Posts by Bobcat

23

Have JWs and other Christians completely missed the point of Matthew 24:4-8?

by Island Man in

many people think those verses are suggesting that the wars, earthquakes, food shortages, etc are all a sign that the end is imminent.

however, a careful examination of the context seems to suggest that jesus was actually forewarning his followers not to draw such a conclusion from such events.

see this interesting article on the subject:.

Bobcat

Island Man:

You make a good point. The disciples wanted to know when the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem that Jesus had just foretold. (Mt 23:33-24:2) Jesus was telling them in 24:4-8 that wars, earthquakes, famines and plagues would not be indicators of when the calamity would come.

Why give such a non-sign? It was because people of those days viewed such events, in particular, as harbingers of God's wrath. So Jesus is telling them that events such as those would not be an indication of 'When these things will be.' (24:3) The event that would indicate "when" was described in 24:15. And Jesus said that they could expect it before the then present "generation" 'passed away.' (24:32-34)

Revelation chapter follows a similar motif. Following Jesus' crowning in 33 AD, which begins the march to his return and his eventual conquering of all his enemies (vv.1, 2), it foretells wars (vv.3, 4), famines (vv.5, 6), and death by sword, famine, plagues, and wild beasts (vv.7, 8), all of which were typically viewed by people as indicators of God's wrath. (Timewise, these things would parallel the ousting of Satan in chapter twelve and the woe for the earth and sea that was foretold to occur as a consequence. Compare 12:7-12.)

Yet, the 'souls' that cry out for justice in verses 9-11 ask, 'When will justice finally take place?' They are not calculating when the end will come based on the wars, famines, etc that were just described. Their cry for justice inserted into the account, and the answer they are given indicated that something else ("the number was filled also of their fellow slaves . . . who were about to be killed") had to finish before then end came. Rev. 7:1-8 explains more of the details of that.

Incidentally, Matthew 24 is not describing the same things as Revelation 6. Matthew 24:4-35 specifically describes what would happen to the Jewish temple and the city of Jerusalem (including the Jewish nation). Revelation 6 describes from Jesus' crowning to his still future return. Yet a similar pattern to Matthew 24 exists in the Revelation 6 account. This causes many to think that Matthew 24 is describing the very same thing as Revelation 6. Matthew 24:4-35 is instructive in showing a pattern that is followed in Revelation, but problems occur if one tries to map the one over the other since the things in the Matthew account are specific to the 1st century.

Take Care

32

What is the OBJECT of Faith For a Christian? (precisely)

by Perry in

of course we were all shamed for not having enough faith in god's spirit directed organization, the elder arrangement, the f&ds ....blah, blah, blah.. but what else is there?

.....another organization, faith in jehovah, faith in jesus, faith in the bible?

what precisely is the primary object of faith for a christian?.

Bobcat

Adamah:

Thanks very much for the reply. I heading to work now, but looking forward to going over your reply when I get back.

Take Care

32

What is the OBJECT of Faith For a Christian? (precisely)

by Perry in

of course we were all shamed for not having enough faith in god's spirit directed organization, the elder arrangement, the f&ds ....blah, blah, blah.. but what else is there?

.....another organization, faith in jehovah, faith in jesus, faith in the bible?

what precisely is the primary object of faith for a christian?.

Bobcat

Adamah:

Very interesting post above.

If I understood you correctly: "A bill of lading" would be the business equivalent of "faith" according to this definition - (Hebrews 11:1 NWT) . . .Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld

Take Care

33

why isnt the Revelation book on the jw website.

by Sojae in

jw
friends

i asked my mother( still very much active).

she said books made from '86 and before would not be online.

so we both looked at her physical revelation book and it was made in 88 so it should be there.

