Posts by robhic

11

More New Testament and Inclusion of name Jehovah

by robhic in

i read with much interest all of the replies to my original question in another thread.

i downloaded one of the books suggested and compiled what i could.

now, as i checked around for sources to prove that i was right and that the nt was jehovah-less, two people mentioned wt sources that i would like verified: 1 - "the watchtower march 1, 1991 p. 28 states that jehovah is not found in the nt.

robhic

I read with much interest all of the replies to my original question in another thread. I downloaded one of the books suggested and compiled what I could. Now, as I checked around for sources to prove that I was right and that the NT was Jehovah-less, two people mentioned WT sources that I would like verified: 1 - "The Watchtower March 1, 1991 p. 28 states that Jehovah is not found in the NT." Verification that that is correct? 2 -"... the foreward of the 'Kingdom Interlinear' states much the same thing." Verification?

If anyone has access to these two publications and can let me know if my info is correct I'd appreciate it. I'd like to read/see for myself the wording here because I'd really hate to tell my new JW "buddies" to look in those two books and have them tell me I was wrong!!!

Thanks to any and all who can help me out in my little project and thanks (again) to the persons who gave these two WT sources I cite above.

Robert

41

"Jehovah" in the New Testament

by robhic in

i just got a return visit from a couple of jw that visited me last month.

all was very nice and friendly.

i have inadvertantly agreed to a study of sorts and figure it might be an interesting challenge for me to try out my newfound knowledge/information with them.

robhic

Peaceful Pete says:

Just for ammo...Inevitably Matt 6:9,10 comes up when JWs attempt to defend the idea that Jesus used the Tetragrammaton. Ask them why if it was considered unlawful by the Jews to utter aloud "The Name" was not once Jesus charged with blasphemy for doing so. He would have been stoned if he defied the Jewish Priesthood and popular practice in this way.

Interesting. This same reaction when the Pharisees were going to stone him for claiming to be God and Jesus ran away has bothered me. It's like he claimed to be God and instead of doing something cool to prove it to them he ran away. Kinda undermines his position...

Thanks to all for their input. It is quite helpful.

Robert

41

"Jehovah" in the New Testament

by robhic in

i just got a return visit from a couple of jw that visited me last month.

all was very nice and friendly.

i have inadvertantly agreed to a study of sorts and figure it might be an interesting challenge for me to try out my newfound knowledge/information with them.

robhic

I just got a return visit from a couple of JW that visited me last month. All was very nice and friendly. I have inadvertantly agreed to a study of sorts and figure it might be an interesting challenge for me to try out my newfound knowledge/information with them. Just see how well I can defend my positions and refute theirs when necessary. (I have waaay too much free time!)

I have read where the name Jehovah doesn't appear anywhere in any of the Greek versions of the NT. This seems pretty factual but the only references I have seen telling me this are books written by ex-JWs. I don't want to use those for obvious reasons. My question is this: Can anyone cite a reference work or whatever that backs up the fact that the name does not appear in the NT?

Point me to a website or something -- anything -- that can be used to support my position besides ex-JW books? Thanks for any and all help and info in the "project" of mine. They are coming back next week. This is something I mentioned today (and they denied) so I would like something to offer them to prove my point when they come back.

Robert

31

Anything written by Org. that has Nabonidus' years of rule.

by ellderwho in

.

been studying this for a while i think this is a good leverage point if theirs anything written.. ive checked usual spots gtr, babylon the great, insight, any help much appreciated.

robhic

Alleymom, once again you did it!

it-2 p. 481 Nebuchadnezzar

Finally, in 607 B.C.E., on Tammuz (June-July) 9 in the 11th year of Zedekiah’s reign (Nebuchadnezzar’s 19th year if counting from his accession year or his 18th regnal year), a breach was made in Jerusalem’s wall.
2 Kings 25:8-9

And in the fifth month on the seventh [day] of the month, that is to say, the nineteenth year of King Neb·u·chad·nez´zar the king of Babylon, Neb·u´zar·ad´an the chief of the bodyguard, the servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah and the king’s house and all the houses of Jerusalem; and the house of every great man he burned with fire.

Jeremiah 52:12-14

And in the fifth month, on the tenth day of the month, that is, [in] the nineteenth year of King Neb·u·chad·rez´zar, the king of Babylon, Neb·u´zar·ad´an the chief of the bodyguard, who was standing before the king of Babylon, came into Jerusalem. And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah and the house of the king and all the houses of Jerusalem; and every great house he burned with fire. And all the walls of Jerusalem, round about, all the military forces of the Chal·de´ans that were with the chief of the bodyguard pulled down.

