John 5:28, 29, 12:47, 48 and Romans 2:14-16 show that people will be affected at the judgment by what they did during their life.
John 12:47, 48 & Romans 2:14-16 also give an indication of what is in the scrolls of Revelation 20:12.
Bobcat
Posts by Bobcat
-
9Wrong and Deceiving
by Madan Magar inin the article 'judgement day' published by jehovah's witness', they are saying,'in 'judgement day', the people who will be resurrected and had no chance to learn about god will not be judged according to their past deed but what will they do after resurrection.
' and they show the scripture roman6:7 which says"who has died has been acquitted from his sin.
" if we take out context and see it literally , it has that meaning but the scripture's contextual meaning is totally different, it doesn't talk about physical death but the death of old personality.so in this cotext, this cannot be applied.this is anacceptable to admit..
-
-
-
22
New light on more parables
by Deltawave inwell after a full watchtower study last week about how we should not read to much into bible account as types and antitypes, we had a whole study article on what the 10 wise virgins now means.
interesting though is the fact that only in 2007/8 they taught that the discreet virgins were the annointed ones who waited for christ's return in 1914 and the foolish ones were the ones who fell away in 1914 because the end didn't come.
now though, we have new light!
-
-
Bobcat
For any interested in a comparison of the WT explanations of the parable of the 10 virgins and the parable of the talents with what a good academic commentary has to say, I posted reference material for both parables on the DTT site:
The parable of the 10 virgins: here.
The parable of the talents: here.
Bobcat
-
72
Specific Comments By R&F About May Broadcast
by freemindfade ini know there are many posts discussing the may money requesting televangalism...er... broadcast i mean!
but i wanted to start one where anyone can put what they have heard any non-exjw, non-apostate witnesses say good or bad about the broadcast.
i don't see how it can't rattle followers... but then again i might be surprised how they can twist things (2+2=5).
-
-
-
26
David Schafer's Mistake
by Hold Me-Thrill Me inthanks cappytan for posting the thread "jehovah's people as a whole can never be corrupted".
it's a sad example of how low in simple reading skills the present gb and their helpers are.
david schafer referred to philippians 4:7 on jw broadcasting.
-
-
-
5
James 1:27, Widows, Orphans, Religion - Worship
by berrygerry inwhat 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.
-
-
Bobcat
a watcher
I was reviewing some older posts. I meant to commend you for this.
The number of needy sisters in the congregations is just overwhelming. I help the handful that I can . . .On a note from my post above, I mentioned that the counting of FS time has the effect of moving congregation members to spend their time where it would be counted - in the ministry, versus spending more time with "orphans and widows."
But in addition, WT dogma or interpretation also has an adverse effect on the time spent with "orphans and widows" within the congregation. For example, in the 'Sheep & Goats' parable of Mt 25:31-46, Jesus commends the sheep for having ministered to him when he was "hungry . . . thirsty . . . a stranger . . . naked . . . sick . . . [and] in prison." Jesus then goes on to say that they did this to him when they did this to "one of the least of these brothers or sisters of mine" (NET).
WT dogma asserts that "one of the least of these brothers or sisters of mine" only refers to an anointed Christian," of which there are only 144,000. And most of them are long gone. And of those that remain, the only ones you can be sure of are the GB.
Thus, their own (enforced) dogma steals support away from the very ones who are being described. They are actually worse than the "goats" who simply admit to ignorance of such situations ("When did we see you . . ." - Mt 25:44)
For anyone interested in experimenting with the effect WT terminology has had on its members, try using the terms "WT religion" or "Jehovah's Witness religion" or "our religion" within the Kingdom Hall and amongst JWs. I'm guessing that if you are not a JW, this 'misuse' of terminology will be excused as simple ignorance. But if you are already a JW it will be seen as an indication of one's starting to distance themselves from the WT, in the same way using terms like "bulletin board" and "New Testament" and "crucify" would be seen.
