Posts by Bobcat

9

Paint us a Picture of your World View of the Beginning, and before.

by prologos in

at cern, scientists are creating pure energy by colliding protons at near light speed.. that pure energy is akin to what preceded the forming of matter, the quarks, the bosons, the plasma.. that pure energy confined in the beginning singularity, that preceded matter,.

in your mind, your words,.

where did it come from, did it always exist, latent as a potential?.

Bobcat

According to quantum theory, the energy that is being released by the proton collisions would not be the energy from "the beginning." Energy at the so-called "planck level" would, in theory, be unified, infinite, and everywhere at the same time. ("Everywhere" being the infinitely small quantum singularity that supposedly existed at the "beginning.") The energy released by the collisions at CERN is distilled down (for lack of a better word), finite, a product of the phased transitions that the universe went through as it cooled down after its initial expansion. It would be energy that holds the proton's constituant parts together, but itself could be further 'sub-divided.'

At least that is how I've understood matters. The saying is, 'anyone who claims to understand quantum mechanics doesn't quite understand it yet.'

19

Armageddon question

by caroline77 in

who do jw's think is going to kill everyone at armageddon?.

how will it happen?.

what is their evidence?.

Bobcat

In connection with the idea of God putting 'hatred into the hearts' of the entities that destroy "Babylon the Great":

The WT holds that God will do this causing these entites ("the tens horns and the [scarlot] wild beast") to suddenly turn on Babylon. Part of this idea is based on the WT's interpreting of "the great city" in 16:19a to be the same as "Babylon the Great" in 16:19c. They neglect to consider that there is a second great city in Revelation, mentioned in 11:8. (Babylon is not referred to as "the great city" until 17:15) Also, the polysyndeton used to enumerate the events of 16:19-21 would individually seperate the events listed in 16:19-21, making 16:19a something different from 16:19c.

The WT idea is also based on an uncareful reading of Rev 17:16, 17. Rev 17:16 says, "And the ten horns that you saw, and the wild beast, these will hate the harlot." But the "For" clause that follows says, "For God put into their hearts to carry out his thought . . . by giving their kingdom to the wild beast, until the words of God will have been accomplished." "Their hearts" that God puts something into is, by context, referring to "the ten horns." So, if God puts 'hatred for the harlot' into the ten horns, it leaves no reason given for why "the [scarlot] wild beast" hates the harlot. Instead, as 17:17 shows, God's "thought" that he puts into "their hearts" causes them to "give their kingdom to the wild beast until the words of God [related to the harlot] will have been accomplished."

This makes the 'falling of the cities of the nations' a much more probable reason for why "the ten horns and the wild beast" will hate the harlot.

********************

Concerning 'the great city being split into three parts' of 16:19a:

This may actually be a movement against all of Christianity, whether faithful and unfaithful. The account in Ezekiel 5 refers to a minor portion represented by a few hairs placed into Ezekiel's "skirt" as opposed to the three portions that suffer from God's judgment during the Babylonian siege of 587.

In the first century something similar happened during the Roman siege. A few Jews, the Christians, escaped, but the most suffered.

Timewise, this places Rev 16:16 in the same relative position (in relation to the "great earthquake" of Rev 16:18) as Matthew 24:15 is to the first century "great tribulation."

19

Armageddon question

by caroline77 in

who do jw's think is going to kill everyone at armageddon?.

how will it happen?.

what is their evidence?.

Bobcat

Caroline:

See my posts # 932 & 933 on this thread for an alternative view of the sheep & goats parable, which would impact the question of 'Who would survive the battle of Armageddon.'

This view might also be hinted at in Rev 11:18 -

"And the appointed time for the dead to be judged, and to give [their] reward to your slaves the prophets and to the holy ones and to those fearing your name, the small and the great, and to bring to ruin those ruining the earth."

"The holy ones" is mostly used as a designation for God's people. So the addition of "those fearing your name, the small and the great," may allow for something similar to the 'vast mixed company' of Egypians who left Egypt with Israel.

******************

On the question of who will do the killing:

"Armageddon" is a "place" (whether symbolic or literal). According to the way Rev 16:16-21 delineates events, "the kings of the entire inhabited earth" are "gathered" there during the sixth bowl of God's anger, which is prior to the outpouring of the seventh bowl of God's anger (v. 17). The results of that seventh bowl include the "great earthquake," which includes the events described in Rev 16:19-21.

The only ones in that sequence of events directly affected by "heaven" are the ones in verse 21 who are pummeled by the hail. These correspond with "the rest" who are "killed off" by 'the king riding the white horse' (Jesus) in Rev 19:21.

