Posts by Leolaia

68

Iesous Xristo real name, not Jesus

by Jaime l de Aragon in

translators destroyed the names iesous xristos.

hebrews 13:8 ihsouv {iesous} cristov {xristos} cqev {yesterday} kai {and} shmeron {today} o {the} autov {mismo,} kai {y} eiv {by} touv {the} aiwnav {ages}.

.

Leolaia

CristoV {Xristos.}

Yo, did you not read what I wrote above?

68

Iesous Xristo real name, not Jesus

by Jaime l de Aragon in

translators destroyed the names iesous xristos.

hebrews 13:8 ihsouv {iesous} cristov {xristos} cqev {yesterday} kai {and} shmeron {today} o {the} autov {mismo,} kai {y} eiv {by} touv {the} aiwnav {ages}.

.

Leolaia

in some first century Pagan graffiti

-grafito, end of 2nd cent.

First century, second century, whatever....

68

Iesous Xristo real name, not Jesus

by Jaime l de Aragon in

translators destroyed the names iesous xristos.

hebrews 13:8 ihsouv {iesous} cristov {xristos} cqev {yesterday} kai {and} shmeron {today} o {the} autov {mismo,} kai {y} eiv {by} touv {the} aiwnav {ages}.

.

Leolaia

Further non-Biblical evidence to show that pagan Christians were recognized as those who worshipped Iesous Xrist (Transformed in Je-sus, it means blasphemy ass)

That was not based on any popular etymology of the name Ièsous. There is nothing in that graffito that comments on the name. The image draws on a well-worn antisemitic motif about Judaism....many pagans believed that Jews worshipped or venerated that animal. Many anti-Jewish slurs originally aimed at Jews were applied to Christians. Tertullian even wrote about a pagan who converted to Judaism who drew similar cartoons aimed at Christians.

I find it funny how you are making a big deal about the name's spelling yet fail to recognize you are bungling it yourself by using the "X".

Also, if we should be picky enough to have "ou" as the second vowel instead of "u" (though this is normal Greek to Latin conversion), why do you still spell the first vowel as "e"? Greek makes a distinction between epsilon and eta.

68

Iesous Xristo real name, not Jesus

by Jaime l de Aragon in

translators destroyed the names iesous xristos.

hebrews 13:8 ihsouv {iesous} cristov {xristos} cqev {yesterday} kai {and} shmeron {today} o {the} autov {mismo,} kai {y} eiv {by} touv {the} aiwnav {ages}.

.

Leolaia

It is a sensitive issue, the J is never used in the original writings, the letter y or I,

The letter "Y" just like "J" was never used in the original writings. It does however represent a phonemic contrast in English which was not represented in Greek; in Greek /i/ when followed by another vowel or diphthong represented the sound /y/. Same thing with Latin: Iulius.

"J" originally represnted the sound /y/; it arose as an orthographic variant of "I". In many European languages, "J" represents that same sound (Ja!!). But in Old French, the letter started to represent a palatal /zh/ sound and English borrowed it from French, where we use it to represent a similar sound, the palato-alveolar affricate ("j" as in "judge"), which was common in English. We needed a letter for it, French offered a letter that represented a sound that was close, so we borrowed it! English speakers therefore pronounce all words borrowed from Latin that contain letters originally written with "I" and later with "J" with that affricate sound, but that is not mispronouncing Latin, we are are not speaking Latin, we have adapted the Latin words into English so that they are now English words. Same thing with names. All Hebrew names with an intial yod /y/, borrowed through Greek and then Latin, were imported into English, and we use them as English names. "Jeremy" is a normal English name. It comes from Jeremias < Ieremias < Y e remiyahu. But we don't pronounce it with Hebrew or Greek pronounciation; we do not pronoune "Jeremy" as "Yeremy", as a normal English name given to children, we say "Jeremy". We do that for all foreign names. It would be much too hard to sort through the orthographies and foreign pronunciation systems to pronounce names as they were in their source language; we pronounce them as they are in English. "Paris" we pronounce with an "s" that is not used in Parisian French. Spanish "Jesus" pronounces the "j" the way it is usually pronounced in that language, as an /h/.

