Posts by pizzahut2023

81

Careful what you wish for! Regarding Jehovah in the New Testament

by pizzahut2023 in

ok i'll bite.. let's say for a moment that jehovah's witnesses are right, and that the nt autographs (the originals) contained the tetragrammaton.let's say that the nt writers always wrote "jehovah" in greek (iexoba, as the witnesses spell it currently) when they quoted the hebrew scriptures, whether they quoted from the hebrew version or the septuagint, and jehovah's name appeared on the quote.

let's say that the original septuagint always had iexoba whenever they were referring to jehovah.then we have that the original septuagint said in psalms 101:26-28 the following:"at the beginning it was you, o jehovah, who founded the earth, and the heavens are works of your hands.

they will perish, but you will endure, and they will all become old like a garment.

pizzahut2023

How can the Watchtower Society reconcile Isaiah 44:24 with Hebrews 1:10?

By ignoring it. I could not find any references to them even attempting to explain that.

196

would you be more happy not knowing what you now know?

by ExBethelitenowPIMA in

a good question is would you be more happy not knowing what you now know?.

were you more happy pimi?

are all the pimis more happy than the the pimos or the pomos?.

pizzahut2023

the more scientific discoveries there are the more science supports the Bible

Uh... no The Bible is totally, 100%, completely wrong on many many scientific things.

For example:

The Bible TWICE implies that Pi (the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter) is EXACTLY 3.

Not 3.14... not 3.1... but 3.000000000000000000000000....

The two texts are

(1 Kings 7:23) 23 Then he made the Sea of cast metal. It was circular in shape, 10 cubits from brim to brim and 5 cubits high, and it took a measuring line 30 cubits long to encircle it. . .

(2 Chronicles 4:2) 2 He made the Sea of cast metal. It was circular in shape, 10 cubits from brim to brim and 5 cubits high, and it took a measuring line 30 cubits long to encircle it.
The Bible also TWICE says that bats are birds...

The Watchtower says that the word used in the text can mean birds or flying things... and that is true, but only on one of them. On the second one, the word used ONLY means birds...

(Leviticus 11:13-19) . . .“‘And these are what YOU will loathe among the flying creatures. They should not be eaten. They are a loathsome thing: the eagle and the osprey and the black vulture, 14 and the red kite and the black kite according to its kind, 15 and every raven according to its kind, 16 and the ostrich and the owl and the gull and the falcon according to its kind, 17 and the little owl and the cormorant and the long-eared owl, 18 and the swan and the pelican and the vulture, 19 and the stork, the heron according to its kind, and the hoopoe and the bat.

(Deuteronomy 14:11-18) . . .“Any clean bird YOU may eat. 12 But these are the ones of which YOU must not eat: the eagle and the osprey and the black vulture, 13 and the red kite and the black kite and the glede according to its kind; 14 and every raven according to its kind; 15 and the ostrich and the owl and the gull and the falcon according to its kind; 16 the little owl and the long-eared owl and the swan, 17 and the pelican and the vulture and the cormorant, 18 and the stork and the heron according to its kind, and the hoopoe and the bat.

The Bible often implies that the Earth is flat (which is why if you go to a flat Earth Facebook group, you will notice that a lot of the members are hardcore Bible believers).

(Daniel 4:20) 20 “‘The tree that you saw that grew great and became strong, whose top reached the heavens and was visible to all the earth. . .

(Matthew 4:8) . . .Again the Devil took him along to an unusually high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. . .
How can a tree be visible to all the earth unless the Earth is flat? How can all the kingdoms of the world be visible from an "unusually high mountain" unless the Earth is flat?

No matter how high you go, on a round Earth, only half of the Earth is visible at any given position and moment!
And many other examples. You just haven't really read your Bible in detail.