"The great city" of 16:19a being split into three parts, if it is in fact an allusion to Ezekiel chapter 5, represent God's unfaithful people who receive judgment from God, but at the hands of humans.

The 'falling of the cities of the nations' of 16:19b may very well hint at much loss of life. It is parallelled in Matthew 24:29 and Luke 21:25, 26, which in the first century saw its fulfillment in the vast and bloody Roman civil war of 68-69 AD.

In Revelation 16:19, the 'falling of the cities of the nations' is a prelude to God's handing "Babylon the Great" his 'cup of wrath.' But chapter 17, which describes that judgment on "Babylon" has 'the ten horns and the wild beast hating the harlot' and doing her in. The 'hatred' of her may very well come from the events that precede her judgment (the falling of the cities), indicating some implication of the harlot in the preceeding events. At any rate, the actual killing of the harlot is described as being at the hands of humans.

The 'removal' of the 'mountains and islands,' being bracketed by Babylon's judgment before and the hailstorm after, would logically be "the war" described in Rev 19:19, 20. Even though in that account they (the kings of the earth and their armies) are described as being defeated by the rider of the white horse and his armies, other Bible accounts of this battle have them being killed off (at least in part) at their own hands (Compare Ezekiel 38:21-39:4; Haggai 2:22; Zechariah 14:13).

*****************

On the question of who will be resurrected:

John 5:28, 29 describes those in the "memorial tombs" as "those who practiced good things" and "those who practiced vile things," which appears to be a merism.

Acts 24:15 similarly describes the resurrection as including "the righteous and the unrighteous." (Possibly another merism.)

1 Cor 15:23 describes them as "those who belong to the Christ," which, when compared with John 6:51 where he gives his "flesh in behalf of the life of the world," could conceivably include very many of humankind.

*****************

I admit that this is not necessarily the published WT point of view. So whether "JWs" in general would agree with me is a question. (I think more likely most JWs would fall back on whatever the most recent published WT viewpoint is. Not all, but most.) But I hold that the above is an accurate exposition of what the scriptures cited above relate. Those scriptures would serve for me as "evidence" based on my holding of them to be the word of God. Whether they serve that way for others is something they would have to say.

Take Care

1

Anglo-American Dominance Ending

by metatron in

jw
friends

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-11-08/guest-post-how-china-can-cause-death-dollar-and-entire-us-financial-system.

the above article exaggerates the danger to the us dollar and economy itself - however, it has an excellent list of bilateral agreements that show that the dominance of the us dollar worldwide is rapidly ending.. in other news, the us and israel lost voting rights in unesco.

meanwhile, a high-ranking chinese official was elected to head an important conference at that organization.. peace with iran may emerge because the us no longer has the will for yet another expensive war.. i think a clear pattern is emerging.

Bobcat

Good article. It explains the situation quite well.

35

Interestingly disturbing!

by DS211 in

i work in the medical field and every 2 years i need 24 hours if continuing education to stay licensed.

my deadline is coming up and i am taking the classes this week and next week.

heres the thing, i scheduled them both on sundays and ive procrastinated over this two year renewal period.

Bobcat

DS211:

Likely your wife hasn't heard of the Bethel rule: You assigned job comes before your meetings.

Bethel reserves to itself the right to make some things more important than the meetings.

Island Man:

You speak truth Kemosabe! See my post # 967 here.

30

John 3:16 - "believe" or "exercise faith?" Same thing?

by Faithful Witness in

i recently asked my jw mother, if she believed that jesus died for her sins.

(john 3:16).

she agreed, but then added the jw party line, "you have to exercise faith also.

Bobcat

Actually, one of the more interesting parts of John 3:16 as it relates to the WT is the "for" (Greek gar) that the verse begins with. It relates what was said previously (about the need to be born again to enter the kingdom, which is an "earthly" or basic teaching - see v. 12) with what follows the "for," namely, God's broad provision of his Son for rescuing the world.

It is interesting that Jesus chided Nicodemus, a notable Mosaic Law teacher, for not knowing these things. Yet, the self-proclaimed F&DS, the so-called 'provider of food at the proper time,' hasn't figured these "earthly things" out either.

30

John 3:16 - "believe" or "exercise faith?" Same thing?

by Faithful Witness in

i recently asked my jw mother, if she believed that jesus died for her sins.

(john 3:16).

she agreed, but then added the jw party line, "you have to exercise faith also.