And even the Greek form Ièsous modifies the name to adapt it to Greek phonology and spelling. So "I" is used because Greek lacks a letter corresponding to Hebrew yod. Similarly, there is no sound in Greek for /š/, represented by Hebrew shin, so the closest thing /s/ is used. And nothing in Greek corresponds to an `ayin, so that letter is dropped entirely. Then, in order for the name to behave grammatically in Greek, a final inflection is added to the name (the final /s/ when it occurs in the nominative).

is a name that was changed to Je-sus, which means something unpleasant and contempt

??? Source?

SÚS is Latin word for animal (Horse,etc)

What does that have to do with anything?

So now we are mixing up Greek with Latin?

68

Iesous Xristo real name, not Jesus

by Jaime l de Aragon in

translators destroyed the names iesous xristos.

hebrews 13:8 ihsouv {iesous} cristov {xristos} cqev {yesterday} kai {and} shmeron {today} o {the} autov {mismo,} kai {y} eiv {by} touv {the} aiwnav {ages}.

.

Leolaia

As I told you yesterday,

1) "X" in English transliterates xi, not chi. That's your first mistake.

2) You leave off the final sigma for no reason. Why? The two words are supposed to grammatically agree.

I see that your source is: http://www.angelfire.com/folk/anticristos/elevangelio.html

I can tell that that is your source because you left one of the Spanish words (mismo) untranslated in the OP. Maybe in Spanish or in some Spanish dialects "x" might transliterate chi (I don't know really), but certainly not in usual English where x=xi and ch=chi.

And that webpage seems really crank to me, btw. Unsurprising since you seem to mostly post crank ideas.

7

In view of the New Light, do we now have to reassess Rev 11:12?

by Splash in

(revelation 11:11,12)11 and after the three and a half days spirit of life from god entered into them, and they stood upon their feet, and great fear fell upon those beholding them.

12 and they heard a loud voice out of heaven say to them: come on up here.

and they went up into heaven in the cloud, and their enemies beheld them.. .

Leolaia

I have also been pointing out the Parable of the Talents, which no longer fits (even though it is obviously parallel to the Faithful and Wise Servant parable).

I think this might require throwing out the whole idea of God's organization being punished with Babylonian captivity in 1918 as punishment for its compromising attitude. It wasn't until 1919 when the appointment occurred.

I don't know, what are the implications for the new light on the whole body of teaching about God's earthly organization? Was there an organization from 33 to 1919 C.E. but not yet appointed as F&DS yet? In what sense was it an "organization", if it wasn't an appointed F&DS class?

74

Why God created predators and beasts

by EndofMysteries in

while i am waiting and taking a big break to sort everything out.

i thought i would share some very cool life and scientific things that were revealed in the scriptures.

have you ever wondered why god made beasts and predators?

Leolaia

AHA!!!! There is a reason why Mogwai are not supposed to be fed after midnight!1!

33

Are Jehovah's Witnesses an American Sect?

by cedars in

this faq was recently added to jw.org.... .

are you an american sect?our world headquarters is located in the united states of america.

however, we are not an american sect for the following reasons:.

Leolaia

"Xristo Iesous"

Xi instead of Chi and mixture of dative and nominative.....why??

Wait...don't answer.

74

Why God created predators and beasts

by EndofMysteries in

while i am waiting and taking a big break to sort everything out.

i thought i would share some very cool life and scientific things that were revealed in the scriptures.

have you ever wondered why god made beasts and predators?

Leolaia

Indeed. That's why I posted it.

33

Are Jehovah's Witnesses an American Sect?

by cedars in

this faq was recently added to jw.org.... .

are you an american sect?our world headquarters is located in the united states of america.

however, we are not an american sect for the following reasons:.

