Posts by TheWonderofYou

14

Reaching the most distant parts - Geoffrey Jackson praising Bible translators and missionaries as "faithful ones" or even "anointed ones"

by TheWonderofYou in

after we heard some time ago that before the time of russel there was no "faitful slave" or no anointed ones who formed a faitful slave class, now we learn that we dont know if before russel there were not "faitful ones" or "anointed".

indeed jackson says that we know the bible teaches that throughout the history there would be a large number of "sons of the kingdom" ..or anointed ones.. beginning from this month in several projects including a film about christian bible translators who gave an example of "faithfulness" and "discretness" in translating the bible, the christian bibletranslators and missionionaries who used "jehovah" by the way are receiving ultimate praise of the governing body, in the first place at the moment is shown the video about tyndale, wo so is very much supposedly a "faithful one" and perhaps even "anointed" because he loved the bible.. jackson says that those early missionaries of the christendom already "preached the message" before russell.

january broadcast.

TheWonderofYou

You could say that JW are "usurp" all faithful bible translators for their purpose - mainly because they translated the bible in the language of the people against against the resistance of the churches - and present them as their forerunners...

14

Reaching the most distant parts - Geoffrey Jackson praising Bible translators and missionaries as "faithful ones" or even "anointed ones"

by TheWonderofYou in

after we heard some time ago that before the time of russel there was no "faitful slave" or no anointed ones who formed a faitful slave class, now we learn that we dont know if before russel there were not "faitful ones" or "anointed".

indeed jackson says that we know the bible teaches that throughout the history there would be a large number of "sons of the kingdom" ..or anointed ones.. beginning from this month in several projects including a film about christian bible translators who gave an example of "faithfulness" and "discretness" in translating the bible, the christian bibletranslators and missionionaries who used "jehovah" by the way are receiving ultimate praise of the governing body, in the first place at the moment is shown the video about tyndale, wo so is very much supposedly a "faithful one" and perhaps even "anointed" because he loved the bible.. jackson says that those early missionaries of the christendom already "preached the message" before russell.

january broadcast.

TheWonderofYou

After we heard some time ago that before the time of Russel there was no "faitful slave" or no anointed ones who formed a faitful slave class, now we learn that we dont know if before Russel there were not "faitful ones" or "anointed". Indeed Jackson says that we know the bible teaches that THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY there would be a large number of "sons of the kingdom" ..or anointed ones.

Beginning from this month in several projects including a film about christian bible translators who gave an example of "faithfulness" and "discretness" in translating the bible, the christian BIBLETRANSLATORS AND MISSIONIONARIES who used "jehovah" by the way are receiving ultimate praise of the Governing Body, in the first place at the moment is shown the video about TYNDALE, wo so is very much supposedly a "faithful one" and perhaps even "anointed" because he loved the bible.

Jackson says that those early missionaries of the christendom already "preached the message" before Russell

January Broadcast

Morning Worship G.Jackson

Coming Video about Bibletranslators who reached out

13

Jehovah's Witnesses Watchtower Society Houses Hidden Sexual Abuse Records, Says Journalist

by no password in

jehovah's witnesses watchtower society houses hidden sexual abuse records, says journalist.

.

TheWonderofYou

In fact there can be any doubt that such a database exists, at least it was even confirmed by speakers of the Wt in legal cases and to the press as well.

Whereas for the "world" such database looks like a "hidden database of criminals" is seen by the watchtower as a "supervising & care" tool for the security of the congregation in the office of spiritulal succor, a tool that is to be used internal and seen as advanced. The data of all members, the victims as well, are treated with a certain privacy if not reported publicly. If that is really a good way is questionable. It can lead to a cult-intelligence apartment controlling over the members or being responsible. If an abuser is reported to the Jw-database and it changes the congregation the other congregation would be informed about the abusers change. The public and the single members are not informed only the elders

What regards to the content of the database, we have seen here in the forum copies of the forms that are sent to the legal desk with the detailled notes for each of such cases.

1

Human Blood is biblically not forbidden

by TheWonderofYou in

biblical speaking human blood is not prohibited, in the virtue of thora law, it is only prohibited by the virtue of rabbinic law and the reason is because you may confuse it with animal blood.

the rabbinic tradition is: when you are bleeding internally in your mouth, you dont have to spit the blood out.

blood of fish is biblically allowed to be eaten.

TheWonderofYou

Biblical speaking human blood is not prohibited, in the virtue of thora law, it is only prohibited by the virtue of rabbinic law and the reason is because you may confuse it with animal blood. The rabbinic tradition is: When you are bleeding internally in your mouth, you dont have to spit the blood out. If you bleed in the finger, you are not supposed to suck on your finger, once the blood leaves your mouth you should not put it back into your body. But that is not a biblical but only a rabbinic prohibition.

