the wt study 4/5/15 quotes from the new interpreter's dictionary of the bible.
the quote is "things like plot, story, narrative development, and character are not really of prime interest.
" it is located in paragraph 6 on page 29. .
The WT study 4/5/15 quotes from the New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible. The quote is "things like plot, story, narrative development, and character are not really of prime interest." It is located in paragraph 6 on page 29.
I was wondering if anyone had access to this reference. It may be in Volume 5 which includes items that begin with "S." I am very interested in the context within which the quote is taken.
Thanks in advance
Bobcat
where did jesus take his faithful 11 apostles immediately after finishing the meal in the upper room?.
anyone looked at this before?
.
Searcher:
Very interesting find. All the times I have read that account I somehow always assumed they were in the same place until the end of chapter 17. I wonder if John 17:1 ("[Jesus] lifted up his eyes to heaven . . .") might be an indication of an outside location?
Looking at various commentaries, they seem to accept the possibility (of the group leaving the upper room after chapter 14) without being dogmatic about it. Some suggest possibly a location passing through vineyards or near the temple entrance (where there was a golden vine hanging over the entrance) whilst giving the vine illustration of chapter 15.
This is the only recent WT commentary I could find on it (Greatest Man book):
*** gt chap. 116 Preparing the Apostles for His Departure ***Also see w90 8/15 p.8 which the Greatest Man book account is taken from.
Following the memorial meal, Jesus has been encouraging his apostles with an informal heart-to-heart talk. It may be past midnight. So Jesus urges: “Get up, let us go from here.” However, before they leave, Jesus, moved by his love for them, continues speaking, providing a motivating illustration.
Bobcat
my memory is that after the 'candidates' answered the questions, the speaker stated that they should be 'baptized without delay' or words to that effect.
is this still the case.
is there any recording you can refer me too which gives the audible evidence?
For some interesting commentary and experience on WT baptism ritual, go to this thread and scroll down to my first post.
Bobcat
this was my first memorial thinking outside of the box.
last year i was starting to have questions but this is the first year i noticed a lot of bs.
can anyone clarify a few things for me?.
Touching the plate and cup, whether you eat and drink or refrain, is intended by the WT to allow you to express your hope - either going to heaven or staying on earth.
And yet they emphasize that only a relative few are going to heaven. And most of those have already died. So anyone who eats/drinks of the emblems becomes the object of others immediate judgment as to whether such a thing is really possible for that person.
There are many ironies in this WT ceremony:
1. The only ones who partake without question are the leaders, the governing body at headquarters. To question their partaking is to question their authority. Everyone else who partakes is somebody that 'believes' they are going to heaven. But as far as the leadership is concerned, that remains to be seen.
2. JWs go to great lengths to invite outsiders to "observe" the Lord's Evening Meal. Yet, as you pointed out, they take pains to make sure everyone participates by being handed the plate and cup. If you noticed after the passing of the cup and plate, the brothers who did the passing of them must sit down and have the plate and cup handed to them. This, despite the fact that they have been handling the plate and cup as they passed it to all those in their seats. Finally, the the speaker has to be handed the cup and plate in the same ritualistic way. He is required to show where he stands on the matter.
It seems to me from points "1" and "2" that this is an exercise in establishing who the leadership is and who those being led are. You show the acceptance of your place as a follower of the GB by passing the emblems without partaking.
3. Another irony is that Jesus (and Paul) described the eating and drinking of the bread and wine as a way of 'remembering Jesus' death.' But at the Kingdom Hall, eating and drinking the bread and wine (or not doing so) is all about where you hope to go after this life.
And I agree with your point about why have non-partakers in attendance. How odd to be invited to a ceremonial meal in order to watch others partake of it. Or in many Kingdom halls, to watch nobody partake of it. What a waste of food that Jesus would never have approved of (compare John 6:12; Matthew 14:20; Mark 8:8; Luke 9:17)
Bobcat
the penalty of this charge??
yes, disfellowshipping.. bad association?
excessive time at work?
Actually, as a translation I think "brazen conduct" is an improvement over the more ambiguous "loose conduct." (See here as an example.)