Leolaia

Some define a sect as a group that has broken away from an established religion. Jehovah’s Witnesses have not broken away from some other religious group.

Historically false. As Satanus points out, "Jehovah's Witnesses" broke from the "Bible Students" started by Russell between 1917 and 1931. The Wikipedia article on sects notes that "American sociologists Rodney Stark and William Sims Bainbridge assert that 'sects claim to be authentic purged, refurbished version of the faith from which they split' ", and that accords well with the version of institutional history that the Watchtower Society promotes: From 1918 and 1919 onward, the group that became "Jehovah's Witnesses" purged themselves of "Babylonish practices" that the more conversative Bible Students (whom they declare to be apostate) maintained. Russell, in turn, broke from the "Second Adventists" he formerly had been allied with: Barbour, Paton, Storrs, etc. And the (largely American) Adventist movement was founded by American William Miller in the context of a larger religious revival (the second Great Awakening) that was sweeping through American Protestantism in the 1840s.

Instead, we feel that we have reestablished the form of Christianity that was practiced in the first century.

Notice the subjective "we feel" statement that presents the group's self-claims. That is different than what is objectively the case. Many Christian sects feel they have "reestablished" true Christianity.

Jehovah’s Witnesses are active in their ministry in over 230 lands and countries. No matter where we live, we give our primary allegiance to Jehovah God and Jesus Christ, not to the U.S. government or to any other human government.—John 15:19; 17:15, 16.

This misconstrues what is normally meant by the characterization of a religion as "American". Mormonism is an American sect because it arose in America, drew on distinctly American religious traditions, and even has America as its special focus in belief and scripture. But it is similarly active in an international ministry over the world. And its American origin has little to do with any sort of political allegience.

All of our teachings are based on the Bible, not on the writings of some religious leader in the United States.?—1 Thessalonians 2:13.

All Christian denominations and sects base their teachings primarily on the Bible (the notion of an authoritative "canon" is common to all Christian groups); that is a fundamental to being Christian (as even Islam recognizes, Jews and Christians are both "peoples of the book"). This statement poses a false dilemma; what it leaves out is that what makes Christian religions differ from each other is their varying interpretation of the Bible, and in the case of JWs, that interpretation is strictly mediated by the Governing Body. Originally, in the 1920s and 1930s, it was almost entirely based on the writings of one single religious leader in the US, J. F. Rutherford.

We follow Jesus Christ, not any human leader.?—Matthew 23:8-10.

Another false dilemma. In reality, JWs teach that following Jesus and following the human leaders of JWs is EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

*** w43 7/1 p. 204 Reasonable Service ***
The Lord through his "faithful and wise servant" now states to us, "Let us cover our territory four times in six months." That becomes our organization instructions and has the same binding force on us that his statement to the Logos had when he said, "Let us make man in our image." It is our duty to accept this additional instruction and obey it.
*** w59 5/1 p. 269 Attain Completeness in the New World Society ***

The whole body under the direction of the head moves and acts as a beautifully co-ordinated unit, perfectly organized. In the same way Christ, the Head, employs the organization that is his body to carry out his assigned work. His orders reach the whole of the organization on earth through the governing body, and on down through the Branches to the congregations.—1 Cor. 12:12-18; Matt. 24:45-47.

To hold to the headship of Christ, it is therefore necessary to obey the organization that he is personally directing. Doing what the organization says is to do what he says. Resisting the organization is to resist him.
*** w89 9/15 p. 25 par. 23 Be Obedient to Those Taking the Lead ***

Loyal Christians gladly obey Jehovah’s commandments and are moved to cooperate with those to whom he has entrusted congregation oversight.
*** w07 4/1 p. 24 par. 12 Loyal to Christ and His Faithful Slave ***

Therefore, when we loyally submit to the direction of the faithful slave and its Governing Body, we are submitting to Christ, the slave’s Master. Our showing due respect for the instrument Christ is using to manage his earthly belongings is one way in which we “openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.”—Philippians 2:11.