Bobcat

Splash:

This (the trumpet order) is also mind numbing to me. Revelation 11:14 specifically puts the 7th trumpet (Rev 11:15-19) after the 6th (which in 11:14 is the 2nd of the last three. Compare Rev 8:12, 13)

Putting Jesus on his throne in 1914 AD, rather than in 33 AD (see link located here), is one of the things that greatly skews the WT interpretation. Imagine trying to force about 2000 years of actual history into about 100 years of supposed fulfillment. But they've written themselves into a corner with 1914.

Take Care

15

Is ingratitude and education inversely proportionate?

by abiather in

bible describes ingratitude as one of the characteristics of last days.

people will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money ....ungrateful.... etc.

(2 timothy 3:2) it seems this prophecy about people becoming ungrateful is having its fulfillment more than 100%.. i was watching an interview on the tv the other day.

Bobcat

Abiather:

Concerning "the last days," and what time period they occupy per the NT writers view, I posted some research here, and here, and here.

Take Care

32

What is the OBJECT of Faith For a Christian? (precisely)

by Perry in

of course we were all shamed for not having enough faith in god's spirit directed organization, the elder arrangement, the f&ds ....blah, blah, blah.. but what else is there?

.....another organization, faith in jehovah, faith in jesus, faith in the bible?

what precisely is the primary object of faith for a christian?.

Bobcat

(1 Peter 1:8, 9 NWT) . . .Though YOU are not looking upon him at present, yet YOU exercise faith in him and are greatly rejoicing with an unspeakable and glorified joy, 9 as YOU receive the end of YOUR faith, the salvation of YOUR souls. (Other translations here.)

(This came to mind with your question above.)

Take Care

18

Baptism Requirements vs What the Bible ReallyTeach

by bruh in

does all other organized religions (christian and non-christian) other than jw's require you to go over some 100 or more questions to qualify for baptism?.

amazing how in its purest form that when in jesus christ/apostles time it was perhaps a few questions of belief and repentance.. .

Bobcat

Bruh:

The idea that the local elders "qualify" someone for baptism is a fiction. The elders think they do. And the candidate is left with the impression that the elders do that with the 100+ question routine. But from the Society's standpoint, consider the info in this post. Also, see this post and this one for additional.

Take Care

22

What's With INVISIBLE ??

by Cold Steel in

the 'dubs' came by today just as the wife and i were on the way out.

we chatted a few moments and the two guys wanted to know if i had any questions about the bible.

so i asked them to drop by in a day or two and they left me with two thin magazines and a book they jokingly referred to as "the gold nugget.".

Bobcat

Cold Steel:

Q: In what form does Christ return?

A: He was resurrected as an invisible spirit person . (1 Peter 3:18) Then, he went to heaven and sat at God’s right hand. (Psalm 110:1) Much later, Jesus was brought before Jehovah God, “the Ancient of Days,” who granted Jesus power to rule over mankind. So Jesus returns, not as a human, but as an invisible King.—Read Daniel 7:13, 14.

A sister did a demo presentation the other day for this magazine and she basically quoted the above WT. What stood out to me was the glaring illogic in the statement, ". . . he went to heaven and sat at God's right hand. (Psalm 110:1) Much later, Jesus was brought before Jehovah God . . ."

The sister acting as the Hh, and the entire audience as far as I could tell, didn't bat an eye.

But I'm wondering, 'How you gonna take a seat beside the King of the universe, and only later be brought before him.' What, did you sneak in the room while he wasn't looking? If you were going to sit beside a high ranking official, wouldn't you first have to be brought before him to get permission or approval?

Not to mention 1 Cor 15:24, 25 where Paul replaces 'sitting at his right side' with 'ruling as king' until his enemies are subdued.

12

Acts 20:28

by never a jw in

acts 20:28 nwt.

pay attention to yourselves+ and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers,+ to shepherd the congregation of god,+ which he purchased with the blood of his own son.

king james and other translations.

