Phizzy:
The Society has an explanation for why WWI and October 1914 do not coincide. Its in the w72 6/1 p.352. If you don't have it I'll copy here.
Take Care
Posts by Bobcat
-
16Pages 1766-1767 of the 2013 NWT
by Doug Mason inpages 1766-1767 of the 2013 nwt states that the message of the bible is gods right to rule.. given that the wts declares that gods kingdom rule began in 1914, one would suspect that this would feature.
instead, there is a vague reference to something that supposedly happened about 1914.. here's the picture:.
http://www.jwstudies.com/2013_nwt__pages_1766__1767.jpg.
-
-
-
16
Pages 1766-1767 of the 2013 NWT
by Doug Mason inpages 1766-1767 of the 2013 nwt states that the message of the bible is gods right to rule.. given that the wts declares that gods kingdom rule began in 1914, one would suspect that this would feature.
instead, there is a vague reference to something that supposedly happened about 1914.. here's the picture:.
http://www.jwstudies.com/2013_nwt__pages_1766__1767.jpg.
-
-
Bobcat
I think the "about" is related to when Satan was 'cast down to the earth.' The Society views it as after the establishment of the Kingdom ('the child being caught away to God's throne' of Rev 12:6, which is in October 1914) BUT before the 'persecution' resulting in the arrest of the seven in the spring of 1918 (of Revelation 12:13, 14). Upon their release, 'about' 9 months later (equated with the 3 1/2 days of Rev 11:9), the "time and times and half a time" occurs which runs from the spring of 1919 to about September of 1922, culminating in the 'Advertise, advertise, advertise the King and his Kingdom' talk at the Cedar Point convention.
For the Society, the devil can be ousted from heaven anytime within the sandwiching dates of October 1914 and March/April 1918. The exact date is not important except that it be between those dates. Since Rev. 12:7 says they "battled" in heaven, it leaves open the possibility that the outcome of the battle was not immediate.
Anonymouz is correct that there is a 42 month period from Oct 1914 to March/April 1918 involved with Rev 11:2, 3. (They may have shifted that to Dec 1914 - June 1918. Not sure why at the moment but might be related to their conviction in June 1918 and subsequent imprisoning in Atlanta. They say they were sent off on July 4th 1918, which they view as ironic - US Independence Day holiday.)
The Society probably says "about 1914-1918 so as to prevent any JWs from giving a more specific date, which many would if they simply said "October 1914."
-
26
John 7:53-8:11 - taken out of the new bible
by cognac inwhat is the proof it should be there?.
i've brought up to jws that revelation says not to take anything out or you will get the second death.. but they are ok with it because they compare it to not using the book of thomas, mary, etc.. what would you say to that?.
-
-
Bobcat
Hey Phizzy:
I wasn't trying to be argumentative at all. You make valid points all around. I just wanted to add the current academic view.
Take Care
-
26
John 7:53-8:11 - taken out of the new bible
by cognac inwhat is the proof it should be there?.
i've brought up to jws that revelation says not to take anything out or you will get the second death.. but they are ok with it because they compare it to not using the book of thomas, mary, etc.. what would you say to that?.
-
-
Bobcat
The BECNT-John commentary (Andreas J. Kostenberger, p.247; BECNT stands for Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament) has an excursus on the passage (7:53-8:11) which they refer to as the pericope adulterae or the story of the adulterous woman.
The commentary excursus has two parts: An internal evidence part and an external one. Without typing all the details they consider, the internal evidence is judged thusly, "This represents overwhelming evidence that the section is non-Johannine." The commentary analyzed the uniqueness of the wording in comparison with the rest of John, as well as the way phrases or clauses were constructed. It also mentions "a penchant for kata-prefixes" in 7:53-8:11 which is unlike the rest of John.
On the "external evidence" side of things, it says "the entire twelve verses of the pericope adulterae are completely absent from all of the oldest manuscripts of the Gospel of John, the pericope first appearing [in the gospel of John] in the fifth-century Codex Gospel of John Bezae (D). Even after this, the spread into the MS tradition is very slow. Thus, scholarship has, almost universally, regarded the pericope as a later insertion for . . . reasons [that] are massive, convincing, and obvious."
A footnote mentions that "one of the few scholars favoring originality (on the grounds of Byzantine priority) is M. Robinson (1998: 1-17)."
The commentary then lists six reasons for excluding it:
- Its utter absence from all pre-fifth-century A.D. MSS
- Its appearance in no fewer than five different places in the MS tradition (after John 7:36, 44, or 52; at the end of John's Gospel; or after Luke 21:38), bearing all the marks of a "bouncing around . . . floating logion." All this suggesting an "unstable MS tradition."
