Posts by accuracy

10

good enough translation?

by gotcha in

what's a good enough bible translation to use..?

how abt the new american bible?

I use many different Bible versions for study, but prefer those that are basically literal, such as the New American Standard Version. Paraphrases or "dynamic equivalence" versions can offer valuable insights sometimes, but are also more prone to individual interpretation. My basic belief is that the Bible is the Word of God in its original, and although we do not have those originals today, translations that try as much as possible to recover those originals are the most suitable for study.

Exegesis and hermeneutics are also good tools in their place, which is to try to uncover possibilities and proper understandings. So long as their findings are not treated as infallible, but merely as probable, they are useful.

My religion? I am, or am trying to be, simply a Christian.

56

On STUMBLING BLOCKS

by You Know in

jw
friends

just a few loose ends and random thoughts for a select group of readers who have not been completely defrauded of your faith.. on the topic of stumbling: stumbling typically involves the mistakes of others whether real or perceived.

the reason jehovah does not consider any stumbling block as a valid reason for abandoning ones faith is because a persons faith should be in jehovah and christ in the first place.

and since god most assuredly did not let his worshipper down, what a fellow believer does or does not do should have no bearing upon our personal relationship with our heavenly father.

accuracy

You Know, what you have said makes perfect sense. I see you are a "stumbling block" to those who want to present Witnesses as monolithic clones. You don't play the game their way. It's interesting to observe the whole thing.

The Hebrew-Aramaic-Greek put-down is irrelevant. Been there, done that. Truth does not come from grammar and syntax alone.

Do your thing, You Know. You have as much right to do so as anyone else.

10

good enough translation?

by gotcha in

what's a good enough bible translation to use..?

how abt the new american bible?

accuracy

I doubt that any translator or group of translators functions from a vacuum, but rather from supposition pools based on their training and theology. Thus, a translation produced by Jews will differ in some points from one made by Christians. And among Christians, there will be differences according to theology: Catholic, Evangelical, conservative Christian, etc. And among those differing theologies, some translators prefer to render word-for-word, others thought-for-thought. Some translate literally, some paraphrase.

One may, however, have recourse to the best available Hebrew and Greek critical texts, but these are also determined by committee and consensus. There are no original manuscripts in existence. On the basis of what is available, a serious student can either read the texts for what they say in plain translation, or accept an understanding that is theologized. Even with that, there appear to be some basic readings to which all agree....or, nearly so.

99

YK on WT UN NGO STATUS

by You Know in

several posters have asked what i thought of the.

revelations about the wt being associated with the un.

as an ngo so i thought i might make a brief comment on.

accuracy

I appreciate your comments, YK. As for the question why we "need" an organization, it is for the same reason the individual Jew needed the Temple and the synagogue. It is for the same reason the individual Christian needed the Congregation and its arrangement. It is because God set it up that way, for His worship to be an organized, arranged worship.

Hillel said: "Do not separate yourself from the community." (Pirkei Avot 2:5). Hillel was a Jewish teacher, but you can find the same sentiments in the New Testament.

10

good enough translation?

by gotcha in

what's a good enough bible translation to use..?

how abt the new american bible?

accuracy

If you're Catholic, the NAB is fine. Otherwise, you might try the NASB (New American Standard Bible) or even the NKJV (New King James Version).

15

Hebrews and Greek Scripture NWT

by Kophagangelos in

jw
friends

i would know more to check the hebrews scripture of nwt.

and i have found also 50 errors in the greek scripure of nwt.

i need more scripure - about 100 hebrews and 100 greek scriputres.

accuracy

The Greek Theology list deals mostly with Biblical Greek. While I do not agree that there are "50 errors" (of what? Grammar? Translation? Theology?) in the Hebrew Scriptures of the NWT, it would help if you state specifically what you are looking for.

62

SEMINAR ON BIBLICAL GREEK Taught by Dr. Firpo Carr

by VM44 in

jw
friends

while surfing the net, i came upon this annoucement.. a seminar on biblical greek to be taught by dr. firpo carr!!!.

who wants to sign up?.

