Blotty
JoinedTopics Started by Blotty
-
66
"outside of time" argument
by Blotty inthis is going to be very brief but a user recently tried to argue an argument that has already been refuted many times - the logic is somewhat sound but falls apart when the definition to the word used it looked and its usages in the bible.the word in question is "aionas" found in the scripture in question hebrews 1:2 .
(https://biblehub.com/hebrews/1-2.htm#lexicon)for starters look at the biblehub translations - do any of them state "outside of time" or that time was "created" in this moment - no because this seems to be heavily inspired by greek philosophy rather than the bible itself.note: i am not saying this word does not mean eternity or anything of the sort, i am saying this scripture some of the claims i dispute and can easily disprove, hence the argument is laughable.. bill mounce defines the word as:pr.
a period of time of significant character; life; an era; an age: hence, a state of things marking an age or era; the present order of nature; the natural condition of man, the world; ὁ αἰών, illimitable duration, eternity; as also, οἱ αἰῶνες, ὁ αἰῶν τῶν αἰώνων, οἱ αἰῶνες τῶν αἰώνων; by an aramaism οἱ αἰῶνες, the material universe, heb.
-
-
11
Greek and antecedents (draft)
by Blotty innatural antecedents (essay) + meanings to certain words.
i posted about 5 months ago a study done by daniel wallace called “greek grammar and the holy spirit” (see: source), which i have cited numerous times since – which focuses heavily on greek antecedents.
ending), and she (fem.
-
-
16
Article & Documentary on the Divine name
by Blotty invideo documentary and academic article on the divine name:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljpgxsyiqtc&ab_channel=johnwyatthttps://www.academia.edu/14029315/the_name_of_god_y_eh_ow_ah_which_is_pronounced_as_it_is_written_i_eh_ou_ah_simplified_edition?email_work_card=title this does not prove gods name was present in the nt, however some points do lead us to that conclusion simply by process of elimination.
-
-
8
How many terms does the bible bother to explain
by Blotty inthe bible is well known for its ellipsis* and its lack of explanatory statements of a term used.
there are exceptions in grammatical patterns, such as john exclusively using archon for ruler in his writings - which make the term self evident.sin - is defined"one" (unity) - is somewhat defined and also self evident from the context (no exceptions, every person part of that unity is listed in the context)an interesting thing to see would be how many terms are actually used and explained.
*the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or able to be understood from contextual clues..
-
-
3
An interesting Blog post
by Blotty inthis is quite an interesting blog post - somethings i find to be "ehh" and some with fundamentally flawed arguments.
but an interesting point of view and worth looking into (not sure if this person is a jw):https://jimspace3000.blogspot.com/2021/01/answers-to-10-questions-answers.html.
-
-
1
Wallace's "The personality of The holy spirit"
by Blotty insource: http://orcuttchristian.org/wallace_greek%20grammar%20and%20the%20personality%20of%20the%20holy%20spirit.pdfi assume this is a portion of one of his books considering the page numbers & all in all its quite good food-for-thought for both sides of the theological argument.
his honesty here is surprising considering he once cited countess' very flawed argument.
a very good article to read anyhow and unironically quite useful in teaching how greek antecedents work - something very important on occasion.not to "spoil" the article but here are some very "un- wallace" thoughts, considering his stance on the trinity:.
-
-
98
Who raised Jesus from the dead?
by Blotty ini 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.
-
-
6
Something that bothers me personally
by Blotty in(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.
-
-
30
Opinions on the Divine name in the New Testament? + an interesting question
by Blotty ini 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.
-
-
28
An interesting Observation of some Bibles
by Blotty infirst 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)?.
-