The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 66,10) states that human blood, after it has left the body, is forbidden. This is not because the human blood itself is forbidden to us from the Torah, but rather because someone might think mistakenly that it was non-human blood and therefore forbidden (this type of law is called "marit aiyin"). So, if one bites an apple and finds that blood has come out of one's gums onto the apple, the blood spots must be removed from the apple before taking the next bite. However, continues the Shulchan Aruch, blood inside one's mouth is allowed, and so if one has bit their cheek, or has bleeding gums, the blood inside the mouth may be swallowed, and one does not need to spit it out.
There is some discussion amongst the Rabbis as to the definition of this prohibition. Is it only permitted when the blood is flowing inside one's mouth because it never "came out" as it were? This seems to be Rashi's understanding. If so, blood on a cut, even though it is clearly human blood and permissible, would still fall under the Rabbinic prohibition, as all external blood was forbidden. Or is it always permitted whenever it is clearly human blood, as when it is dripping from a cut finger? This is Tosafot's understanding. If so, the blood from a cut finger is readily identified as human blood, and is allowed. Many opinions rule leniently, and allow one to suck on a cut finger, whilst there are some stricter opinions who forbid it, or only allow it if the blood is inside the wound and will be sucked out, but not if it has already flowed out onto the skin of the finger. (See Nishmat Avraham on the Shulchan Aruch ibid).
Blessings.
From an answer to the Question "Blood from wound -kosher?"

http://www.yeshiva.co/ask/?id=5984

Why is certain animal blood forbidden after kosher slaugther? Because it served as korban under the alter in the temple. Blood of fish is biblically allowed to be eaten. There is blood that is allowed. The same is certainly the case with the blood of grasshoppers in some traditions.

The point of interest: not all animal blood has been biblically but only that which serves as korban according to biblical law. .

Blood - There is no prohibition against eating fish blood, other than the fact that people may think that a
person is eating prohibited blood in which case a sign must be posted indicating that the blood is fish
blood. Ritual slaughter is not required.
http://www.crcweb.org/fish_guidelines.php#

Human blood which inadvertently got mixed with food (such as blood from a cut that dripped into food) may be consumed as long as no bloody redness is visible. This is true even if there is more blood than food in the mixture. If redness is visible, then the food may not be eaten, even if the volume of the food is sixty times greater than that of the blood(24). If blood gets mixed into food, additional food may be added to the mixture in order to make the blood invisible(25).
http://www.torah.org.il/advanced/weekly-halacha/5759/acharei.html

Thats a treasure of the bible, that there is no ban in Leviticus of consumation of human blood but only on animal blood to find. Hence even a saving life with "nourishing" transfusion would be also permissable. If it were garantueed that it is not mixed with animal blood and that human blood contains no demons than what speaks against transfusion? In anticity they believed that if you consume blood of an animal that you would become animalistic. It would somehow diminish your humanity/sensititvity.

Lets eat fishblood and grasshoppers blood withouth fear of loosing eternal blessings so!

2

Early Bible Translations

by TheWonderofYou in

this is a story about the bishop of hippo, a scholarly man.

augustine.

we saw him in the hollywood film.. was he a scholarly man?

TheWonderofYou

Yes.

What is truth?

Truth is about a RESTLESS Heart.

From his book: DE VERA RELIGIONE "About the true religion"

"Do not look outside! Return to yourself! In the interior of man dwells the truth. ...Not the mind creates the truth, but finds it and comes upon it. "

- De vera religione 39, 72f.
A book worthy to read from the 4th century?

19

UK 'blood' court case re:2yo

by darkspilver in

hi orphancrow.

thought you might be interested in the following, brief, court case summary.

high court family division - 18 november 2016an nhs foundation hospital v mr and mrs t. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/ewhc/fam/2016/2980.html.

TheWonderofYou

Crow are you coming outside for a smoke?

6

Are christians allowed to eat blood sausages?

by TheWonderofYou in

this text is an edited google translation by me of a german article by detlef löhde.

the article has also a lutheran aspect in it.

(the bible quotations are taken in english from the nabre, while in the german original the luther-bible is used).

TheWonderofYou

The original Manuscript is obviously not free to obtain.

But I found a transcription made by Constantin Tischendorf: again with "suffocatis"!

Why does my OP than say that Jerome translated the bible without "suffocated"? I should have checked this before, I was gullible.

Either Jerome really used about 420 a manuscript with the writing "suffocated - PNIKTOU

or someone had to change Jerome's Vulate before it was about 540 in the Codex Amiatinus text recorded.

