Blotty

Joined

• started 13 topics
• posted 153 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Topics Started by Blotty

• 
  98

  Who raised Jesus from the dead?

  by Blotty in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i have seen arguments surrounding jesus' resurrection being proof of "the trinity" - now while in some cases it's a good argument the evidence for it remains very weak.

  (bible quotes are from the nwt but other bibles are referenced, use whichever you please) this following version of it is a good example.. "the bible indicates that all [persons] of the trinity was involved in jesus’ resurrection.

  galatians[1:1] says that the father raised jesus from the dead.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 
  11

  Two Translators Who Restored God’s Name to the NT

  by Wonderment in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  one of the first prayers that many people learn is the lord’s prayer, which jesus taught his followers.

  this prayer is found in what is commonly called the new testament.

  the prayer begins: “our father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified [or hallowed].” (matthew 6:9) yet, god’s name, rendered in english as “jehovah” or sometimes “yahweh,” is rarely found in english translations of the new testament.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 
  28

  Jesus as 'The mighty + almighty God'

  by JW Answers in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah's witnesses refuse to believe that jesus is the almighty god.

  they would state that jesus is 'mighty', but not almighty.. below is a 30 minute video proving from the word of god that the lord jesus christ is both mighty and almighty, separate from the father but equal too.. the verses used from scripture show without a doubt that christ is mighty (isaiah 9:6) and almighty (rev 1:7-8)..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 
  6

  Something that bothers me personally

  by Blotty in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  (i apologise if this is the wrong section for this - its the one i think suits best)this may sound really cliché (it does in my opinion) and a first world thing, but it bothers me someone can be like this and spout these "illogical" arguments (among others, which i will list as questions in the near future)i recently (as of 21/11/22) finished up a conversation with someone on a few things - i find one of their "implications" slightly concerning.. they wouldn't accept "evidence" from scholars who seemingly didn't agree with their standpoint which is interesting.

  i.e on the divine name, i listed scholars such as george howard - i got the answer "try a real scholar"or another example i cited beduhn as (in my opinion) he is easy to understand but then got told "he doesn't teach greek at a university so his opinion is not valid" - scholars may not cite beduhn, but from looking at other factors he really gets nothing wrong (linguistically)once again i apologise if this is wasting anyone's time.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 
  30

  Opinions on the Divine name in the New Testament? + an interesting question

  by Blotty in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am genuinely curious and mainly posting this for research purposes, i do not have enough knowledge on either of these subjects to debate them in any useful manner.. (this information is as far as i am aware and may be incorrect in places)as most know the nwt is known for placing a form of the divine name in the nt (new testament) - while i agree the evidence is significantly weak for it too appear in the nt, a few things must be considered - (from my limited research)rev references the name twice (3:12, 14:1)early copies of the lxx contain the divine name (likely the versions that the nt writers copied?

  stafford has a couple of videos on this subject)it was emphasized over and over the name [divine name, which ever form you prefer] would be "known" (other words used aswell) forever - if this is true, why then go against your own message in some cases and replace it with a surrogate?some also claim the nwt is dishonest for not translating some occurrences of "lord" as the divine name - common ones i notice are: phil 2:10-11, 1pe 3:14-15, heb 1:10yet these all use "lord" as a title not a proper noun, seems to be staunch trinitarians who make this claim most oftenscholar qualifications:why does a scholars qualification's matter?

  sounds dumb i know.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 
  28

  An interesting Observation of some Bibles

  by Blotty in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  first of all, hi, i go by blotty on this website :) i am someone who has a passion for the bible and like to get a as balanced view as i can from the trinitarian and the jw (or unitarian) side - even though i come off as leaning towards one or the other at times, in my opinion they both have merits in certain cases..if this is in the wrong section i apologise - this is just something i found interesting.iv seen online a lot that say the watchtower and tract society "invented" the link between proverbs 8:22 - 30 and jesus (the word).

  yet interestingly some "mainstream" "trinitarian- aimed" translations are cross referencing the following:source:https://www.biblegateway.comprov 8:22 cr rev 3:14niv, gnt,esv, nasb, nasb1995, nasbre, cevprov 8:30 cr john 1:1,2 esv nasbprov 8:30 cr john 1:3esvnasb1995nasb(this list is by no means complete)if this is simply wisdom, why is it referenced with jesus (or the word)?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 
  31

  How do Witnesses reconcile Isaiah 43:10 with John 1:1

  by Vanderhoven7 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  something does not compute.

  you are my witnesses,”declares jehovah, yes, my servant whom i have chosen, so that you may know and have faith in me and understand that i am the same one.before me no god was formed, and after me there has been none.

  isaiah 43:10. in the beginning was the word, and the word was with god and the word was god.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 
  12

  Review of Wallace's Grammar

  by Wonderment in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  review of daniel b. wallace’s greek grammar.

  daniel b[aird] wallace is professor of new testament, and author of greek grammar beyond the basics, a work first published by zondervan corporation in 1996. his work has since become a standard work in the intermediate koine greek field and has been translated into half a dozen languages.

  it is said two-thirds of bible colleges today that teach the subject use the textbook.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 
  37

  114,000, Literal, or Symbolic?

  by Wonderment in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a poster wrote to me privately, and brought to my attention the following comment below i made a while back in regards to the 144,00 number of revelation.

  i had casually conjectured that this number was likely symbolic in line with the book of revelation being mostly symbolic in kind.

  he brought up this juicy source:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 
  79

  John 1:1 in Coptic Translation

  by slimboyfat in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  apparently there has been quite a stir in jw apologetic circles recently about the translation of john 1:1 in the early sahidic version of john.

  i don't know if this has been discussed here before - if someone could give a link to a previous thread they know about on the subject that would be great.

  here is what i gather: .

  1. 
  2. 
  3.