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

The Tetragrammaton it was certainly not in Jude 5. Nor anywhere in the NT.

It's a moot point for those who believe in the Trinity, it's just a "nod" to them if Jesus was in the text.

Trinity believers won't see a difference if it's "Jesus", "The Lord", or "God", or even, "Jehovah".

It's only non-Trinity believers who will have a huge issue if it's "Jesus".

Just my two cents.

26

It's official: JW celeb Nicolas King publicly out

by neat blue dog in

after years of speculation, jw movie star & chorus member nicolas king, who ironically starred as the bad guy espousing homosexuality in a jw movie, has coupled up with his performing partner and also performed in a church for pride month.. .

.

pizzahut2023

Found the exact moment when "it" happened. Beard and look at the comment about the band-aid.

26

It's official: JW celeb Nicolas King publicly out

by neat blue dog in

after years of speculation, jw movie star & chorus member nicolas king, who ironically starred as the bad guy espousing homosexuality in a jw movie, has coupled up with his performing partner and also performed in a church for pride month.. .

.

pizzahut2023

You should have used THIS pic as "proof".

Good for him!!

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

LOL you backpedalled so hard!! Now you would LOVE it if this hypothetical scenario would read "Lord" instead of "Jehovah" in this supposed "original" Septuagint!!

The question is what did the Greek of this Psalm say before the divine name was removed? The Greek version of this Psalm can be read as a Messianic Psalm, and the Lord in verse 26 is the Lord Messiah rather than YHWH. This is indicated in verse 24 where is says “he answered him”. Who answered who? This is apparently YHWH and Jesus speaking to each other.

I read both the LXX and the MT versions and if you see the MT version has "Jehovah" or "Jah" EVERY single time "Lord" is read in the LXX.

The LXX and MT diverge in reading in vss 23-24 (MT) (24-25 in LXX), but and with the exception of "Oh Lord/Jehovah", the LXX and MT go back to saying the same thing afterwards.

The ENTIRE chapter talks about Jehovah, and even the verse by the context (referring to that "Lord" as the Creator) points towards this hypothetical "original" LXX reading "Jehovah" there!

In any case, the WT readily admits that the verse in Psalms is referring to Jehovah. So they have to do mental gymnastics to say that the text applies to Jehovah in the OT but applies to Jesus in the NT, but it doesn't make Jehovah equal to Jesus...

73

"Jehovah" In The New Testament.

by LostintheFog1999 in

i see they have updated their list of translations or versions where some form of yhwh or jhvh appears in the new testament.. https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/appendix-c/divine-name-new-testament-2/.

pizzahut2023

The scholars who argue that the original NT contained the divine name have various faith backgrounds that don’t seem to impinge on the matter one way or another. George Howard, Lloyd Gaston, David Trobisch and others argue for the divine name in the divine name in the original NT on historical rather than religious grounds. They would probably agree that the text has been corrupted in various ways because they are not committed to upholding the overall integrity of the NT text.

Whether your position is right or it is wrong, the Witnesses lose.

If your position is right, then there is absolutely no basis at all to believe any word in the entire Bible. The NT was promptly and so thoroughly corrupted that a central point of belief, the nature of God, was changed and forever changed the history of the church.

5000 manuscripts, the most well attested of ancient texts... means nothing. It still was corrupted within 50 years.

If your position is wrong, then the Witnesses changed the Bible to fit their ideology, and are therefore condemned by the Bible itself.

From a purely historical viewpoint, and given the historical evidence available to us, I think that the NT autographs did NOT contain the Tetragrammaton.

Up till 2018 when it was finally published and analyzed, there were tantalizing news of a possible First Century Mark.

Then it was published and lo and behold, it had Nomina Sacra. And it was 3rd Century.

If it had been 1st century, the Watchtower would have probably then argued that we need more 1st Century manuscripts to confirm either way, whereas 99.9% of NT textual critics would have said "This pretty much clinches it. It shows that the Tetragrammaton was never there."

They have been moving the goalposts since the 1980's...

In the 1980's the corruption happened in the 4th century.

In the October 2018 JW Broadcasting, they said that we needed 1st century manuscripts to prove this either way.

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.