Bobcat

Joined

• started 21 topics
• posted 2,187 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Bobcat

• 
  28

  When and where is the War in Heaven, supposedly?

  by jam in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  1)when did this war breakout or did i miss it.. many commentators conclude that the battle between michael.

  and the dragon occurs roughly at the start of the church age.. some even argue that the battleground is the church itself.. others say this scene describes the dispute between michael.

  and satan for the body of moses (jude 9) or the long-ago.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Bobcat

  Band:

  Not everybody has such a rosy view of the early middle ages.

  .
• 
  20

  Have Jehovah’s Witnesses Changed the Bible to Fit Their Beliefs

  by KSFernando in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  no, we havent.

  on the contrary, when we have discovered that our beliefs were not completely in line with the bible, we have changed our beliefs.. is this correct?.

  gods name in greek scriptures?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Bobcat

  Speaking of Hebrews 1, see the second bulleted point on this post concerning Hebrews 1:1, 2 and "the last days."

  Here is something similar regarding James 5:3:

  (James 5:3 Old NWT) . . .YOUR gold and silver are rusted away, and their rust will be as a witness against YOU and will eat YOUR fleshy parts. Something like fire is what YOU have stored up in the last days. . .

  (James 5:3 rNWT) . . .Your gold and silver have rusted away, and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh. What you have stored up will be like a fire in the last days.

  Compare these NWT renderings above with the renderings of James 5:3 at BibleHub (here).

  In both instances (Hebrews 1:1, 2 and James 5:3), the NWT makes a rendering that dilutes the idea of "the last days." The Society holds that the last days don't begin until 1914. The NT writers held to the idea that they were in the last days. The renderings of the NWT on these two verses reflect in a subtle way, the view of the WT in reference to their "last days" doctrine.
• 
  32

  Undeclared changes to the 2013 NWT

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  in the following from the 2013 edition of the nwt, the watchtower society indicates that when it released its initial 1950 edition, it considered the greek text provided by westcott and hort as its master text.

  as a result of these additional masters, the wts made some undeclared changes to the 2013 nwt.

  it does not list these changes or give any explanations.. greek text: in the late 19th century, scholars b. f. westcott and f.j.a.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Bobcat

  Another interesting change in the 2013 NWT:

  (1 Corinthians 16:2 Old NWT) . . .Every first day of the week let each of YOU at his own house set something aside in store as he may be prospering, so that when I arrive collections will not take place then.

  (1 Corinthians 16:2 rNWT) . . .On the first day of every week, each of you should set something aside according to his own means, so that collections will not take place when I arrive. . .

  The bolded, underlined part in the old was removed in the new. Commented on in the first bulleted point on this post.
• 
  15

  GB And Change: Lessons From Soviet History

  by metatron in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i read an interesting book - "spymaster" by tennent bagley in which he offers a biography of a senior consultant to the kgb, based on long interviews with a man who was once his enemy (sergey kundrashev).

  i believe the book proves some powerful insights into the workings of secretive totalitarian cults.. there are many parallels between the two organizations: they were both born out of 1914 events, they addressed each other as comrade/brother, they encouraged youth to become "pioneers/red pioneers", they were started as very individualistic (revolutionaries) -were then taken over and structured by an amoral thug-dictator (stalin/rutherford) , worshipped the "party/organization", emphasized collective thought over the individual, and ended up ruled by an elderly politboro/governing body - who were forced to contend with disruptive change.. .

  but here's where the similarities get interesting:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Bobcat

  Metatron:

  Very interesting post and food for thought. There is a lot in there that I can identify with such as: ". . . thoughtlessly demoted, shafted and grossly mistreated those among them that were often most loyal and hardworking. No practical sense of real gratitude whatsoever."

  Thanks for posting this.

  Take Care
• 
  28

  When and where is the War in Heaven, supposedly?

  by jam in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  1)when did this war breakout or did i miss it.. many commentators conclude that the battle between michael.

  and the dragon occurs roughly at the start of the church age.. some even argue that the battleground is the church itself.. others say this scene describes the dispute between michael.

  and satan for the body of moses (jude 9) or the long-ago.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Bobcat

  As a starting point, Satan's ouster from heaven would depend on when Jesus was enthroned in heaven. If you look at the bottom of my post here, you will see several links that lead to Scriptural references that Jesus was enthroned shortly after he returned to heaven.

