Wrangler
Well-known member
Context. Do you recognize there are many REAL lords and gods in the Bible?
Furthermore, do you recognize the different senses of "god" could refer to a thing rather than a Being or person?
What do JW's Believe ?
- Thread starter civic
- Start date
Furthermore, do you recognize the different senses of "god" could refer to a thing rather than a Being or person?
Olde Tymer
Well-known member
.
The Watchtower Society's theology is a based on a version called monolatrism,
which basically alleges that all gods are actual deities; though not all deities are
deemed worthy of worship. This is not quite the same as polytheism where
numerous gods are all considered worthy of worship.
Monolatrism is distinguished from monotheism (asserts the existence of only one
god) and distinguished from henotheism (a religious system in which the believer
worships one god alone without denying that others may worship different gods of
equal value)
While classical Christianity recognizes but two categories of gods-- the true and the
false, viz: the authentic and the imitation, the intrinsic and the artificial --the
Watchtower Society's theologians took the liberty to create a third category
sandwiched between the true and the false called "mighty ones". The mighty-one
category is a sort of neutral zone where qualifying personages exist as bona fide
deities without violating the very first of the Ten Commandments. For example:
"I myself have said: You are gods" (Ps 82:6)
The gods referred to in that passage are humans; which everybody should know
are only imitation deities rather than the genuine article; so in order to avoid
stigmatizing humans as fake gods, the Society classifies them as mighty ones.
This gets kind of humorous when we plug "mighty one" into various locations. For
example:
"In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a
mighty one." (John 1:1)
And another:
"No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten mighty one who is in the
bosom position with the Father is the one that has explained him." (John 1:18)
The "mighty one" category was an invention of necessity. In other words: without
it, the Society would be forced to classify the only-begotten (John 1:18) and the
Word (John 1:1) as a false god seeing as how Deut 6:4, John 17:3, and 1Cor 8:4-6
testify that there is only one true god.
POSIT: Jesus verified the authority of Ps 82:6 in a discussion recorded at John
10:34-36. If the word of God cannot be nullified, then those gods have to be real
gods.
REPLY: Oh; they're real alright: real imitations because according to Deut 6:4, John
17:3, and 1Cor 8:4-6 there is only one true god. Therefore the gods in Ps 82 are
artificial gods. Plus; true gods don't die; viz: they're immortal, impervious to death.
The gods in Psalm 82 were neither immortal nor impervious to death.
"Surely you will die just as men do" (Ps 82:7)
So then, what does all this say about the Word of John 1:1? Well; if the Word is
only a mighty one, as the Watchtower Society alleges; then he's an artificial god--
i.e. a false god --and in reality his deity is no more divine than a totem pole or a
statue of Ganesha.
POSIT: If true gods don't die, then Jesus is not a true god because he was mortal.
REPLY: That's actually a very good point; but let's be very sure we know what we're
talking about when we speak of the Word's alter ego Jesus because that name
identifies the Word's flesh per John 1:14.
Had the Word's flesh been truly divine prior to the cross, the Romans would've
most certainly failed to kill it. It was therefore essential that the Word's flesh be
100% human so it could be sacrificed for the Jews' sins per Isa 53:6
FAQ: If the Word's flesh was 100% human, then how could Jesus honestly say he
existed before Abraham?
REPLY: Well obviously Jesus was speaking of his divine origin when he said that.
Now right there is something that the Watchtower Society has thus far found to be
impossible to accept, to wit: the Word exists as a spirit being and a material being
simultaneously, i.e. an eternal being and a temporal being both at the same time.
The one is an extension of God whereas the other is an extension of Adam.
According to John 1:1-3, the Word created Adam; which of course implies that the
Word created his own human origin. That is so supernatural, and so miraculous, that
the Watchtower Society's think tank can't do the math, so to speak.
_
The Watchtower Society's theology is a based on a version called monolatrism,
which basically alleges that all gods are actual deities; though not all deities are
deemed worthy of worship. This is not quite the same as polytheism where
numerous gods are all considered worthy of worship.