- Non-Johannine literary features.
- The interruption of the narrative flow from 7:52 to 8:12, breaking up the literary unit 7:1 - 8:59; on a historical level, the setting of 7:53 - 8:1 suggests most plausibly Jesus' pattern during the week before his passion (cf. Mark 11:11, 19; 13:3; and esp. Luke 21:37).
- The lack of citation in early patristic writings up to the fourth century (the earliest Greek patristic reference of a variation of this narrative occurring in a commentary by Didymus the Blind [d. 398].
- The suggested scenario that the pericope passed from its original place in the Gospel according to the Hebrews to John's Gospel (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 3.39.17, citing Papias).
The commentary acknowledges that the story might be included among "other possibly authentic sayings of Jesus that may be found in NT apocryphal literature. Thus, though it may be possible to derive a certain degree of edification from the study of this pericope, proper conservatism and caution suggest that the passage be omitted from preaching in the churches (not to mention inclusion in the main body of translations, even within square brackets."
The commentary ends the excursus saying, "The present commentary therefore will follow the precedent of Origen (d. 253), who moved directly from 7:52 to 8:12, and refrain from further comment on 7:53 - 8:11.
A footnote states that, "A survey of major commentaries shows that about half provide a regular commentary (Carson, Laney, Lindars, Whitacre, Calvin, Westcott), while the other half refrain from comment (Michaels, Talbert, Stibbe, Brodie, D. M. Smith), in some cases choosing not to address the issue at all (e.g. Schlatter [1948: 205], who in his scholarly commentary moves directly from 7:52 to 8:12 without comment, though his popular commentary [1962: 139 - 41] does treat the pericope adulterae in deference to 'ecclesiatical tradition' "
-
4
Interesting Links!
by Atlantis inhere are some links you might find interesting!
.. https://sites.google.com/site/jehovahswitnessesmedia/weekly-meeting-material-packs .. .
http://da-ip.getmyip.com:8080/pdf/study%20prep/2013/?sort=t .. .
-
-
Bobcat
Atlantis:
Thanks!
Take Care
-
22
Tragic Fatal Plane crash at Bagrum base in Afghanistan caught on camera 04/29/2013. Viewer discretion is advised
by StoneWall inthis is the full crash that wasn't showed on the news.. they referenced it on national news but didn't show whole clip.. if you already have fear of flying etc.
you may not wish to view this.. all 7 aboard died.. hard to believe this guy was in the right spot with his car to capture the whole thing.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icfvsql38oc.
edited to add: forgot to say his camera date was not set for correct date.
-
-
-
73
Nov 2013 KM Question Box. Head coverings on Doorstep bible studies
by BroMac inshould a female publisher wear a headcovering if she is accompanied by a male publisher at a door step bible study?
when a female publisher conducts a regular ,scheduled bible study and a male kingdom publisher is present, she should wear a head covering.(1cor.
11:3-10)the july 15, 2002 issue of the watchtower, page 27, explains: this is a pre arranged session of teaching where the one conducting the study actually presides.
-
-
-
17
INTERESTING QUOTE FROM A DISTRICT OVERSEER
by The Searcher ini personally recorded a district overseer's statement he made in a talk, regarding calling someone a "despicable fool".
(matthew 5:22) .
he basically equated that term with calling someone an apostate!!!
-
-
Bobcat
Searcher:
Raka (Strong's # 4469; NWT's "unspeakable word of contempt") is defined by AMG's Greek dictionary as, "A word of contempt meaning empty, worthless, foolish. . . Utter contempt, equivalent to the Gr. kenos (2756), empty, vain." [Compare 1 Thess 2:1 NWT, "without results"; Jas 2:20 NWT, "empty" - Bobcat]
BDAG deines it this way: "A term of abuse/put-down relating to lack of intelligence, numskull, fool (in effect verbal bullying)" BDAG then refers to a quote from Chrysostom describing raka as "not an expression denoting a strong put-down."
Moros (Strong's # 3474; NWT's "despicable fool") is defined by AMGs Greek disctionary as, "Silly, stupid, foolish, from which the Eng. word "moron" is derived. Used of persons meaning morally worthless (Mt 5:22). It is a more serious reproach than raka (4469), raca, which scorns a man by calling him stupid, whereas moros scorns him concerning his heart and character.