81

Careful what you wish for! Regarding Jehovah in the New Testament

by pizzahut2023 in

ok i'll bite.. let's say for a moment that jehovah's witnesses are right, and that the nt autographs (the originals) contained the tetragrammaton.let's say that the nt writers always wrote "jehovah" in greek (iexoba, as the witnesses spell it currently) when they quoted the hebrew scriptures, whether they quoted from the hebrew version or the septuagint, and jehovah's name appeared on the quote.

let's say that the original septuagint always had iexoba whenever they were referring to jehovah.then we have that the original septuagint said in psalms 101:26-28 the following:"at the beginning it was you, o jehovah, who founded the earth, and the heavens are works of your hands.

they will perish, but you will endure, and they will all become old like a garment.

pizzahut2023

Whenever the WT translators saw "Jehovah" in an OT quote, they inserted it into the New Testament where that quote appeared EXCEPT where it was talking about Jesus.
Then they rendered it "Lord."

Actually no... Many times they do put "Jehovah" even though the quote refers to Jesus.

Examples are:

(Matthew 3:3) . . .This, in fact, is the one spoken of through Isaiah the prophet in these words: “Listen! Someone is crying out in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of Jehovah, YOU people! Make his roads straight.. . .
(Mark 1:1-3) . . .The] beginning of the good news about Jesus Christ: 2 Just as it is written in Isaiah the prophet: “(Look! I am sending forth my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way;) 3 listen! someone is crying out in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of Jehovah, YOU people, make his roads straight,’”
(Luke 1:17) 17 Also, he will go before him with E·liʹjah’s spirit and power, to turn back the hearts of fathers to children and the disobedient ones to the practical wisdom of righteous ones, to get ready for Jehovah a prepared people.”
(Luke 1:76) . . .But as for you, young child, you will be called a prophet of the Most High, for you will go in advance before Jehovah to make his ways ready,

Who actually came and walked the Earth? Jesus, not Jehovah. So why would John prepare Jehovah's road if Jesus would be the one walking it?

Here it would totally make sense that the original NT used "Lord", because in my opinion putting "Jehovah" in there actually is more trinitarian than putting "Lord".

Same with Romans 10:13

(Romans 10:13) 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”
If you look at the context, Romans 10 is talking about Jesus...

Verses 11-14, if you read them carefully, link up. The person who you have to put faith in (verse 11, Jesus) is the same person who's name you have to call (verse 13, Jesus).

But if the Watchtower insists that verse 13 is Jehovah, then they have unwittingly said that Jesus = Jehovah.

So the text ends up being more trinitarian than if they had just kept "Lord".

But then... they chicken out when it comes to putting "Jehovah" in Hebrews 1:10 and 1 Peter 2:3.

81

Careful what you wish for! Regarding Jehovah in the New Testament

by pizzahut2023 in

ok i'll bite.. let's say for a moment that jehovah's witnesses are right, and that the nt autographs (the originals) contained the tetragrammaton.let's say that the nt writers always wrote "jehovah" in greek (iexoba, as the witnesses spell it currently) when they quoted the hebrew scriptures, whether they quoted from the hebrew version or the septuagint, and jehovah's name appeared on the quote.

let's say that the original septuagint always had iexoba whenever they were referring to jehovah.then we have that the original septuagint said in psalms 101:26-28 the following:"at the beginning it was you, o jehovah, who founded the earth, and the heavens are works of your hands.

they will perish, but you will endure, and they will all become old like a garment.

pizzahut2023

Sure, they do the rebuttal but they don't dare put "Jehovah" in those texts. They chickened out and put "Lord".

I can't imagine how they would explain "Jehovah" being in Hebrews 1:10 in their Bibles.

Just FYI, it's in many many J versions. I believe Hutter's (J7) has "Jehovah" in there.

81

Careful what you wish for! Regarding Jehovah in the New Testament

by pizzahut2023 in

ok i'll bite.. let's say for a moment that jehovah's witnesses are right, and that the nt autographs (the originals) contained the tetragrammaton.let's say that the nt writers always wrote "jehovah" in greek (iexoba, as the witnesses spell it currently) when they quoted the hebrew scriptures, whether they quoted from the hebrew version or the septuagint, and jehovah's name appeared on the quote.

let's say that the original septuagint always had iexoba whenever they were referring to jehovah.then we have that the original septuagint said in psalms 101:26-28 the following:"at the beginning it was you, o jehovah, who founded the earth, and the heavens are works of your hands.

they will perish, but you will endure, and they will all become old like a garment.

pizzahut2023

Ok I'll bite.

