Posts by Robert_V

32

Why is Jehover's spiritual food copyrighted?

by berten in

the wts likes to put the "c in a circle" symbol on everything they publish.. but why should god's "inspired" writings have to be protected that way?.

to protect it against illegal copying?he and the wts should be pleased .

that his works are copied even more because is that not what he wants?.

Robert_V_Frazier

Three reasons come to mind:

1. It's not food.

2, It's not spiritual.

3. God (however you spell His name) has nothing to do with it.

Robert Frazier

89

Why do so many people believe that jesus is god?

by Legendary U.2.K. in

i still say that, christiaity is f--- up in these last days.. christianity teaches that the messiah is god, when the bible clearly points out that jesus is a prophet sent by god... jesus prayed to god<----that's the biggest proof... so i think if anybody believe that jesus is god, is not only an'-ti-christ(not accepting) but also a liar, foolish, and you knoweth nothing, and you are not close to god or christ, you are closer to that devil which we call satan....

Robert_V_Frazier

This should be a good place to start. Hope this is what you were looking for

Thanks, but that's rather more than what I was looking for. Origen wrote a ton of stuff, and he was not always consistent. I'd just like to see, in Origen's works (not in summaries of it), where he wrote the comment on John 1:1 that New Way alludes to. Origen's writings are available on the internet, but finding the comment New Way has in mind in that pile could take a long time, especially when I don't know exactly what to look for.

Thanks anyway.

Robert Frazier

89

Why do so many people believe that jesus is god?

by Legendary U.2.K. in

i still say that, christiaity is f--- up in these last days.. christianity teaches that the messiah is god, when the bible clearly points out that jesus is a prophet sent by god... jesus prayed to god<----that's the biggest proof... so i think if anybody believe that jesus is god, is not only an'-ti-christ(not accepting) but also a liar, foolish, and you knoweth nothing, and you are not close to god or christ, you are closer to that devil which we call satan....

Robert_V_Frazier

I have already had John 1:1 answered to my satisfaction from an expert witness (Origen) who actually spoke Koine Greek while it was still a living language, someone who obviously knew what he was talking about.

Okay, I'll bite. Where did Origen "answer" John 1:1? (I wasn't aware it was a question.) I haven't heard of Origen cited as an opponent of the Trinity before, so I'd be interested in reading what you're referring to here.

Thanks,

Robert Frazier

9

reproach and loyalty

by zev in

reproach and loyalty.

consider the following points from the publishing house in brooklyn

ny, usa.

Robert_V_Frazier

Expatbrit, I agree. The problem is, the Society doesn't distinguish among sins against God, crimes against humanity, and civil lawsuit grievances against an individual person. To them, all are sins, none are crimes, all must be handled internally by the Org, and none need involve outside authorities, such as the police, child welfare agencies, the FBI, Interpol, etc.

By keeping it "in the family", their precious reputation can't be harmed, they think. As if the Society EVER had a good reputation outside its own ranks!

You're right; they don't clarify when the advice not to take a brother to court might not apply, because in their minds, it always applies.

Robert Frazier

9

reproach and loyalty

by zev in

reproach and loyalty.

consider the following points from the publishing house in brooklyn

ny, usa.

Robert_V_Frazier

The omission of any statements that these principles would not apply in certain cases of serious crime is telling.

A correction, if I may: these principles would NEVER apply in the case of ANY crime -- Paul was talking about civil lawsuits, and civil lawsuits ONLY.

Robert Frazier

89

Why do so many people believe that jesus is god?

by Legendary U.2.K. in

i still say that, christiaity is f--- up in these last days.. christianity teaches that the messiah is god, when the bible clearly points out that jesus is a prophet sent by god... jesus prayed to god<----that's the biggest proof... so i think if anybody believe that jesus is god, is not only an'-ti-christ(not accepting) but also a liar, foolish, and you knoweth nothing, and you are not close to god or christ, you are closer to that devil which we call satan....

Robert_V_Frazier

Christians believe that because the Bible teaches it. The Father and Jesus are not the same person, which is why Jesus can pray to the Father. They are the same God, as John 1:1 (among many other verses) teaches. If the Bible didn't teach that Jesus is God, nobody would believe it. It's not exactly the kind of idea that somebody would make up, and others would accept. Most Jews in the first century reacted to John, Peter, Paul, et al just as you do to those of us who accept and teach what they did, that Jesus is God.