Monolatrism is distinguished from monotheism (asserts the existence of only one
god) and distinguished from henotheism (a religious system in which the believer
worships one god alone without denying that others may worship different gods of
equal value)
While classical Christianity recognizes but two categories of gods-- the true and the
false, viz: the authentic and the imitation, the intrinsic and the artificial --the
Watchtower Society's theologians took the liberty to create a third category
sandwiched between the true and the false called "mighty ones". The mighty-one
category is a sort of neutral zone where qualifying personages exist as bona fide
deities without violating the very first of the Ten Commandments. For example:
"I myself have said: You are gods" (Ps 82:6)
The gods referred to in that passage are humans; which everybody should know
are only imitation deities rather than the genuine article; so in order to avoid
stigmatizing humans as fake gods, the Society classifies them as mighty ones.
This gets kind of humorous when we plug "mighty one" into various locations. For
example:
"In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a
mighty one." (John 1:1)
And another:
"No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten mighty one who is in the
bosom position with the Father is the one that has explained him." (John 1:18)
The "mighty one" category was an invention of necessity. In other words: without
it, the Society would be forced to classify the only-begotten (John 1:18) and the
Word (John 1:1) as a false god seeing as how Deut 6:4, John 17:3, and 1Cor 8:4-6
testify that there is only one true god.
POSIT: Jesus verified the authority of Ps 82:6 in a discussion recorded at John
10:34-36. If the word of God cannot be nullified, then those gods have to be real
gods.
REPLY: Oh; they're real alright: real imitations because according to Deut 6:4, John
17:3, and 1Cor 8:4-6 there is only one true god. Therefore the gods in Ps 82 are
artificial gods. Plus; true gods don't die; viz: they're immortal, impervious to death.
The gods in Psalm 82 were neither immortal nor impervious to death.
"Surely you will die just as men do" (Ps 82:7)
So then, what does all this say about the Word of John 1:1? Well; if the Word is
only a mighty one, as the Watchtower Society alleges; then he's an artificial god--
i.e. a false god --and in reality his deity is no more divine than a totem pole or a
statue of Ganesha.
POSIT: If true gods don't die, then Jesus is not a true god because he was mortal.
REPLY: That's actually a very good point; but let's be very sure we know what we're
talking about when we speak of the Word's alter ego Jesus because that name
identifies the Word's flesh per John 1:14.
Had the Word's flesh been truly divine prior to the cross, the Romans would've
most certainly failed to kill it. It was therefore essential that the Word's flesh be
100% human so it could be sacrificed for the Jews' sins per Isa 53:6
FAQ: If the Word's flesh was 100% human, then how could Jesus honestly say he
existed before Abraham?
REPLY: Well obviously Jesus was speaking of his divine origin when he said that.
Now right there is something that the Watchtower Society has thus far found to be
impossible to accept, to wit: the Word exists as a spirit being and a material being
simultaneously, i.e. an eternal being and a temporal being both at the same time.
The one is an extension of God whereas the other is an extension of Adam.
According to John 1:1-3, the Word created Adam; which of course implies that the
Word created his own human origin. That is so supernatural, and so miraculous, that
the Watchtower Society's think tank can't do the math, so to speak.
_
Last edited:
In John 1:1b, the Greek word theon (θεόν) is simply the accusative form (meaning here a different spelling for the same word) of the noun God, because it's required to be so for the Greek preposition pros (πρὸς) to include the meaning of "with" there.
On the Use of Theos and Theon in John 1:1 and Elsewhere in the Greek New Testament
Discusses where and how all the noun forms and cases of Theos (God) are used in the Greek New Testament.
thestarman.pcministry.com
Any can look up John 1:1 in Greek and see that fact. That means the trinity scholars know its fact as well, yet say nothing.
The true God in the NT ended in v every single spot--Every spot god small g is ended in g.
Olde Tymer
Well-known member
.
● 1John 2:26-27 . .These things I write you about those who are trying to mislead
you. And as for you, the anointing that you received from him remains in you, and
you do not need anyone to be teaching you; but, as the anointing from him is
teaching you about all things, and is true and is no lie, and just as it has taught
you, remain in union with him.
The anointing provides people with some valuable advantages to which people who
lack it of course have no access.
1_ Protects people from deception
2_ Enables people to comprehend Jesus Christ's teachings the way he wants them
comprehended.
3_ Makes it possible for people to remain in union with him.
According to Watchtower Society theology, only 144,000 special Jehovah's
Witnesses have the anointing. There aren't that many living Witnesses who have
the anointing though because when anointed Witnesses die, their passing doesn't
create vacancies; viz: 144,000 is the maximum unless an anointed JW either
apostatizes or is ousted via the process of disfellowship.