Bobcat

The BECNT-Acts commentary (Darrell L. Bock, p. 630) says:

The verse does not explicitly mention the title "Son" but rather speaks of God's giving his own to gain the church. The image implies sonship. . . Thus the acquiring of the church had as its basis a substitution of God's own for those God would bring to eternal life.

This commentary has its own translation included: (Acts 20:28) ". . . which he obtained with the blood of his own [Son]." The older NWT has "[Son]" inserted and reads exactly as the commentary except "obtained" in the NWT is "purchased." The 2006 edition of the NWT took the brackets around "Son" out.

The NAC-Acts commentary (John B. Polhill, pp.427-28) says:

A final major problem in v. 28 is both text-critical and interpretive. It involves the final clause: "Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood." [The NIV rendering is used in this commentary - Bobcat] The problem is the very striking statement that God puchased the church with his own blood. The reference is surely to the atoning blood of Jesus shed on the cross. It is quite possible to denote this as "God's blood" from the perspective of sound Trinitrian doctrine, but such an expression is really quite unlike anything alse in the New Testament. [Footnote here says: "Catholic scholars seem to have less trouble with the concept of Christ's blood as "God's blood." " - Bobcat] A number of significant manuscripts read "church of the Lord," which removes the difficulty; but the reading "church of God" seems to be the more likely original reading. It is possible to argue that "God" is not the intended antecedent but rather Christ, "implicitly," but that is not likely. Another possibility, favored by many recent translations and commentaries, is to translate the final phrase "with the blood of his own," "his own" referring to Christ, God's own beloved Son. This is grammatically arguable and perhaps the best solution for those who find the reference to "God's own blood" unlikely for Paul or for Acts.

Another commentary, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, p. 414 notes:

Nowhere does the Bible speak of the blood of God the Father. The Greek here can read "by the blood of His own," that is, His own Son.

Incidentally, the whole last phrase (tou haimatos tou idiou; literally "the blood the own") is genitive, neuter, singular. The word order differs from two instances of "his own blood" in Hebrews (tou idiou haimatos; 9:12; 13:12). The difference becomes even more interesting if, as some think, Luke is the writer of Hebrews. "His own blood" also occurs in Revelation 1:5 but the construction is somewhat different (to haimati autou), precluding comparisons. (Also John versus a possible Luke as writers.)

So you have a case where each side (Trinitarians versus Non-Trinitarians) could argue, each for his own side, and feel like they have a valid argument. The NWT Reference Bible also has an appendix discussion on the phrase on page 1580 with some of the ideas presented above. It doesn't hide the fact that the KJV rendering ("his own blood") is quite possible, although, it favors the other rendering ("blood of his own") as the preferable one, with "[Son]" in brackets added for clarification. (But now taken out, the brackets that is, in newer editions.)

The LXX also has "his own blood" at Gen 9:6; Ezekiel 18:13; 33:4, 5. The construction in Greek is similar to Revelation 1:5.

Take Care

8

Musings

by thedog1 in

jw
friends

apropo of nothing, i just wanted to share some thoughts.

i have started reading and posting here recently.

i have previously mentioned that i am an active jw, an elder who conducts the wt study.

Bobcat

On the pioneering side of things, it helps to recognize that "pioneering" is a company approved policy. If you were to regularly put in 70 hours a month in the ministry without signing up for pioneering, you would be viewed as someone bucking the system. (Compare Mark 7:5) There would be no experiences from someone like that in the magazines. I dare say, some elders would want you to reduce your time so as not to give others the idea that they could do that without 'signing up.'

As far as the Society is concerned, the only way to serve God full-time and be truly happy is if you are signed up to pioneer. It's no different from a business presenting the idea that you can only be happy or fulfilled if you have their product. As far as they are concerned, something 'like' their product or some oher solution is just not an option.

You've taken a big step simply recognizing there's a problem. Many experiences here recognize that elders like you are the ones who get deleted or burned out - because you are not a 'company man.'

Hope things work out for you and your wife.