BDAG defines it as "foolsh, stupid." But then , in reference to its use in Matthew 5:22 says, The meaning of more Mt 5:22 is disputed. Most scholars take it, as the ancient Syrian versions did, to mean you fool . . . the connotation of an obstinate, godless person
The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek NT says, "raka expresses contempt for a man's head: "you stupid." more expresses contempt for his heart and character: "you scoundrel." "
NICNT-Matthew (R. T. France, pp.200-01) has some interesting commentary on the verse and the word raca and more:
It is possible to find an ascending scale of severity in the descriptions of the punishment in this verse, from an unspecified "judgment" to the more specific "trial" and then to the final extreme of "hellfire." [NWT "Gehenna" - Bobcat] Certainly the most striking and powerful image is kept to the last. But there is no such clear escalation in the offenses cited. The first (anger) is in the mind and the second and third in speech, but the speech is cited not so much as a clearly actionable utterance but rather as an indication of attitude. The two words of abuse, "stupid" [raca] and "fool" [moros] (the latter used by Jesus himself in Matthew 23:17), are not readily distinguishable in either meaning or severity; both are everyday utterances, significant enough in a society which took seriously public honor and disgrace, but not the sort of exceptional abuse which might conceivably form the basis of litigation. The deliberate paradox of Jesus' pronouncement is thus that ordinary insults may betray an attitude of contempt which God takes extremely seriously. The effect of the saying is therefore to be found not in a careful correlation between each offense individually and the respective punishment assigned to it, but in the cumulative rhetorical force of a series of everyday scenes and the remarkable range of expressions used for their results; the totally unexpected conclusion in "hellfire" comes as a shocking jolt to the complacency of the hearer, who might well have chuckled over the incongruous image of a person being tried for anger or for conventional insult, only to be pulled up short by the saying's conclusion. . .
[Concening the use of gehenna as the ultimate punsishment in this saying:] To invoke this awesome concept in relation to the use of an everyday abusive epithet is the sort of paradoxical exaggeration by which Jesus' sayings often compel the reader's attention . . .
[End of quote]
In France's view, the whole saying is concerned more with an expanding, abusive attitude towards other humans that suddenly finds itself very much at odds with God himself. It was also interesting that Jesus used the term moros himself when describing the religious leaders in Mt 23:17, perhaps indicating that the saying in 5:21, 22 is more concerned with an overall attitude rather than a graded listing of offenses.
That was a curious statement by the DO, given who he works for.
Take Care
-
14
Isn`t the scripture at Rev.12: 12,13 Pointless ? " Woe for the earth...because the Devil has come down to you having great anger...."
by smiddy indoesnt the bible clearly show he has always been on the earth causing trouble and havoc ?
onwards.. then especially with the account in the book of job.. not forgetting his tempting jesus in the wilderness.. being reinforced in 2cor.4:4 "...the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of unbeleivers...".
all of which occurs on earth with humans , so whats the big deal about rev.12:12,13 ?.
-
-
Bobcat
Bart:
12:13 does not concern the Devil only the Dragon. This Dragon should not be confussed with the Great Dragon of 12:9 they are not the same.
I'm trying to figure how you reached that conclusion. Just looking at the text (Rev 12:3-17), I don't see any marker identifying "the dragon" of verse 13 as being different from any of the other references to "the dragon" in the context (3-17)
I'm not trying to be critical, just trying to understand your viewpoint.
Smiddy:
In connection with the thread topic, it is possible that the intent of the passage is not so much Satan's being 'hurled to the earth' (although it is expressed that way), as it is stating that he no longer has access to the heavens (i.e. God's residence) where he has been 'accusing our brothers day and night before our God.' (v.10) In other words, "the blood of the Lamb" has ended any basis for him to lodge accusations, and so he has been 'thrown out of court' so to speak.
If read that way, there is no need to take up the WT view that Satan and his angels are strictly confined to the vicinity of the earth. In the 1st century view of things, there was heaven (God's residence) and earth (man's residence). (In fact, earth being "down" from heaven is hardly an accurate spatial direction. It better describes how humans percieve God's position.) At the same time, the earth is where Satan's kingdom is at and, from his viewpoint, it is being invaded by his adversary's (Jesus) kingdom via their preaching and prosletyzing. Those factors (and the fact that Jesus would, at some unexpected future date - which even his disciples thought would be in "a short period of time" (cmp. Rom 16:20) - might very well explain his 'great anger.'
As an addon thought, I wonder if verse 10 ("Now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ") might be a marker for the approximate time of this event. "The authority of his Christ" was claimed by Jesus in Matthew 28:18.
Take Care
-
22
Tragic Fatal Plane crash at Bagrum base in Afghanistan caught on camera 04/29/2013. Viewer discretion is advised
by StoneWall inthis is the full crash that wasn't showed on the news.. they referenced it on national news but didn't show whole clip.. if you already have fear of flying etc.
you may not wish to view this.. all 7 aboard died.. hard to believe this guy was in the right spot with his car to capture the whole thing.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icfvsql38oc.
edited to add: forgot to say his camera date was not set for correct date.
-
-