Robert Frazier

10

Keeping Witnesses Away

by Dia in

jewish people have mezuzas (sp?

) and others in history have used gargoyles to keep away evil spirits.... .

looks like we could mount a smurf on our doorposts to keep jehovah's witnesses away.

Robert_V_Frazier

The best thing to do if you are serious about this is to call the KH shortly before a scheduled meeting, ask for the service overseer or another elder, say that you do not want anyone to call on you, giving them your name and address. Get the name of the elder you talked to if possible. The followup, send a registered letter to the congregation restating your desire that no JWs call on you.

That's way too much work. Just open a Bible (theirs or yours), turn to Rev. chapter 4, read through to the end of chapter 7, then ask, "According to these four chapters (and don't bother going anwhere else in the Bible; this vision is only recorded here), where is the great crowd/multitude that no one can count?" When the dust settles from the JW's running away, go back to what you were doing. You won't see them again for a long time, if ever.

Robert Frazier

103

IS the NWT really the WT Bible?

by Bleep in

just wondered how many people this this is all true.

feel free to really think about this one and provide proof and examples.

Robert_V_Frazier

One can also provide quotations in favour of the NWT but the test is really how well it serves a Bible student interested in what was actually written. I have found it serves that purpose well.

Earnest, how do you know it serves that purpose? How much do you know about Greek? I'm not an expert on the level of the scholars you dismissed, but I do know enough to know that the NWT, especially in the NT, does not serve to tell you what the NT text actually says at all! It is an irresponsible and biased translation, with all the worst faults of wooden literalism and loose paraphrase, and the advantages of neither. Also, the style reads like something the cat barfed up on the carpet.

Robert Frazier

103

IS the NWT really the WT Bible?

by Bleep in

just wondered how many people this this is all true.

feel free to really think about this one and provide proof and examples.

Robert_V_Frazier

It is sometimes assumed that Classical Greek is in some major way quite different from Koine Greek, but this is not so.

There are differences. How "major" they are would depend on the knowledge of the translator.

It would be no more difficult for a Classical Greek scholar to translate Koine Greek than it would be for a British person to understand American English.

A good analogy. The grammar and syntax are pretty close, the spelling varies, and the real issue is the vocabulary, particularly idioms. The NT uses a lot of idioms.

I know at least one Classical Greek course that includes translation of Koine Greek (i.e. extracts from the New Testament) as part of the exercises.

And since the overlap is large, that works, but it would be a mistake to think that such exercises prove there is no significant difference between the two dialects.

There is no evidence that anyone on the NWT committee was sufficiently fluent in any dialect of Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek to qualify as an assistant to a real translator, much less produce a complete translation of the Bible. They just edited existing translations according to their theological bias. If they had to sit down with just the Hebrew and Aramaic OT and the Greek NT and translate from that, they would have been lost.

Robert Frazier

Edited by - robert_v_frazier on 30 July 2002 15:5:32

103

IS the NWT really the WT Bible?

by Bleep in

just wondered how many people this this is all true.

feel free to really think about this one and provide proof and examples.

Robert_V_Frazier

For, as LaSor points out, even most teachers of Biblical Hebrew 'do not have sufficient fluency in the language to speak or write in it.

Granted, most teachers of Hebrew might find translating from English to Hebrew a challenge. But no translator worthy of the title would. If you aren't fluent in Hebrew, sufficiently fluent to easily translate in either direction, then you are not qualified to translate the Hebrew Bible. Period. And that goes double or triple for anyone claiming to make the best and most unbiased translation on Earth, which is what is claimed for the NWT. The standard of fluency for a translator is and ought to be much higher than for a mere teacher. It's the translators who write the textbooks the teachers teach from.

So, the statement "When asked in a Scotland courtroom if he could translate Genesis 2:4 into Hebrew, Franz replied that he could not," is perfectly accurate. He was asked if he could do that, and he did say, "No." Then he went on to add, "I won't attempt to do that." To conclude from that, "The truth is that Franz was unable to translate Hebrew or Greek," is entirely reasonable.

Robert Frazier

Robert_V_Frazier

Posts by Robert_V_Frazier