What that means is: the vast majority of today's living JWs don't have the
anointing. We're talking about some serious numbers here.
Currently approximately 19.7 million adherents attend the annual Memorial of
Christ's death. Even if all 144,000 anointed Witnesses were alive today, that would
leave approximately 19.56 million JWs roaming the earth in our day who 1) have no
protection from deception, 2) are unable to grasp Jesus Christ's teachings the way
he wants them grasped, and 3) not in union with him.
I'd imagine that quite a few ordinary Witnesses sincerely believe that their
association with the Watchtower Society keeps them in union with Jesus Christ; but
according to 1John 2:26-27, union with Jesus Christ isn't accomplished on the
coattails of an organization; it's accomplished by means of the anointing, i.e. no
anointing, no union.
Ironically, every non anointed JW coming to our doors preaching the kingdom of
God are themselves "those who are trying to mislead you."
_
● 1John 2:26-27 . .These things I write you about those who are trying to mislead
you. And as for you, the anointing that you received from him remains in you, and
you do not need anyone to be teaching you; but, as the anointing from him is
teaching you about all things, and is true and is no lie, and just as it has taught
you, remain in union with him.
The anointing provides people with some valuable advantages to which people who
lack it of course have no access.
1_ Protects people from deception
2_ Enables people to comprehend Jesus Christ's teachings the way he wants them
comprehended.
3_ Makes it possible for people to remain in union with him.
According to Watchtower Society theology, only 144,000 special Jehovah's
Witnesses have the anointing. There aren't that many living Witnesses who have
the anointing though because when anointed Witnesses die, their passing doesn't
create vacancies; viz: 144,000 is the maximum unless an anointed JW either
apostatizes or is ousted via the process of disfellowship.
What that means is: the vast majority of today's living JWs don't have the
anointing. We're talking about some serious numbers here.
Currently approximately 19.7 million adherents attend the annual Memorial of
Christ's death. Even if all 144,000 anointed Witnesses were alive today, that would
leave approximately 19.56 million JWs roaming the earth in our day who 1) have no
protection from deception, 2) are unable to grasp Jesus Christ's teachings the way
he wants them grasped, and 3) not in union with him.
I'd imagine that quite a few ordinary Witnesses sincerely believe that their
association with the Watchtower Society keeps them in union with Jesus Christ; but
according to 1John 2:26-27, union with Jesus Christ isn't accomplished on the
coattails of an organization; it's accomplished by means of the anointing, i.e. no
anointing, no union.
Ironically, every non anointed JW coming to our doors preaching the kingdom of
God are themselves "those who are trying to mislead you."
_
Wrangler
Well-known member
Is this from the Watchtower Society?
Wrangler
Well-known member
What is your take on the 144K?
Olde Tymer
Well-known member
.
Raymond Victor Franz was a member of the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses
from October 20, 1971 until his removal on May 22, 1980, and served at the
organization's world headquarters for fifteen years, from 1965 until 1980.
Mr. Franz resigned, and stated that the request for his resignation, and his
subsequent dis-fellowshipping, resulted from allegations of apostasy.
* Apostasy isn't always a bad thing. For example Paul applauded certain Christians
for defecting from idols. (1Thess 1:9)
Following his departure, Mr. Franz wrote a book titled "Crisis Of Conscience"
relating his personal experiences with the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society,
along with his views on Jehovah's Witness teachings. It's a bit expensive in print
form, but might yet be heard audibly for free on YouTube and/or available as a free
pdf download.
Mr. Franz's book, and his interviews, are helpful aids for people wondering if they
made the right decision leaving the Society's fold. It's also helpful for people
thinking about becoming a Jehovah's Witness but reserve some doubts as to
whether they'd be making a really big, life-changing mistake not easily corrected.
NOTE: Mr. Franz passed away in June of 2010.
_
Raymond Victor Franz was a member of the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses
from October 20, 1971 until his removal on May 22, 1980, and served at the
organization's world headquarters for fifteen years, from 1965 until 1980.
Mr. Franz resigned, and stated that the request for his resignation, and his
subsequent dis-fellowshipping, resulted from allegations of apostasy.