  If one accepts the idea that Jesus was enthroned as king when he returned to heaven in the 1st century then:

  • Satan’s ouster from heaven, depicted in Revelation 12, directly after, and as a result of, 'the woman's child being caught away to God and to His throne (an oblique reference to the start of the 'child's' rule). This would tie Satan's ouster with the enthronement of Jesus, shortly after he returned to heaven. (Revelation 12:5-9)

  • This view, that Satan was ousted shortly after Jesus returned to heaven, would correspond nicely with the fact that Jesus, while on earth, said that this would be an event then soon to take place, and linked it with his death:

    (John 12:31, 32 NWT) . . . Now there is a judging of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out. 32 And yet I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw men of all sorts to me.

    Regarding “now” in John 12 (Greek nun, Strong’s #3568), AMG’s Greek WordStudy Dictionary understands it in this verse (as also with Acts 13:11; Phil 1:20; John 16:5; Acts 26:17) as meaning, “In reference to future time just at hand. . . As implying what is immediately to take place.” (p. 1019) Similarly, BDAG (Bauer’s 3rd Edition Lexicon) defines it as “a temporal marker with focus on the moment as such, now.” And with regard to John 12:31 (and the other pasages referenced in the AMG reference) as “of time shortly before or shortly after the immediate pres[ent].”

    Consider also John 16:11 -

    (John 16:7-11 NWT) . . .Nevertheless, I am telling YOU the truth, It is for YOUR benefit I am going away. For if I do not go away, the helper will by no means come to YOU; but if I do go my way, I will send him to YOU. 8 And when that one arrives he will give the world convincing evidence concerning sin and concerning righteousness and concerning judgment: 9 in the first place, concerning sin, because they are not exercising faith in me; 10 then concerning righteousness, because I am going to the Father and YOU will behold me no longer; 11 then concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.

    Verse 11 is the verse of interest. But I included from verse 7 for context. The verb “has been judged” (in verse 11) is “perfect,” a completed action. Alternate renderings of the verse at BibleHub bring this out also. (See here.) Although this verse is indirect evidence, it would make plain why Jesus would say in John 12:31, “now the ruler of this world will be cast out.” There was no reason to let Satan remain in heaven for another 1900 years.

  • Also note that Satan’s ouster from heaven is connected to his having been an “accuser of our brothers.” (Revelation 12:10) Paul, in his writings, indicated that no one then was in a position to “accuse” Christians:

    (Romans 8:31-34 NWT) . . .What, then, shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who will be against us? 32 He who did not even spare his own Son but delivered him up for us all, why will he not also with him kindly give us all other things? 33 Who will file accusation against God’s chosen ones? God is the One who declares [them] righteous. 34 Who is he that will condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died, yes, rather the one who was raised up from the dead, who is on the right hand of God, who also pleads for us. . .

    (Colossians 1:21, 22 NWT) . . .Indeed, YOU who were once alienated and enemies because YOUR minds were on the works that were wicked, 22 he now has again reconciled by means of that one’s fleshly body through [his] death, in order to present YOU holy and unblemished and open to no accusation before him . . .

    These verses make a lot more sense if Satan has already been cast out of heaven in the 1st century, as described in Revelation 12:7-12. In effect, Jesus' sacrifice provided the legal basis for throwing Satan out of court.

  • And finally, from a historical perspective. Satan's ouster from heaven is linked to 'woe for the earth and sea.' (Revelation 12:12)

    In the centuries that followed Jesus' return to heaven, the greatest empire up to that time broke up and Europe entered the Dark Ages which lasted until somewhere between the 8th and 11th centuries, according to who is doing the reckoning. Human population is thought to have declined during that period. Education basically stopped for all but a few. Wars, famines, and plagues (the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th horseman of the apocalypse, which follow the crowning of the 1st horse rider - Revelation 6) were rampant on a scale that make the 20th century seem downright tame by comparison. (As some here have pointed out.)

  Take Care
• 
  48

  Danger Witness Robinson! Danger!!!

  by Marvin Shilmer in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  danger witness robinson!

  danger!!!

  today i added a new article to my blog highlighting the danger of power consolidation along with an overt attempt to ready millions for obeying irrational direction from this power.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Bobcat

  Google says it is open to invited guests only. I wonder also what happened. It had a great collection of articles.
• 
  7

  "The gentile times reconsidered"

  by zebagain in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  have just finished the book by olofsson on this subject.

  anyone else read it.?

  it is extremely detailed and not an easy read at all.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Bobcat

  I read it too. An amazing, well-researched, and, as you said, a difficult subject. Before I read it I read The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings (Edwin Thiele, See here). This also was a difficult read, but well worth the effort. (And I think Thiele is passed now, but I am very grateful for his 30+ years of research that he put into his work.)