That was exactly what I wanted. Something saying which year of his reign Nebuch destroyed Jesusalem and not the specific year/date. Excellent! Thanks for all your fine work and your help. I appreciate it and its simplicity as you have presented it. Great job!

Robert

16

Sept 15th 2003 Watchtower Page 26-30

by stillajwexelder in

just read this article about martin luther -- the wtbts state -- luther recognized that god's favor cannot be earned.

rather , it is granted to those exercising faith romans 1:16; 3:23,24,28 .

these days i do not go to meetings very often so i do not know what is new light and old -- and have read in r. franz coc similar material with ed dunlap and commentary on letter of james.. this implies salvation can not be earned (i.e.

robhic

Undisfellowshiped writes:

The Watchtower Society definitely teaches that in order to be saved, Jehovah's Witnesses MUST do "good works".
They MUST attend all of the Meetings.
They MUST put in ENOUGH hours out in Field Service.
They MUST not disobey the Watchtower Society.
They MUST not have independent thoughts.
They MUST not take whole Blood Transfusions.
They MUST not be involved in politics (except possibly maybe voting)
The list goes on and on.

My question is regarding those physically unable to do these things. I have a friend who is a JW and she is disabled. Almost home-bound so, needless to say, her FS days are out.

She attends meetings over a phone link her KH has set up for the sick but I don't know if she links up for all meetings and can't say how fully she participates in the ones she does listen to. This negates the first two items on the list above.

She is pretty good at holding fast to the "party line" of the WTS teachings and she doesn't have a problem with independent thinking. Yep, she is a very good sheep for the last 3 years.

As far as holding fast to the WT teachings, well she can spout WatchTower-isms with the best but she also fails miserably to be a "perfect JW" out of the other side of her mouth. In fact she is guilty of a fairly serious infraction (fornication) which she says she must confess but has not done so for going on a year. Hmmm, that casts a shadow over #3 on the list.

The rest is no problem. She carries her blood card, doesn't vote or participate in politics. Most of her life is a very good portayal of a JW -- the other part, I'm just not so sure. Like a modern day Pharisee she says one thing but has, at times, done another. What are her chances of finding herself on the "right" side of Armageddon?

Just curious because it sounds like for all her trouble she may be left out. Not for circumstances she has no control over but she does have some doozies that would seem to me enough to effectively keep her in the "birdfood" catergory. Any thoughts?

Robert

16

Cross religion mariage

by 2k in

i have a friend who recently married a witness.

he isn't a witness, and this is causing some issues with the family.

i'm curious what is cosidered the appropriate way that the families should deal with the issue.

robhic

Just to be argumentative here, JWs say to not be "unevenly yoked." Isn't that sort of a judgement call? If you are a Christian -- raised as one, don't observe pagan, muslim or other non-Chrisitan beliefs -- isn't specific denomination splitting hairs? Wouldn't 2 Christians be, technically, evenly yoked despite what the JW want to think?

I know JWs feel they are the one and only but just for the sake of pushing things, a few years ago (1998) they took out a full-page ad in the New York Times whining about the government of France unfairly taxing the "third largest Christian religion in France." For purely financial reasons the WTS was admitting to being one of (at least) 3 Christian religions. That has a non-exclusive sound to it. So if they are one of 3 Christian religions in France, wouldn't that make them evenly yoked in some way?

There was an article written somewhere (I have a copy) that laid out the whole case. I have a copy of the NYT ad also. (It helps to have a friend at the Library of Congress...) Seems like if someone wanted to make a case for Christians being evenly yoked even though one wasn't a JW, they would have fairly good backup.

I'd be curious as to former (or current) JW thoughts on this matter. Anyone wanting copies of the above mentioned article and/or pictures of photocopies of the NYTimes ad can let me know. It might be helpful. In fact, this was the reason I got these copies in the first place -- I was (and still possibly may be) involved with a fairly new JW and there was a time when marriage was considered (but that's a whole other different story!).

Robert

5

John 3:13

by ClassAvenger in

according to john 3:13, "no one has ascended to heaven".

i've been wondering what this means, does it mean that no one but jesus ascended to heaven and came back to explain celestial things?

robhic

According to John 3:13, "no one has ascended to heaven". I've been wondering what this means, does it mean that no one but Jesus ascended to heaven and came back to explain celestial things?