* Apostasy isn't always a bad thing. For example Paul applauded certain Christians
for defecting from idols. (1Thess 1:9)
Following his departure, Mr. Franz wrote a book titled "Crisis Of Conscience"
relating his personal experiences with the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society,
along with his views on Jehovah's Witness teachings. It's a bit expensive in print
form, but might yet be heard audibly for free on YouTube and/or available as a free
pdf download.
Mr. Franz's book, and his interviews, are helpful aids for people wondering if they
made the right decision leaving the Society's fold. It's also helpful for people
thinking about becoming a Jehovah's Witness but reserve some doubts as to
whether they'd be making a really big, life-changing mistake not easily corrected.
NOTE: Mr. Franz passed away in June of 2010.
_
Olde Tymer
Well-known member
.
So-called Replacement Theology is just another name for identity theft. Take for
example the Watchtower Society's interpretation of Rev 7:1-8 wherein is listed a
specific number of Hebrews taken from every tribe of the sons of Israel.
The Society claims that those aren't biological sons of Israel; but rather "spiritual"
sons-- referring of course to the Society's elite cadre of 144,000 Witnesses who
have supposedly undergone a spirit birth per Christ's instructions at John 3:3-12;
and the anointing as per 1John 2:26-27.
The Society's claim is premised upon its observation that there never was a tribe of
Joseph; when in reality Joseph is listed as both a son and a tribe (Gen 49:2-28 and
Ezek 48:31-34). So that portion of the Society's reasoning is clearly a false
premise.
The Society's claim is also premised upon its observation that Ephraim and Dan are
missing from the list of tribes at Rev 7:4-8. However, what the Society's
theologians have somehow overlooked in the Old Testament is that it doesn't
matter whose names are chosen to represent the twelve tribes of Israel just so long
as there are twelve names. Are there twelve in Rev 7:4-8? Yes. Well then that's
good enough. I realize that makes no sense but then the Lord's apostles were still
referred to as "the twelve" even with Judas out of the picture. So that premise in
the Society's reasoning is spurious too.
The Society's claim is also premised upon its reasoning that Levi isn't a valid tribe
based upon the fact that the Levites are exempt from warfare. However, Levi is
clearly listed as both a son and a tribe (Gen 49:2-28 plus Ezek 48:31-34) which is a
good many years after Num 1:1-54. So that premise is bogus too.
The Watchtower Society not wanting the 144,000 to be biological Hebrews is one
thing; but I would just like to know from whence Charles T. Russell's and Joseph F.
Rutherford's followers got the idea that their people constitute the 144,000. That's
a pretty serious claim. How do they validate it? I don't know; but I can just about
guarantee that their explanation is an outlandish stretch of the imagination
consisting of humanistic reasoning, rationalizing, spiritualizing, clever sophistry, and
semantic double-speak.
NOTE: According to Rev 14:1-4, the 144,000 are supposed to all be males, and
none have ever slept with a woman. That, if true, would of course disqualify
married JWs and all the females among them too.
_
So-called Replacement Theology is just another name for identity theft. Take for
example the Watchtower Society's interpretation of Rev 7:1-8 wherein is listed a
specific number of Hebrews taken from every tribe of the sons of Israel.
The Society claims that those aren't biological sons of Israel; but rather "spiritual"
sons-- referring of course to the Society's elite cadre of 144,000 Witnesses who
have supposedly undergone a spirit birth per Christ's instructions at John 3:3-12;
and the anointing as per 1John 2:26-27.
The Society's claim is premised upon its observation that there never was a tribe of
Joseph; when in reality Joseph is listed as both a son and a tribe (Gen 49:2-28 and
Ezek 48:31-34). So that portion of the Society's reasoning is clearly a false
premise.
The Society's claim is also premised upon its observation that Ephraim and Dan are
missing from the list of tribes at Rev 7:4-8. However, what the Society's
theologians have somehow overlooked in the Old Testament is that it doesn't
matter whose names are chosen to represent the twelve tribes of Israel just so long
as there are twelve names. Are there twelve in Rev 7:4-8? Yes. Well then that's
good enough. I realize that makes no sense but then the Lord's apostles were still
referred to as "the twelve" even with Judas out of the picture. So that premise in
the Society's reasoning is spurious too.
