you speak against the vaccines you are speaking against the gb and by extension jehovah .

Vidqun

29

Who really is the faithful and discreet slave?

by Fisherman in

“who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?” — math 24:45. according to jw, the faithful and discreet slave are the “anointed” men of the “governing body” of the jehovah’s witnesses religion..

Vidqun

Problem with this passage is few venture further with their reading. One of the GB commented concerning this passage. It's a 'hypothetical impossibility.' Unfortunately one cannot wish it away. It was added by Jesus for a reason, especially the part of 'beating the slaves' as well as 'the eating and drinking with cofirmed drunkards,' e.g., Babylon the Great (cf. Rev. 17:2). So, there is risk involved for anyone that insists on applying the passage to himself:

48 But if ever that evil slave should say in his heart, My master is delaying,
49 and should start to beat his fellow slaves and should eat and drink with the confirmed drunkards,
50 the master of that slave will come on a day that he does not expect and in an hour that he does not know,
51 and will punish him with the greatest severity and will assign him his part with the hypocrites. There is where [his] weeping and the gnashing of [his] teeth will be. (Matt. 24:48-51 NWT)

31

WHEN is the Kingdom of God coming?

by Fisherman in

when is the kingdom of god coming?.

on being asked by the pharisees when the kingdom of god was coming, he answered them: “the kingdom of god is not coming with paratherisis; 21 nor will people say, ‘see here!’ or, ‘there!’ for look!

the kingdom of god is in your midst.” —lu 17:20,21. .

Vidqun

If any Christian leader or wannebee comes up with a date, he/she is downright dishonest if measured by what Jesus said.

Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father. (Matt. 24:36)
Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father. (Mk. 13:32 NWT)