Posts by Blotty

28

An interesting Observation of some Bibles

by Blotty in

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)?.

Blotty

Slimboy

"As you mention, some argue that the word archē here doesn’t mean “beginning”, but “ruler”, and others “origin”. Yet the go-to scholarly Greek lexicon (known by the initials BDAG) in the latest edition says that it means “beginning” in this verse."

Not only that but nowhere does John use Arkhe to mean "ruler" (or "origin") for that he always uses the object noun "Arkhon".. Luke only proves arkhe can mean "ruler" but the difference is ALL Luke's occurrence's are evident from the context used (similar to plural unity).. so the argument used about Rev 3:14 (and the others ) is erroneous purely based on that fact alone..

Jhine:

"I see no evidence for this in the Bible so where does this come from?"

On Jesus being Michael the archangel.. the similarities between the two are amazing.. just as Jesus and Wisdom are described very similarly.. The evidence on him being the archangel is even more likely based 1 thes 4:16 - Why come with a lesser authority than what you already have? Stafford I believe has a really indepth video on this subject

(I may go into more detail on this at another time, this is all I will say for now)

Hooberus:

"So when attacking the personhood of the Spirit, they appeal to wisdom in proverbs “not” being actually a person."

I don't think attacking is the right word..

secondly many things are personified in the bible.. as was the holy spirit (Slimboy and Wonderment are ones who have made several comments on this subject)

The gender of nouns really doesn't matter for personification.. There are many other gender conflicting examples in the bible of "personification" - one need not search too far..

28

An interesting Observation of some Bibles

by Blotty in

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)?.

Blotty

Earnest, Thank you very much for this information
& everyone else

28

An interesting Observation of some Bibles

by Blotty in

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)?.

Blotty

Slimboy said: "Alexander and Athanasius didn’t disagree that Proverbs 8:22ff applied to Jesus but rather disputed the meaning of wisdom being “created” in this passage."

Tell me if I'm wrong or not getting the point here, but the fact that these bibles make the correlation between Prov 8:22 and Rev 3:14 where John uses arkhe (Not arkhon, Which he EXCLUSIVELY uses for "Ruler") + the word used in the Septuagint literally mean "created" or "brought forth" would indicate its creation.

As far as im aware even the bibles that render it "begotten" also submit too this as to be "begotten" do you not have to be born (or created in other words)?

28

An interesting Observation of some Bibles

by Blotty in

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)?.

Blotty

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.com

Prov 8:22 CR Rev 3:14
NIV, GNT,ESV, NASB, NASB1995, NASBRE, CEV

Prov 8:30 CR John 1:1,2
ESV NASB

Prov 8:30 CR John 1:3
ESV
NASB1995
NASB

(This list is by no means complete)

if this is simply wisdom, Why is it referenced with Jesus (or The Word)?

31

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

by Vanderhoven7 in

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.

Blotty

"You guys would make great Watchtower apologists." - Vanderhoven

Doesn't take being a watchtower apologist to say these things it takes reading the bible in its context.

"But we know that God created the universe and man by Himself without the help of another god. Yet as He creates man, he says, "Let us make man in our image after our likeness...."
- without the help of a foreign God yes.. But The word is the agent whom God created the world through - The statements in Isaiah SHOULD be taken as comparisons between Jehovah and False Gods worshipped by Israel.. NOT as hyper literal statements as trinitarians would like to have you take them

31

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

by Vanderhoven7 in

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.

Blotty

@hooberus

you have left one thing out, Jesus was referred to as "The last Adam" (1 Corinthians 15:45) - was Adam also Divine?
The hebrew idoim "Son of" denotes membership to a guild - sons of men are mankind The son of man, either denotes messiahship or his human "flesh" nature/form ("son of" & "flesh" can also mean direct descendent, but that's context dependant)

The Word (prehuman Jesus) was said to have become flesh (John 1:14) been murdered then been raised up as a spirit creature (1 Corinthians 15:45 (B))

Jesus only ever claimed to be a man while on earth. what's more other fleshly beings could not ascend to heaven (John 8:21)

When he was placed at teg right hand of God for suffering his death he was a spirit, not Flesh (Phil 2)

Wonderment never said Jesus was not divine - he just said Jesus is not God

31

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

by Vanderhoven7 in

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.

Blotty

Context is everything, its a comparison between God and gods of the nations of the time.. Its untrue there were no other "gods" besides Jehovah. The title is used of Aaron and Moses, Satan, Angels and human Judges.

you cant use apparent exclusive titles to prove anything as they are reapplied:

God: [Listed above] also Hebrews 1:8 is quoted from a text which is addressing apparently a king as "God" (possibly Solomon)

Savior: Jehovah/ Jesus, Othniel and Ehud

Lord: Jehovah/ Jesus and others are addressed as "Lord" including Saul

12

Review of Wallace's Grammar

by Wonderment in

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.

Blotty

What's with people and saying "JW's have no scholars"? This argument seems to have started when Beduhn wrote his book (This is how I understand it, I may well be wrong) and trinitarians now saying he isn't qualified when he has to know some koine Greek for one of his PHD's

Edgar J Foster is quite good from what I have read and is def someone worth paying attention too

Phizzy "I think his mainly positive Review is enough to persuade people that the Wallace Greek Grammar is worth buying !"

oh its definitely worth having, Wallace is well respected and for good reason, While personally i find some of conclusions odd and out of nowhere, it cant be argued he is very knowledgeable (I have a similar opinion on Beduhn, Countess, Colwell and others)

37

114,000, Literal, or Symbolic?

by Wonderment in

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:.

Blotty

@ozziepost - thats not nessacary, all one must do is read the bible, while not always explicit, it is heavily context dependant - The need to go to bible and theological collages for something like is really not needed (This is an opinion yours may well differ)

37

114,000, Literal, or Symbolic?

by Wonderment in

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:.

Blotty

If we are too take 144,000 symbolically then it is worth understanding if we take the following symbolically or literally -

In Rev 21:4 it mentions "The twelve names of the twelve apostles of the lamb" - We know this to be literal as Jesus had 12 apostles

In 20:3 + 5-7 Satan is said to be locked away for 1000 years (note it would make 0 sense for this to be symbolic)

Revelation 11:16 says “24 elders” - is this literal or symbolic? Im leaning more to literal

are the 12,000 from each tribe actually symbolic in light of: 2 Corinthians 1:22?

even though the book of revelation is highly symbolic, if it places a literal number on something I see no reason to take it symbolically - the only exceptions being:

Matthew 18:22 - forgiveness 77 times, but commentaries and scholars alike seem to agree this is a Greek idiom for time indefinite

Revelation 13:18 - the number "666" seems to by symbolic or more likely a label of something

see here for more on 666:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_beast#:~:text=Here%20is%20wisdom.-,Let%20him%20that%20hath%20understanding%20count%20the%20number%20of%20the,the%20number%20comes%20to%20666.

How do we know the 12,000 of very nation is symbolic and not literal? Their are many references from ones who imply they are part of this group (at least how I understand it)

I may well be very wrong in views.