The Society's claim is also premised upon its reasoning that Levi isn't a valid tribe
based upon the fact that the Levites are exempt from warfare. However, Levi is
clearly listed as both a son and a tribe (Gen 49:2-28 plus Ezek 48:31-34) which is a
good many years after Num 1:1-54. So that premise is bogus too.
The Watchtower Society not wanting the 144,000 to be biological Hebrews is one
thing; but I would just like to know from whence Charles T. Russell's and Joseph F.
Rutherford's followers got the idea that their people constitute the 144,000. That's
a pretty serious claim. How do they validate it? I don't know; but I can just about
guarantee that their explanation is an outlandish stretch of the imagination
consisting of humanistic reasoning, rationalizing, spiritualizing, clever sophistry, and
semantic double-speak.
NOTE: According to Rev 14:1-4, the 144,000 are supposed to all be males, and
none have ever slept with a woman. That, if true, would of course disqualify
married JWs and all the females among them too.
_
You keep using these words. I do not think they mean what you think they mean.
civic
Well-known member
Agreed Ted !
Olde Tymer
Well-known member
.
● Acts 1:1-3 . .The first account, O Theophilus, I composed about all the things
Jesus started both to do and to teach, until the day that he was taken up, after he
had given commandment through holy spirit to the apostles whom he chose. To
these also by many positive proofs he showed himself alive after he had suffered.
The Watchtower Society's version of those "positive proofs" is interesting.
In order to show his friends that their savior was back from death, the arch angel
Michael is alleged to have materialized an artificial Jesus that was in all respects
just as physical, and just as functional, as the real Jesus.
However:
1» The New Testament never even one time, on any occasion, nor under any
circumstances, nor in any situation, either attests, alleges, alludes, or states that
an angel named Michael appeared to Christ's disciples cloaked in a human avatar.
2» The Society's Michael never once let on to his friends that he was an angel in
disguise. He led them to believe that his avatar was the actual Jesus Christ they all
knew prior to his crucifixion.
3» Passing one's self off in the guise of a dead man is the lowest form of identity
theft imaginable. It's what I expect from election frauds and illegal aliens, but that
is not the kind of behavior I have a right to expect from a high-ranking angel.
4» A so-called materialized body is a counterfeit.
5» Neither Paul, nor Peter, nor John, nor James, nor Jude, ever even one single
instance in any of their writings identify Jesus Christ as an angel named Michael:
not once. You'd think that if Jesus Christ is currently an angel who goes by the
name of Michael, those men would have said so because that would be a really big
deal.
FAQ: Why make an issue of the characteristics of Christ's resurrection?
REPLY: The predicted new world order is on track to be ruled not by angels, rather,
ruled by humans. (Heb 2:5-8) A materialized human-- a.k.a. an avatar --isn't really
human; it's a fake human.
Now the way I see it: If Michael is to rule the new world order, then he will have to
undergo death all over again and have his life force re-transferred to Jesus' body, thus
restoring it to life. That way Michael could be a real human instead of an angel in
disguise.
_
● Acts 1:1-3 . .The first account, O Theophilus, I composed about all the things
Jesus started both to do and to teach, until the day that he was taken up, after he
had given commandment through holy spirit to the apostles whom he chose. To
these also by many positive proofs he showed himself alive after he had suffered.
The Watchtower Society's version of those "positive proofs" is interesting.
In order to show his friends that their savior was back from death, the arch angel
Michael is alleged to have materialized an artificial Jesus that was in all respects
just as physical, and just as functional, as the real Jesus.
However:
1» The New Testament never even one time, on any occasion, nor under any
circumstances, nor in any situation, either attests, alleges, alludes, or states that
an angel named Michael appeared to Christ's disciples cloaked in a human avatar.
2» The Society's Michael never once let on to his friends that he was an angel in
disguise. He led them to believe that his avatar was the actual Jesus Christ they all
knew prior to his crucifixion.
3» Passing one's self off in the guise of a dead man is the lowest form of identity
theft imaginable. It's what I expect from election frauds and illegal aliens, but that
is not the kind of behavior I have a right to expect from a high-ranking angel.
4» A so-called materialized body is a counterfeit.
5» Neither Paul, nor Peter, nor John, nor James, nor Jude, ever even one single
instance in any of their writings identify Jesus Christ as an angel named Michael:
not once. You'd think that if Jesus Christ is currently an angel who goes by the
name of Michael, those men would have said so because that would be a really big
deal.