Let's say for a moment that Jehovah's Witnesses are right, and that the NT autographs (the originals) contained the Tetragrammaton.

Let's say that the NT writers ALWAYS wrote "Jehovah" in Greek (Iexoba, as the Witnesses spell it currently) when they quoted the Hebrew Scriptures, whether they quoted from the Hebrew version or the Septuagint, and Jehovah's Name appeared on the quote. Let's say that the original Septuagint ALWAYS had Iexoba whenever they were referring to Jehovah.

Then we have that the original Septuagint said in Psalms 101:26-28 the following:

"At the beginning it was you, O Jehovah, who founded the earth, and the heavens are works of your hands. They will perish, but you will endure, and they will all become old like a garment. Like clothing you will change them, and they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will not fail."

Then, appropriately, Hebrews 1:10-12 would read

10 And: “At the beginning, O Jehovah, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands. 11 They will perish, but you will remain; and just like a garment, they will all wear out, 12 and you will wrap them up just as a cloak, as a garment, and they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will never come to an end.”

What about this other scripture?

Psalms 32:9 in the "original" Septuagint would have read

O taste, and see that Jehovah is kind, happy the man who hopes in Him.

And therefore, the "original" NT would have HAD to have said

(1 Peter 2:3, 4) 3 provided you have tasted that Jehovah is kind. 4 As you come to Him, a living stone rejected by men but chosen, precious to God,

Oops!

What have we done? Says the Watchtower.

We have called the Son Jehovah!!

The New World Translation suddenly here backpedals really really hard on their statement that the Septuagint contained "Jehovah" and that the NT writers had NO CHOICE but to respect the name and put it whenever they quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures where the name was found!

Actually, this is what they do currently!

They do NOT follow their own rule, their own statement, with regards to "Jehovah" in the Septuagint and/or the New Testament when it does not suit their needs/preconceived notions!

Hebrews 1:10 and 1 Peter 2:3 in the New World Translation contain "Lord", NOT "Jehovah", because it would put them in an awkward position, theologically speaking.

Let's go a bit further.

Let's say that the Peshitta is a closer version to the original than the Greek New Testament.

Let's say that every time the Peshitta says "MarYah", it means "The Lord Jehovah", as it does throughout the entire Old Testament.

Then we would have MANUSCRIPT EVIDENCE from the 6th century that Luke 2:11 reads

(Luke 2:11) 11 For today there was born to you in David’s city a savior, who is Christ The Lord Jehovah.

If Jehovah's Witnesses are right, then let's pack our bags and call it a day. Jesus is Jehovah Himself!

If Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong (my opinion), then let's pack our bags and call it a day. They changed the Bible to suit their needs. Heck, every single Bible translator has in some way modified the Bible, so the Bible is not trustworthy, and therefore the Witnesses and every Bible-based religion is false. Let's all be atheists!

Check. Mate.

34

A New List of the J Versions and Where to Find them

by pizzahut2023 in

hi!i am doing a very long and exhaustive study of the "j" versions, based off the new study edition of the new world translation:https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/appendix-c/divine-name-new-testament-2/.

this list has about 300 sources, mostly bibles, that the jehovah's witnesses have used to "justify" their insertion of "jehovah" into the new testament.i am doing an excel spreadsheet of where to find digitized copies of these j versions and then some notes on them.. they contain some really interesting renderings, some that would make a jehovah's witness's head spin!for example, in j29:the original aramaic new testament in plain english (an american translation of the aramaic new testament), by glenn david bauscher, seventh edition, australia, 2012which you can find here:.

http://buffaloriverforge.com/peshitta/nt%20peshitta%207th%20ed%20plain%20text%20unnoted.pdfin luke 2:11 it says:.