That sounds not reasonable at all and why should that have been necessary at all?

Codex Amiatinus by Conrad Tischendorf, page 210

This book is free https://archive.org/stream/codexamiatinus00jero#page/210/mode/2up

Tischendorf was the guy who discovered the oldest bible the Codex Sinaiticus in the Catherine Monastery at Mt. Sinai, was he not?

6

Are christians allowed to eat blood sausages?

by TheWonderofYou in

this text is an edited google translation by me of a german article by detlef löhde.

the article has also a lutheran aspect in it.

(the bible quotations are taken in english from the nabre, while in the german original the luther-bible is used).

TheWonderofYou

I found something curious in the Latin Vulgate,

while I checked if "suffocated" really was not in Jeromes latin translation as the quote in my OP reads and I found out that in the new Vulgate-versions "suffocated" doesn not lack at all. Here is an example.

https://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/Chronologia/Lspost04/Hieronymus/hie_vn05.html

Acts 15,20 http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drl&bk=51&ch=15&l=20#x

Or another digitalized full text of the vulgate https://www.ub.uni-freiburg.de/fileadmin/ub/referate/04/nt-vg.htm#05

----

Now I am curious to find out if any older version of the Vulgate has the suffocated in it. There is a Codex, the Codex Amiatinus, which is seen as the earliest surviving MM of the nearly complete Latin Vulate translation. and is considered to be the most accurate copy of St. Jerome's text. So i will try to find the digitalized version. Please press your thumbs that I find it.

Codex Amiatinus

http://www.lametaeditore.com/4ita.htm

Unfortunately, the dedication page was altered, but the librarian Angelo Maria Bandini managed to reconstruct the history of the book enough to suggest that the author was Servandus, a follower of St. Benedict, and that the Codex Amiatinus was produced in the Monte Cassino Abbey around the 540s, thus making this copy the oldest among those of the Vulgata. German scholars, though, noted that it is remarkably similar to a text from the 9th century.

Sidenotes:

Did Jerome who lived mainly in Rome already know the people who produced the Codex Vaticanus, which is also from the same century - 4th- and which has Alexandrian text type. Codex Vaticanus was presumeably written in Ceasarea, Egypt...... Moment was not the Codex Vaticanus also produced for the Ceasar as gift? And was not the Vulgate also translated for the Ceasar as gift? ..No sorry for bishop Damasius. Again many questions.

As Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire in the first centuries after Christ, it became necessary to produce Latin versions of the Bible for those not able to understand the Greek of the New Testament or Septuagint.
The first translations were made by individual Christians for use within their own community. These are known as the Old Latin or Vetus Latina.
Towards the end of the fourth century, Pope Damasus asked the scholar Hieronymus (St. Jerome) to produce a revised version of the Gospels. Along with Jerome's translation of the Old Testament, an anonymous revision of the rest of the New Testament, and a handful of books from other sources, these later became the standard version, the Vulgate.
The Vulgate took many years to become established as the principal Latin Bible. In the meanwhile, the Old Latin versions continued to be used. Some of these translations are preserved in Bible manuscripts, in the writings of the Church Fathers and in early Christian liturgies.
These texts are of great significance for the history of the early Church and the transmission of the Bible. Most of the Old Latin translations were made from Greek manuscripts which no longer exist. Although the Latin texts have undergone their own process of transmission, the original layer preserves a witness to the Bible, especially the New Testament, which would otherwise be lost to us. The language and history of these documents also provides information on the social background of early Christian communities and the spread of the Church.
http://www.vetuslatina.org/

Damasus had instructed Jerome to be conservative in his revision of the Old Latin Gospels, and it is possible to see Jerome's obedience to this injunction in the preservation in the Vulgate of variant Latin vocabulary for the same Greek terms. Hence, "high priest" is rendered princeps sacerdotum in Vulgate Matthew; as summus sacerdos in Vulgate Mark; and as pontifex in Vulgate John. Comparison of Jerome's Gospel texts with those in Old Latin witnesses, suggests that his revision was substantially concerned with redacting the expanded phraseology characteristic of the Western text-type, in accordance with Alexandrian, or possibly early Byzantine, witnesses.
Given Jerome's conservative methods, and that manuscript evidence from outside Egypt at this early date is very rare; these Vulgate readings have considerable critical interest. More interesting still—because effectively untouched by Jerome —are the Vulgate books of the rest of the New Testament; which demonstrate rather more of supposed "Western" expansions, and otherwise transmit a very early Old Latin text. Most valuable of all from a text-critical perspective is the Vulgate text of the Apocalypse, a book where there is no clear majority text in the surviving Greek witnesses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate

7

Readers Digest - Early Text of the New Testament

by TheWonderofYou in

https://books.google.at/books?id=ttnrzxcvggyc&pg=pa162&lpg=pa162&dq=p38+papyrus+michigan&source=bl&ots=iwzmjy4bmu&sig=lpsfa1rd31f4d-olxunuztjhuqg&hl=de&sa=x&ved=0ahukewiek-eh3cvqahvcfhokhzkgdagq6aeistak#v=onepage&q=p38%20papyrus%20michigan&f=false.

i recommend to read the introduction (free preview) at google preview containing stuff about.