FAQ: Why make an issue of the characteristics of Christ's resurrection?
REPLY: The predicted new world order is on track to be ruled not by angels, rather,
ruled by humans. (Heb 2:5-8) A materialized human-- a.k.a. an avatar --isn't really
human; it's a fake human.
Now the way I see it: If Michael is to rule the new world order, then he will have to
undergo death all over again and have his life force re-transferred to Jesus' body, thus
restoring it to life. That way Michael could be a real human instead of an angel in
disguise.
_
Olde Tymer
Well-known member
.
The verse below is deliberately misquoted in order to emphasize a point. Watch for
the revision.
"It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spirit body. If there is a natural body, there
is also a spirit body." (1 Cor 15:44)
There are of course spirit bodies, e.g. angels and demons. However, the actual
word in the verse above is supposed to be spiritual rather than spirit, and in some
places describes things that bear absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to the bodily
characteristics of an angel or a demon. For example:
Spiritual gifts (Rom 1:11)
Spiritual law (Rom 7:14)
Spiritual things (Rom 15:27)
Spiritual people (1Cor 2:15)
Spiritual nourishment (1Cor 10:3)
Spiritual water (1Cor 10:4)
Spiritual rock (1Cor 10:4)
Spiritual counselors (Gal 6:1)
Spiritual blessings (Eph 1:3)
Spiritual music (Eph 5:19)
Spiritual understanding (Col 1:9)
Spiritual housing (1Pet 2:5)
Spiritual sacrifices (1Pet 2:5)
So then the properties of a spiritual body aren't necessarily those of a supernatural
being, rather; quite possibly those of a superhuman being.
● 1Cor 15:53 . . For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal
must put on immortality.
Immortal people are able to dine upon ordinary foods and beverages.
● Matt 26:29 . . I tell you: I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until
that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom.
● Luke 22:15-16 . . I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I
suffer. For I tell you: I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of
God.
● Luke 22:28-30 . .You are the ones that have stuck with me in my trials; and I
make a covenant with you, just as my Father has made a covenant with me, for a
kingdom, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom
_
The verse below is deliberately misquoted in order to emphasize a point. Watch for
the revision.
"It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spirit body. If there is a natural body, there
is also a spirit body." (1 Cor 15:44)
There are of course spirit bodies, e.g. angels and demons. However, the actual
word in the verse above is supposed to be spiritual rather than spirit, and in some
places describes things that bear absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to the bodily
characteristics of an angel or a demon. For example:
Spiritual gifts (Rom 1:11)
Spiritual law (Rom 7:14)
Spiritual things (Rom 15:27)
Spiritual people (1Cor 2:15)
Spiritual nourishment (1Cor 10:3)
Spiritual water (1Cor 10:4)
Spiritual rock (1Cor 10:4)
Spiritual counselors (Gal 6:1)
Spiritual blessings (Eph 1:3)
Spiritual music (Eph 5:19)
Spiritual understanding (Col 1:9)
Spiritual housing (1Pet 2:5)
Spiritual sacrifices (1Pet 2:5)
So then the properties of a spiritual body aren't necessarily those of a supernatural
being, rather; quite possibly those of a superhuman being.
● 1Cor 15:53 . . For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal
must put on immortality.
Immortal people are able to dine upon ordinary foods and beverages.
● Matt 26:29 . . I tell you: I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until
that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom.
● Luke 22:15-16 . . I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I
suffer. For I tell you: I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of
God.
● Luke 22:28-30 . .You are the ones that have stuck with me in my trials; and I
make a covenant with you, just as my Father has made a covenant with me, for a
kingdom, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom
_
In your misunderstanding. Some of the NT was written only to the little flock and not to all. There was a governing body in Jerusalem( apostles and elders) back then When Paul went to them to settle disputed matters. Its the same today-Matt 24:45--By Jesus' appointment they are.
You gotta be kidding. I have studied Jesus for over 60 years--There is 0 doubt-In every translation on earth, Jesus' teachings back the JW teachers, as does true God worship history--There is nothing else on earth for backing one. So what do the rest have= Catholicism altered translating.
Its why there is a difference-v or g ending. The word got g=god, the true God got v=God
Olde Tymer
Well-known member
.