But at the same time, in the hands of a star chamber court, "brazen conduct" is just the sort of weapon of choice. It allows the inquisitors to punish any attitude they don't like, or anyone who dares to think for themselves.
Bobcat
this is the watchtower's equivalent to the theory of evolution - there is no evidence but it must be so.
in fact all the evidence points to the contrary.
there is not one new testament manuscript known today in which the tetragram appears and there is no evidence of a conspiracy to get rid of the tetragram.
what bothered me in the past few years prior to departure was the lack of caring for widows and orphans.. two days ago, i discovered that james 1:27 uses the word religion - even though the reference bible has it as a footnote, as does the gray bible.. there was a study article in 1991 which boasts that the nwt is consistent in translating threskeia all 4 times as "form of worship," whereas other translations also use "worship" at col. 2:18.
(check the context and greek - nwt is quite off.).
the article does not refer one to vine's, which is usually the go-to reference book.
θρησκεία (threskeia, noun, Strong's # 2356) is used at Acts 26:5; Col 2:18; Jas 1:26, 27 (for those who want to look its use over).
BDAG (Bauer's 3rd edition lexicon, 1995) defines it as, "expression of devotion to transcendent beings, esp. as it expresses itself in cultic rites, worship." AMG's Greek dictionary gives it an infinitive definition, "to worship God."
BDAG also lists θρησκεὺῷ (threskeuo, verb), but this isn't used in the NT.
Both words are derived from θρησκὸς (threskos, adjective, # 2357) which is used in the NT only at Jas 1:26. BDAG defines that as "religious." AMG's Greek dictionary adds "devout" and "pious."
So the NWT's renderings of "form of worship" for 2356 and "formal worshiper" for #2357 ("worshiper of God" for #2357 in the rNWT) fits within the range of meaning given in BDAG.
BDAG is pretty much the gold standard in Greek lexicons. Vine's is a bit dated, but still useful. But I think you are fairly correct in regard to the WT's use of the term "religion." The WT has its own 'religious' vocabulary to which they have nuanced various words. And "religion" and "religious" are often relegated to those outside of WTdom. So their non-use of "religion" or "religious" in a context discussing how Christians should act would seem to fit their MO.
In connection with attention (or lack thereof) given to "orphans and widows," I would posit that here is where the WT's demand for counting field service time is at the root of the problem. It has the effect of forcing people to spend their time where they know it will be counted (counted by the WT, that is), even though the text at James 1:26, 27 shows that caring for "orphans and widows" has a priority with God.
Bobcat
how do you say it where you are?
geehovah or jahovah?
i don't know how many of you still participate in the sunday wt study, but i unfortunately still do.
even though i was asleep half of the time, i did notice something i thought i should share with the rest, in case you haven't noticed.
a lot of the paragraphs were worded strongly against partaking and used clear language of intimidation and discouragement toward anyone thinking of partaking.
What is the penalty for partaking if you're not eligible?The problem wouldn't so much be that you partook. The problem would come in if you tried to provide a scriptural reason for partaking such as, 'Well, that's what Jesus said to do.' Or even worse, 'I think all Christians are supposed to partake.' An example of their lying fraud is the last sentence of paragraph 5:
Gratitude to God and his Son should move us to be present at the commemoration of Jesus’ death, thus obeying the command: “Keep doing this in remembrance of me.”—1 Cor. 11:23-25.In the paragraph, "Keep doing this . . ." means "to be present." But they strategically left out verse 26 which explains what "keep doing this . . ." means:
(1 Corinthians 11:23-26 NWT) . . .For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night on which he was going to be betrayed took a loaf, 24 and after giving thanks, he broke it and said: “This means my body, which is in your behalf. Keep doing this in remembrance of me.” 25 He did the same with the cup also, after they had the evening meal, saying: “This cup means the new covenant by virtue of my blood. Keep doing this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this loaf and drink this cup, you keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he comes.
"glenn close stepped on the stage to honor the academy members who sadly passed away this evening.".
.. what did the reporter mean to say?
coco.
Glenn Close should have canceled his engagement to attend the funeral(s). You see the fuss that was raised against William Shatner . . .
Bobcat