- early text and original text p3- papyri and early text- classifying early papyri readings- text quality - earl text a free text?- transmission quality- public and privat copies- textal and scribal culture- book trade in the roman empire.

TheWonderofYou

I am dealing with the question: If so many early witnesses are for a catalogue of the NT scriptures, why can anyone serioulsy argue or hold to the theory that at the council at Nicea at 325 A.D. Emporer Ceaser Constantine had decided which scriptures would become the New Testament with the evil ulterior motive to unify the church or to give power to the orthodoxy? Was the canon made to give the orthodoxy more power at all or for other reasons? Was the reason for the 325 council not that JW would get a full bible with all books in the last days for the worldwide work?

Did at 325 the church really begin or later after the synod of Cartage at 397 to maliciously destroy or exclude gnostic and apocryph books and did it even burn the books of gnostic apostates so that the so called 'Catolic church" would gain more and absolute power over all believers and the gnostic would be annihilated as apostates. Went the christian mobs around to burn the gnostic books? Did the orthodox christian then pry about and betray the gnostic christians?

But mainly: How could that the canonization be the reason for any pogroms or bookburning against gnostics if the canon already existed in the 2nd century?

Perhaps it was really only more an emperors trial to settle dogmatic conflicts about the Arianism/Trinity and not so much about selection of canon?

I think that the bishops wanted to give the emperor Ceaser the honour and so it looks for us like he decided, but in reality the canon already was spoken about in an "a process of careful investigation and deliberation" since longer and also in talks with the jewish what relates the hebrews.

7

Readers Digest - Early Text of the New Testament

by TheWonderofYou in

https://books.google.at/books?id=ttnrzxcvggyc&pg=pa162&lpg=pa162&dq=p38+papyrus+michigan&source=bl&ots=iwzmjy4bmu&sig=lpsfa1rd31f4d-olxunuztjhuqg&hl=de&sa=x&ved=0ahukewiek-eh3cvqahvcfhokhzkgdagq6aeistak#v=onepage&q=p38%20papyrus%20michigan&f=false.

i recommend to read the introduction (free preview) at google preview containing stuff about.

- early text and original text p3- papyri and early text- classifying early papyri readings- text quality - earl text a free text?- transmission quality- public and privat copies- textal and scribal culture- book trade in the roman empire.

TheWonderofYou

http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-28/367-athanasius-defines-new-testament.html

The famous Codex Vaticanus in the Vatican Library, a Greek codex of the Old and New Testaments. It consists of the same books in the same order as in Athanasius’s festal letter—which is particularly noteworthy given the peculiar order: Gospels, Acts, Catholic Epistles (James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, and Jude), Pauline Epistles (including Hebrews between 2 Thessalonians and 1 Timothy), and Revelation. The Codex Vaticanus probably was written in Rome, in 340, by Alexandrian scribes for Emperor Constans, during Athanasius’s seven-year exile in the city. It would thus predate the festal letter. Even though Athanasius was probably not far away when the Codex Vaticanus was written, one realizes that the establishment of the canon was not a sudden decision made unilaterally by a bishop in Alexandria, but a process of careful investigation and deliberation, documented in a codex of the Greek Bible and, twenty-seven years later, in a festal letter.

In this concern the fact is interesting that Codex Vaticanus is seen as that collection which has the best text quality of all of the earliest codices, which speaks for the job which Athanasisus had done. The text form of the codes is Alexandrian. Alexandria was a cosmopolitan city including Greeks, Jews, Egyptians, other native Africans and Romans. Its place in trade was dominant. It also had a long literary tradition and a special Platonic tradition which Eudorus represented. Its libraries were central in its learning. The patriarchy of Alexandria had after the Roman and Constantinople patriarchy the third rank.

Codex Vaticanus (B): According to Aland the by far best manuscript especially with the gospels. From Hebrew 9,14 on the original text is lost due to damage. Alexandrian texttype; 4th century

Early catalogues according the mentioned book from 1990 All Scriptures are Insprired.

Athanasisus' is included.