  When I first started lurking here I saw all the hubbub about 607 and was inclined leave that subject for others. As I continued researching (outside WT parameters) I began to see the need to look into this subject. So I read Thiele's book first, then Jonsson's. The two books unintentionally form a complimentary pair. Thiele is interested in establishing the dating of the Hebrew kings from the split in the kingdom after Solomon (c. 931 BC) down till the last king (Zedekiah) and the fall of Jerusalem (c. 587 BC). So Thiele is more interested in the whole chronology, while Jonsson is intent on dating of the fall of Jerusalem. Yet their seperate research meets at the same point in time. The two books left me with no doubt about the true dating of the fall of Jerusalem, and more than ready to explore the impact that had on my WT understanding of things.

  Take Care
• 
  28

  JW's Never Closed the Door On A Russian King of the North

  by scotoma in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  king of the north.

  union, the "king of the south" can be none other than the rival non-communist bloc, under the .

  so who is the king of the north now?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Bobcat

  An example of what Alan said about the WT hedging their bets: Here.
• 
  33

  Letting JESUS refute the Watch Tower blood policies

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  letting jesus refute the watch tower blood policies.

  the watch tower bible and tract society represent itself as christian.. it represents its theology and policies as direct from jehovah god through his son, jesus christ.. further, the governing body of this corporation interposes itself between the mediator, jesus, and the rest of jehovah's (christian) witnesses for the purpose of "feeding them (spiritual) food at the proper time.. the official word of jesus christ is represented in the watch tower's policy on blood transfusions.. in 1998 this statement was made:.

  jehovah's witnesses do not accept whole blood, or major components of blood, namely, red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets and plasma.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Bobcat

  The following is from the NAC-Acts commentary (John B. Polhill, p.330-31). So as to fill out the discussion of this thread and give a little background to the development of the "Western Text" tradition:

  • When looked at closely, all four of these [decrees of Acts 15:19, 20] belong to the ritual sphere. Meat offered to idols was an abomination to Jews, who avoided any and everything associated with idolatry. "Strangled meat" referred to animals that had been slaughtered in a manner that left the blood in it. Blood was considered sacred to the Jews , and all meat was to be drained of blood before consuming it. The prohibition of "blood" came under the same requirement, referring to the consumption of the blood of animals in any form. These three requirements were all ritual, dealing with matters of clean and unclean foods. The fourth catagory seems somewhat less ritual and more moral: sexual immorality (porneia). It is possible that this catagory was also originally intended in a mainly ritual sense, referring to those "defiling" sexual relationships the Old Testament condemns, such as incest, marriage outside the covenant community, marriage with a close relative, bestiality, homosexuality, and the like. It is also possible that a broader meaning was intended including all illicit "natural" relationships as well, such as fornication, concubinage, and adultery. Gentile sexual mores were lax compared to Jewish standards, and it was one of the areas where Jews saw themselves most radically differentiated from Gentiles. The boundary between ritual and ethical law is not always distinct, and sexual morality is one of those areas where it is most blurred. For the Jew sexual misbehavior was both immoral and impure. A Jew would find it difficult indeed to consort with a Gentile who did not live by his own standards of sexual morality.

    The four requirements [of Acts 15:19, 20] suggested by James were thus all basically ritual requirements aimed at making fellowship possible between Jewish and Gentile Christians. Often referred to as "the apostolic decrees," they belonged to a period in the life of the church when there was close contact between Jewish and Gentile Christians, when table fellowship especially was common between them. In a later day, by the end of the first century, Jewish Christianity became isolated into small sects and separated from Gentile Christianity. There no longer existed any real fellowship between them. The original function of the decrees no longer had any force, and they tended to be viewed in wholly moral terms. This tendency is very much reflected in the textual tradition of Acts 15:20, 29 and 21:25, particularly in the Western text, which omits "strangled meat," adds the negative form of the golden rule, and reads "idolatry" rather than idol meat. There are thus four moral prohibitions: no idolatry, no sexual immorality, no murder ("blood" now viewed as the shedding - not consuming - of blood), and "do not do to another what you wouldn't wish done to yourself."

    [End quote. Material in "[ ]" is Bobcat's for clarity.]
• 
  49

  Head covering for women--how did you feel about this? Men? Women?

  by humbled in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  thinking about how this felt awkward to some of us women when a bible student noticed something was "up" if a baptised brother sat in on a study.

  had to reference 1 cor.

  11:1-16.. i wonder if this irked any while you were still in?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Bobcat

  In Paul's day a woman's wearing/not wearing a head covering had social meaning for people inside and outside of the congregation. In most western lands today (the main realm of Christendom) it has no meaning except to JWs. In fact, to see a woman suddenly put on a head covering for no apparent weather-related or fashion-related reason might seem a bit irratonal.