pizzahut2023

Acts 9:1

Acts 9:5

Acts 9:6

Acts 9:10

Acts 9:11

Acts 9:15

Acts 9:27

34

A New List of the J Versions and Where to Find them

by pizzahut2023 in

hi!i am doing a very long and exhaustive study of the "j" versions, based off the new study edition of the new world translation:https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/appendix-c/divine-name-new-testament-2/.

this list has about 300 sources, mostly bibles, that the jehovah's witnesses have used to "justify" their insertion of "jehovah" into the new testament.i am doing an excel spreadsheet of where to find digitized copies of these j versions and then some notes on them.. they contain some really interesting renderings, some that would make a jehovah's witness's head spin!for example, in j29:the original aramaic new testament in plain english (an american translation of the aramaic new testament), by glenn david bauscher, seventh edition, australia, 2012which you can find here:.

http://buffaloriverforge.com/peshitta/nt%20peshitta%207th%20ed%20plain%20text%20unnoted.pdfin luke 2:11 it says:.

pizzahut2023

I continue with my analysis of J7, aka the Hutter Polyglot from 1599.

It's one thing to have one text or another identify Jesus with Jehovah, but it's a whole other thing to have a whole chapter identifying Jesus with Jehovah, again and again! Well, that's J7 in Acts 9 for ya!

I quote the NWT and then J7:

NWT:

(Acts 9:1) . . .But Saul, still breathing threat and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest

J7:
But Saul, still breathing threat and murder against the disciples of JEHOVAH, went to the high priest
NWT:

(Acts 9:5) 5 He asked: “Who are you, Lord?” He said: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
J7:
(Acts 9:5) 5 He asked: “Who are you, Lord?” And JEHOVAH said: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.

NWT:

(Acts 9:6) . . .But get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”
J7:
He, fearful and trembling, said: Lord, what would you like me to do? And JEHOVAH said: "get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."

NWT:

(Acts 9:10) . . .There was a disciple named An·a·niʹas in Damascus, and the Lord said to him in a vision: “An·a·niʹas!” He said: “Here I am, Lord.”
J7:
(Acts 9:10) . . .There was a disciple named An·a·niʹas in Damascus, and JEHOVAH said to him in a vision: “An·a·niʹas!” He said: “Here I am, Lord.”

NWT:
(Acts 9:11) 11 The Lord said to him: “Get up, go to the street called Straight, and look for a man named Saul, from Tarsus, at the house of Judas. For look! he is praying,
J7: JEHOVAH said to him: “Get up, go to the street called Straight, and look for a man named Saul, from Tarsus, at the house of Judas. For look! he is praying,
NWT:
(Acts 9:15) . . .But the Lord said to him: “Go! because this man is a chosen vessel to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel.
J7:

But JEHOVAH said to him: “Go! because this man is a chosen vessel to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel.
NWT:
(Acts 9:27) 27 So Barʹna·bas came to his aid and led him to the apostles, and he told them in detail how on the road he had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken to him, and how in Damascus he had spoken boldly in the name of Jesus. . .
J7:

(Acts 9:27) 27 So Barʹna·bas came to his aid and led him to the apostles, and he told them in detail how on the road he had seen JEHOVAH, and that he had spoken to him, and how in Damascus he had spoken boldly in the name of Jesus. . .

The Tetragrammaton appears in verses 31, 35, and 42 of Acts 9 in J7, and in vs 31, the Watchtower agrees with Hutter and puts "Jehovah" in there, but in the other verses puts "Lord". However, in verses 35 and 42 it's not immediately obvious which "Lord" is being spoken about so it's not an obvious identification of Jesus with Jehovah.

The most obvious (and shocking) one is Acts 9:5, for sure.

In another post I will put up the pictures so you can see for yourselves.