Bobcat

Here are a couple WT comments on the NWT rendering:

*** w91 9/15 p. 10 par. 4 Exercise Faith Based on Truth ***

4 In the New World Translation, the causative form of the Hebrew verb ʼa·man′ is sometimes rendered “exercise faith.” According to the Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, “at the heart of the meaning of the root is the idea of certainty . . . in contrast with modern concepts of faith as something possible, hopefully true, but not certain.” The same work says: “The derivative ʼāmēn ‘verily’ is carried over into the New Testament in the word amēn which is [the] English word ‘amen.’ Jesus used the word frequently (Mt 5:18, 26, etc.) to stress the certainty of a matter.” The word rendered “faith” in the Christian Greek Scriptures also means belief in something firmly based on fact or truth.

*** w90 12/1 p. 30 Questions From Readers ***
▪ Why does the New World Translation at times render the Greek word pi·steu′o as “believe” (like most translations) and at other times as “exercise [or put] faith in”?

This is done to reflect different shades of meaning that are expressed by the Greek word pi·steu′o.

For example, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by James Moulton, notes that early Christians clearly recognized “the importance of the difference between mere belief . . . and personal trust.” Both these thoughts can be expressed using the Greek word pi·steu′o.

Often, the different shades of meaning of pi·steu′o must be discerned from the context. At times, though, different grammatical constructions help us to see what the writer had in mind. For example, if pi·steu′o is followed merely by a noun in the dative case, the New World Translation usually renders it simply as “believe”—unless the context indicates something different. (Matthew 21:25, 32; but see Romans 4:3.) If pi·steu′o is followed by the word e·pi′, “on,” it is generally rendered “believe on.” (Matthew 27:42; Acts 16:31) If it is followed by eis, “to,” it is usually translated “exercise faith in.”—John 12:36; 14:1.

This latter rendering (which reminds us that pi·steu′o is related to the Greek word pi′stis, “faith”) is in harmony with a comment in An Introductory Grammar of New Testament Greek, by Paul Kaufman. This work says: “Another construction which is common in the New Testament (especially in John’s Gospel) is πιστεύω [pi·steu′o] with εἰς [eis] and the accusative case . . . The whole construction of εἰς plus the accusative must be translated rather than attempting to translate the preposition εἰς as an isolated word. Faith is thought of as an activity, as something men do, i.e. putting faith into someone.”

21

Christ Jesus vs Jesus Christ in RNWT

by wisdomfrombelow in

i noticed in the bible reading in titus this week that that they changed one instance of christ jesus to jesus christ.

it made me wonder why it was done and what benefit it could have in their doctrines..

Bobcat

It appears that the revised NWT was updated with newer greek texts. The WH text reads "Christ Jesus." The UBS3 text has "Jesus Christ."

See here for how others render it.

And here is a comparison of various Greek texts.

It doesn't appear to be theologically important.

19

Is JW Baptism the Only Valid Baptism?

by Cold Steel in

what is the watchtower bible and tract societys view on baptism?

is it absolutely essential that one be baptized to gain eternal life in gods kingdom?.

and can they tell you who you can and cant baptize?.

Bobcat

There are some interesting comments about Matthew 16:19 in the NICNT-Matthew commentary (R. T. France, pp. 625-27):

[Start quote]

19. A change in metaphor now highlights the responsible role Peter will play in the development of this new ekklesia. Taking up the imagery of Isa. 22:20-22, Jesus declares Peter to be the steward (the chief administrative officer) in the kingdom of heaven [which France understands to refer to "God's rulership", rather than a "government" per se; an abstract noun rather than a concrete one. - Bobcat], who will hold the keys, so that, like Eliakim, the new steward (cf. Isa. 22:15) in the kingdom of David, "he will open, and no one shall shut; he will shut, and no one shall open." The steward is not the owner. He has both authority (over the rest of the household) and responsibility (to his master to administer the affairs of the house properly). The keys are those of the storehouses, to enable him to make appropriate provision for the household, not those of the outer gate, to control admission. The traditional portrayal of Peter as porter at the pearly gates depends on misunderstanding "the kingdom of heaven" here as a designation of the afterlife rather than denoting God's rule among his people on earth.

The metaphor of "tying up" and "untying" also speaks of administrative authority. The terms are used in rabbinic literature for declaring what is and is not permitted. When the same commission is given to the whole disciple group in 18:18, it will be specifically in the context of dealing with sin within the community. Such authority to declare what is and is not permissible will of course have personal consequences for the person judged to have sinned, but it is the prior judgment in principle which is the focus of the "tying" metaphor, and there, as here, the objects of both verbs will be expressed in the neuter, not the masculine; it is things, issues, which are being tied or untied, not people as such. The historical role of Peter in Acts well illustrates the metaphor, as it was to him that the responsibility fell of declaring that gentiles might be accepted as members of the new ekklesia (Acts 10:1 - 11:18), though of course the exercise of his disciplinary authority could also have dire personal consequences for those who stepped over the mark (Acts 5:1-11; cf Acts 8:20-24). Peter's personal authority remained, however, that of the first among equals, and the extension of this commission to the rest of the disciples in 18:18 will ensure that he is kept in his place [cf. Gal 2:11-14 - Bobcat].