Bobcat
-
12
You are simulation and physics can prove it
by Brokeback Watchtower inhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chfoo9nbeow.
a little about george smoot.
http://bigbangtheory.wikia.com/wiki/george_smoot.
-
-
Bobcat
marked -
8
Request for Research . . .
by Bobcat inthe 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. .
-
-
Bobcat
Wonderment:
Thank you very much for providing the context of the quote as well as the brief synopsis of the dictionary as a whole.
And thank you for the link to Cokesbury.com. I saw it listed at CDB for $99 and thought that was great. I'm going to have to bookmark Cokesbury also.
Thanks again,
Bobcat
-
32
Governing Body Sheep Fleecing - Official!
by The Searcher infellow witnesses - do you think the kingdom hall belongs to you, just because you all paid for it and personally finance its maintenance?
think again, sheep!
the "shepherds" have announced the fleecing in black & white for you, in case you decide to question them!.
-
-
Bobcat
Watchtower July 15th 2015 p.31 - "A Kingdom Hall is a building dedicated to Jehovah. Therefore, it cannot rightly be said to belong to any individual or congregation,whatever its legal title may indicate."
My question, then, is, Who can rightly sell a kingdom hall? since it does not "belong to any individual or congregation,whatever its legal title may indicate."
Bobcat
-
8
Request for Research . . .
by Bobcat inthe 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. .
-
-
Bobcat
Thank you all for your replies! And yes, Wonderment, I am more than willing to wait for your input.
berrygerry, the WT is the 1/15/15 study issue, page 29, paragraph 6.
The (possible) issue here is that the WT quoted from the New Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible concerning the Song of Solomon (see the OP for the exact quote and paragraph number). The WT maintains that the Song of Solomon is a drama featuring three people: Solomon (as the villain); the Shulammite woman, and her shepherd husband-to-be (who repeatedly refers to the Shulammite as his "bride."
Various references that I have point out that the Song of Solomon has the most diversified history of interpretation of any book of the Bible. It has been interpreted as an allegory of the love between God and Israel (Jewish interpretation), of Christ and his church (Christian interpretation), a two person drama (the shepherd and the Shulammite), a three person drama (the shepherd, the Shulammite, and Solomon as a foil - this is the interpretation held to in the WT study on 4/3/15).
There are numerous variations of all of these interpretations and some others not mentioned, like one having to do with a funeral for Baal (?). For example, in the allegorical interpretations, the dark skin of the Shulammite is often equated with sin.
As usual, the WT study simply presents the three character drama as if this were all settled. No mention that there are countless other interpretations. No mention that most modern references debunk all these interpretations. That in itself is a bit galling - to see such mindless drivel being passed off as 'food at the proper time.' And the audience sopping it up - although, there were a lot in the audience who admittedly couldn't wrap their heads around this - but there it is in the WT, so it must be true!
And the points made in the WT about marriage and courtship weren't bad at all. It was just strange to see them try to make Song of Solomon try to prove them. I don't think any cited text from Song of Solomon actually said what the paragraph said it was saying.
But at any rate, that aside. I had a hunch that the context of the quote from the Bible dictionary was dismissing the whole dramatic interpretation being held to in the WT. I wanted to see if they were pulling a quote right out of the middle of material that dismisses the very interpretation they were holding to. (As usual, the WT gives no page numbers. But they did give the name of the reference. That is an improvement.)
(And this interpretation in no way originates with the WT. One of my references says that the three person drama was first proposed by Ibn Ezra in the 12 century AD and then further enlarged upon in the 18th and 19th centuries. Of course, the audience was lavishing praise upon the F&DS for having deciphered such a hard to understand book.)
Wonderment, I'd also like to hear what you think of the Dictionary. CBD has the 5 volume set on sale. I was wondering if it is worth the sale price.
Thanks again in advance.
Bobcat
-
8
Request for Research . . .
by Bobcat inthe 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. .
-
-
Bobcat
bump