34

A New List of the J Versions and Where to Find them

by pizzahut2023 in

hi!i am doing a very long and exhaustive study of the "j" versions, based off the new study edition of the new world translation:https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/appendix-c/divine-name-new-testament-2/.

this list has about 300 sources, mostly bibles, that the jehovah's witnesses have used to "justify" their insertion of "jehovah" into the new testament.i am doing an excel spreadsheet of where to find digitized copies of these j versions and then some notes on them.. they contain some really interesting renderings, some that would make a jehovah's witness's head spin!for example, in j29:the original aramaic new testament in plain english (an american translation of the aramaic new testament), by glenn david bauscher, seventh edition, australia, 2012which you can find here:.

http://buffaloriverforge.com/peshitta/nt%20peshitta%207th%20ed%20plain%20text%20unnoted.pdfin luke 2:11 it says:.

pizzahut2023

Pardon my being obviously obtuse, but could someone kindly explain the interest in these MSS ? of what significance are they to our determining what was originally written all those Centuries before these Texts appeared ?

no worries!

Firstly, these are not (with maybe only the first one) manuscripts, as they were not handwritten, they're all from 1385 onwards, so there was printing already.

These are Bible versions that various people have made that agree with the Watchtower on one thing: "Jehovah" should be in the New Testament.

That's where the similarity ends. WHERE in the New Testament should "Jehovah" go, that's a whole different story. These 300 versions all have different opinions on where "Jehovah" should go or where it shouldn't, and the vast majority of them are very, very, very trinitarian.

They put "Jehovah" in places where the Watchtower would never ever agree with, because it would make the text extremely trinitarian, like in Luke 2:11. "Jehovah" wasn't born, it was Jesus who was born, but many of these J versions say that "Jehovah" was born.

So the interest of this study is to show the reader how utterly corrupt the New World Translation is, that it neglects 5000 or more New Testament Greek manuscripts and favors Bibles, some even from 2012 (!!!), that agree with what it says instead.

None of the existing 5000 greek manuscripts of the New Testament ever mention "Jehovah". So the evidence points to the autographs, the original NT, not having the tetragrammaton in it. The Watchtower doesn't accept that, and uses these Bibles to justify inserting (they call it "restoring") Jehovah into the New Testament.

34

A New List of the J Versions and Where to Find them

by pizzahut2023 in

hi!i am doing a very long and exhaustive study of the "j" versions, based off the new study edition of the new world translation:https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/appendix-c/divine-name-new-testament-2/.

this list has about 300 sources, mostly bibles, that the jehovah's witnesses have used to "justify" their insertion of "jehovah" into the new testament.i am doing an excel spreadsheet of where to find digitized copies of these j versions and then some notes on them.. they contain some really interesting renderings, some that would make a jehovah's witness's head spin!for example, in j29:the original aramaic new testament in plain english (an american translation of the aramaic new testament), by glenn david bauscher, seventh edition, australia, 2012which you can find here:.

http://buffaloriverforge.com/peshitta/nt%20peshitta%207th%20ed%20plain%20text%20unnoted.pdfin luke 2:11 it says:.

pizzahut2023

John 20:20 in the Hutter Bible is Trinitarian. The Watchtower says that "HaAdon" is exclusively used in the Masoretic text to refer to Jehovah.

Surely Hutter knew this. And yet, he still decided to call Jesus "HaAdon" (The True Lord) in John 20:20.

34

A New List of the J Versions and Where to Find them

by pizzahut2023 in

hi!i am doing a very long and exhaustive study of the "j" versions, based off the new study edition of the new world translation:https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/appendix-c/divine-name-new-testament-2/.

this list has about 300 sources, mostly bibles, that the jehovah's witnesses have used to "justify" their insertion of "jehovah" into the new testament.i am doing an excel spreadsheet of where to find digitized copies of these j versions and then some notes on them.. they contain some really interesting renderings, some that would make a jehovah's witness's head spin!for example, in j29:the original aramaic new testament in plain english (an american translation of the aramaic new testament), by glenn david bauscher, seventh edition, australia, 2012which you can find here:.

http://buffaloriverforge.com/peshitta/nt%20peshitta%207th%20ed%20plain%20text%20unnoted.pdfin luke 2:11 it says:.

pizzahut2023

The Hutter Polyglot also has Aramaic, and in the Aramaic, in Luke 2:11, Hutter is again very trinitarian:

Not only does he put the Tetragrammaton, but he puts MarYah. So Luke 2:11 could read as "Jehovah the Lord Yah the Messiah was born".