The heavenly "endorsement" of Peter's decisions is expressed (both here and in 18:18, twice in each verse) in the unusual syntax of future perfect passive verbs, "will have been tied up," "will have been untied." The construction is sufficiently unusual and indeed awkward in Greek to draw attention. . . It seems likely, therefore, that these repeated future perfects are there for a reason. They change the sequence of actions. . . with future perfects the impression is that when Peter makes his decision it will be found to have been already made in heaven, making him not the initiator of new directions for the church, but the faithful steward of God's prior decisions. In this syntactical form the saying becomes a promise not of divine endorsement, but of divine guidance to enable Peter to decide in accordance with God's already determined purpose.

[End quote. Material in brackets was Bobcat's for clarification.]

Note that, as far as personal entry (into the Christian community) is concerned, God desires 'all to be saved' (1 Tim 2:4), and baptism, as a ritual for entry into the Christian community, was already determined by Jesus (Mt 28:18-20). The commentary above footnotes the fact that "keys" (plural) is more suited for storehouses than for an admission gate. And the example on which Matthew 16:19 is based, Eliakim of Isaiah 22, he had no say about entry into the Israelite community. That was already established in the Law Code. Even so, some personal conduct limitations are indicated for entry into the New Covenant community (compare Rev 21:27; 22:15).

The "faithful steward" parable (Lk 12:42-48; Mt 24:45-51), as in Mt 16:19, may have had its underlying basis on the steward account in Isaiah 22. Luke 12:48 applies it to "all" or "everyone" "to whom much was given" and "put in charge of much." (Compare with Peter's question in Luke 12:41.) That leaves a basis for its application on a much wider scale than just a handful of men some 20 centuries after the parable was given.

The baptism ritual that is added by the WT Society (to be done at large assemblies, the two vows, etc), all of this is best understood as providing the WT with legal leverage over the person being baptised. This is why non-WT baptisms are illegitimate as far as the WT is concerned. See my post # 770 on this thread for a number of links to comments on baptism. See my post # 1025 for comments about "re-baptism" on this thread.

And see Isaiah's comments about "Shebna" in Isa. 22:15-19, who was the "steward" prior to Eliakim, and see if you notice any similarities between him and the current GB.

11

Very Big (and Shocking) Contradiction in the Gospels

by DeWandelaar in

i was visiting a website in order to prove to people that the bible can be seen as a very extremist book.. however... the site also showed some contradictions and although i am aware of most of them i came to one contradiction that was actually very shocking: the part that satan tries to temp jesus christ.

most of the gospels mention this and the timeframe shows that it happened directly after the baptism of jesus.

however... look at what happens in john!.

Bobcat

Concerning John's gospel account omitting the institution of the Lord's Evening Meal (which the Synoptics include), but including the discussion in the latter half of John chapter six (about 'eating his flesh and drinking his blood'), see my post # 428 on this thread for possible motives on John's part.

The BECNT-John commentary has an interesting diagram of the first twelve chapters of John's gospel account which also revolves around 7 major signs performed by Jesus. The commentary uses the table to try to help make sense of the way John has the account of Jesus ministry outlined:

Transitional

sections:

First week,

sign

(1:19-2:11)

Final week

sign,

(11:1-12:50)

Major

literary units

or cycles:

Start of

public ministry

(1:19-51)

Ministry cycle

(chaps. 2-4):

Various responses,

elusive language

Festival cycle

(chaps. 5-10):

Increased hostility,

elusive movements

Conclusion of

public ministry

(chaps 11-12):

Jesus withdraws

(11:53-54)

Inclusion

markers

(related

to signs):

The Baptist

(1:19-34)

Cana sign

(2:1-11)

Judean sign

(2:12-22)

Cana sign

(4:46-54)

Judean sign

(5:1-15)

Galilean and

Judean signs

(chaps. 6, 9)

The Baptist

(10:40-42)

Judean sign

(11:1-44;

12:1-2, 9-11,

17-18)

Ending

(12:37-50)

Midpoint

crisis:

Moments of

major crisis

(6:60-71)

(My first real attempt at a table. It appears that either some of the table features don't work, or I don't. Probably the latter.)

Take Care