Here is a quote from Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible commentary on this question:

Joh 3:13 -

And no man hath ascended into heavens -

No man, therefore, is qualified to speak of heavenly things,

Joh_3:12 . To speak of those things requires intimate acquaintance with them - demands that we have seen them; and as no one has ascended into heaven and returned, so no one is qualified to speak of them but He who came down from heaven. This does not mean that no one had Gone to heaven or had been saved, for Enoch and Elijah had been borne there ( Gen_5:24 ; compare Heb_11:5 ; 2Ki_2:11 ); and Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and others were there: but it means that no one had ascended and "returned," so as to be qualified to speak of the things there.

ClassAvenger, looks like you and Albert seem to agree.

Robert

31

Anything written by Org. that has Nabonidus' years of rule.

by ellderwho in

.

been studying this for a while i think this is a good leverage point if theirs anything written.. ive checked usual spots gtr, babylon the great, insight, any help much appreciated.

robhic

If you let me know which king you mean (Nabonidus or Nebuchadnezzar) and whether you mean the fall of Jerusalem or the fall of Babylon, I can give you the WT quotes you want.

Alleymom:

Your excellent step-by-step post in the K.I.S.S. thread pretty much said it all. I saved it along with a couple of WT cites you included to add some "punch" to showing just who was responsible (the WTS) for citing those dates. What I didn't see was anything saying that 586/587 was the 17/18 year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign. Not the actual year of the desrtuction but where it says the destruction took place in the 17/18 year of Nebuch's reign and not just how that works out to 586/587. Did that make more sense?

I was afraid my question was a bit sketchy. You included a couple of WT (1/11/86 "A Dream Reveals How Late It Is") to show Nebuch reigned for 43 years but not that he destroyed Jerusalem in his 17/18 year. That's what I would like: a WT or WT publication stating specifically that Nebuch destroyed Jerusalem in his 17/18 year and not just in the year 586/587.

Thanks for your time and these excellent poets! You know some stuff!!!

Robert

3

How much of the problems are down to 'the system'?

by be wise in

jw's love to dis the system in their usual caring way.

personally i had little respect for 'the system' as a jw.

i was told it was evil and it was going to be destroyed because it is controlled by the devil.

robhic

All bible based religions would say because of Adam sinning due to falling for the devil's charm. In that case it means that as soon as 'the devil' got Adam to sin he has been able to sit on his 'arse' for all these years and do nothing but watch the domino sin affect pass on to their offspring over and over through genetics.

I read elsewhere a very interesting comment to something relating to this. Adam and Eve screwed up (if you actually believe the reality of that story) and got tossed out of the Garden of Eden. From that time on they would have a hard life and inevitably die. So would all their descendants. And this doesn't even begin to address god's omniscience so that he should have known they were gonna eat the apple anyway! That's a whole other thing.

But isn't this sorta like condemning the entire family of a criminal sentenced to jail? Joe-Blow murders someone, his entire family gets thrown in the prison with him AND .... not just his immediate family but all of their descendants, too! Would there be any free persons walking around today if that were the case? Jails would be full of entire families from cradle to grave. And god is supposed to be loving? He sucks, IMO!

The whole thing makes me angry that 1) I didn't think of this myself years ago and 2) because the utter stupidity of it yet it controls religious thinking of people for thousands of years!!! A fairy tale is running people's lives. Jeez, where are these gullible fools when I want to set up my free breast-exam device in a parking lot somewhere? It just isn't fair.

Robert

31

Anything written by Org. that has Nabonidus' years of rule.

by ellderwho in

.

been studying this for a while i think this is a good leverage point if theirs anything written.. ive checked usual spots gtr, babylon the great, insight, any help much appreciated.

robhic

Alleymom:

Excellent posts from the K.I.S.S. one to these current ones. Thank you for all your work. I saved the original you painstakingly wrote out each year/date and worked your way back to the year when Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem. You also cited a WT that contained something about that being the date he did his destroying. It didn't mention specifically that he did it in his 17/18th year just the year itself.

Did that WT say that, or is there another WT (or other WTS publication) that states that, Nebuch destroyed Jerusalem in his 17/18 year and not just what that year was? (Did that make sense?) I'd like a specific publication to show the WT states it was his 17/18 year of reign and not only the year.

Sorry to get in the middle of your discussion but I've been looking for specifics without much luck.

Thanks for all your great info.

Robert