< http://www.stirinc.org/seminar.htm.

accuracy

Sibboleth, shibboleth! Yerusalyim, if your name is supposed to be the Hebrew for "Jerusalem," someone also replaced your shin with a sin (talking about Hebrew letters here, not body parts or their actions). The correct form is "yerushalayim." Which is dual, not just plural. Are there two of you?

Or does your name not mean "Jerusalem"?

156

Biblical PROOF that Jesus Christ IS GOD

by Bibleboy in

before i get started, my name is mark whitmore, 20, i live in vancouver, canada, and i am a follower of the way, a true christian, not a jw.

if you reply, please post who you are, how old and what you believe so that i know where you are coming from.

thanks.. now down to business.. strongs' hebrew and greek online:.

accuracy

For the past 1,700 years philosophers masquerading as biblical Greek theologians have attempted to deny the central truth of the Bible that Jesus is the Son of God, not "God the Son." During that time such "theologians" have used all manner of obtuse arguments and circuitous "proofs" and invented concepts, in an attempt to override the simple and clear message of the New Testament: Jesus, as the Son of God, is subordinate to his Father, not equal to Him. As on earth, so in heaven, and so for eternity. The verses which demonstrate this are so well-known that I will not quote them here. But they can stand on their own. They are the Word of God, which I much prefer to the idle cogitations of man.

156

Biblical PROOF that Jesus Christ IS GOD

by Bibleboy in

before i get started, my name is mark whitmore, 20, i live in vancouver, canada, and i am a follower of the way, a true christian, not a jw.

if you reply, please post who you are, how old and what you believe so that i know where you are coming from.

thanks.. now down to business.. strongs' hebrew and greek online:.

accuracy

Additionally, if John had wanted to say that Jesus was the same as the God he was "with," (John 1:1a), he would not have said , as he did, KAI QEOS HN hO LOGOS. Rather, he would have to say (as he did not), KAI hO QEOS HN hO LOGOS. (Dr. William Barclay, "Many Witnesses, One Lord," page 23) By leaving the second QEOS ("Theos") anarthrous, John was saying either that the Logos was a divine being or "god," or that the Logos has the character and attributes of God or, as Dr. Barclay puts it, "The Word was in the same class as God, belonged to the same order of being as God." (op. cit., page 23)

Just a note, the late Dr. Barclay was a New Testament expositor well recognized in Evangelical and conservative circles, and not one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

156

Biblical PROOF that Jesus Christ IS GOD

by Bibleboy in

before i get started, my name is mark whitmore, 20, i live in vancouver, canada, and i am a follower of the way, a true christian, not a jw.

if you reply, please post who you are, how old and what you believe so that i know where you are coming from.

thanks.. now down to business.. strongs' hebrew and greek online:.

accuracy

Any number of wannabe grammarians have tried to say that the "was" of John 1:1 (Greek, HN, "en," in the indicative imperfect active tense) implies the Word's "eternal" existence, but it doesn't wash. If HN means "eternal" existence at John 1:1, it has to mean the same thing everywhere else it is used, which makes for monstrosities. For example, when John 1:10 states that, after becoming a man, Jesus "was [Greek, HN] in the world...but the world did not know him," does it mean that Jesus "was eternally" in the world? Of course not! He was "in the world" for only 33 1/2 years! Verbs in the imperfect indicative active tense simply represent "an action as going on in past time...this action may be simultaneous, prolonged, descriptive, repeated, customary, interrupted, attempted, or BEGUN." (William Davis, Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p. 41, my emphasis) The verb HN, in and of itself, does not indicate how long the Word existed, nor does it say that he existed forever.

And this is just one instance of the tortured exegesis and misuse of grammar that must be employed in order to support the trinity. It would be far better to just let the Greek text speak for itself, rather than trying to force out of it what is not there.