Some of Solomon's remarks in the book of Ecclesiastes appear to conflict with
Christ's teachings in the New Testament. Well; the answer to that is actually pretty
simple.
According to 2Tim 3:16, Solomon was inspired to write Ecclesiastes, but the catch
is: his comments essentially represent a world view-- a philosophy of life under the
sun --rather than a book of either history, revelation, or prophecy.
In other words: Solomon's observations are limited to the scope of empirical
evidence and human experience; a perception of reality moderated by what we can
see for ourselves going on around us in the natural universe rather than the
supernatural-- which is at least one of the reasons why Ecclesiastes appeals to
cultists, atheists, and agnostics, et al.
Solomon was a very wise man; in point of fact, the brightest intellectual of his day.
But Solomon's knowledge and experience were limited. He didn't know everything
there is to know, nor had he seen everything there is to see, nor been everywhere
there is to go. Whereas Christ's knowledge is extremely vast.
● Col 2:3 . . Carefully concealed in him are all the treasures of wisdom and of
knowledge.
So then, it only stands to reason that Christ would know more about the afterlife
than Solomon, whereas Solomon didn't see anything beyond the grave when he
penned Ecclesiastes.
A good rule of thumb to apply when the teachings of Solomon and Jesus contradict
each other, is to keep in mind that Jesus is Solomon's superior, viz: Jesus'
teachings trump Solomon's.
● Matt 12:42 . .The queen of the south will be raised up in the judgment with this
generation and will condemn it; because she came from the ends of the earth to
hear the wisdom of Solomon, but, look! something more than Solomon is here.
● John 3:31 . . He that comes from above is over all others.
And Jesus comes highly recommended too.
● Matt 17:5 . . This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved; listen to him.
So then, when encountering remarks in the book of Ecclesiastes that are out of step
with Jesus' teachings in the New Testament; my unsolicited spiritual counseling is
to ignore Solomon's view of the afterlife and go with the wisdom of "my Son".
● John 8:12 . . I am the light of the world. He that follows me will by no means
walk in darkness, but will possess the light of life.
_
Some of Solomon's remarks in the book of Ecclesiastes appear to conflict with
Christ's teachings in the New Testament. Well; the answer to that is actually pretty
simple.
According to 2Tim 3:16, Solomon was inspired to write Ecclesiastes, but the catch
is: his comments essentially represent a world view-- a philosophy of life under the
sun --rather than a book of either history, revelation, or prophecy.
In other words: Solomon's observations are limited to the scope of empirical
evidence and human experience; a perception of reality moderated by what we can
see for ourselves going on around us in the natural universe rather than the
supernatural-- which is at least one of the reasons why Ecclesiastes appeals to
cultists, atheists, and agnostics, et al.
Solomon was a very wise man; in point of fact, the brightest intellectual of his day.
But Solomon's knowledge and experience were limited. He didn't know everything
there is to know, nor had he seen everything there is to see, nor been everywhere
there is to go. Whereas Christ's knowledge is extremely vast.
● Col 2:3 . . Carefully concealed in him are all the treasures of wisdom and of
knowledge.
So then, it only stands to reason that Christ would know more about the afterlife
than Solomon, whereas Solomon didn't see anything beyond the grave when he
penned Ecclesiastes.
A good rule of thumb to apply when the teachings of Solomon and Jesus contradict
each other, is to keep in mind that Jesus is Solomon's superior, viz: Jesus'
teachings trump Solomon's.
● Matt 12:42 . .The queen of the south will be raised up in the judgment with this
generation and will condemn it; because she came from the ends of the earth to
hear the wisdom of Solomon, but, look! something more than Solomon is here.
● John 3:31 . . He that comes from above is over all others.
And Jesus comes highly recommended too.
● Matt 17:5 . . This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved; listen to him.
So then, when encountering remarks in the book of Ecclesiastes that are out of step
with Jesus' teachings in the New Testament; my unsolicited spiritual counseling is
to ignore Solomon's view of the afterlife and go with the wisdom of "my Son".
● John 8:12 . . I am the light of the world. He that follows me will by no means
walk in darkness, but will possess the light of life.
_
God inspired his bible, Solomon and Jesus. You aren't understanding correctly. There is no contradiction in Gods words. Except in the altered translations. Which is what you use.
Ted, My post is reality about the v and g ending. Trinity scholars know its fact. Truth would expose hundreds of religions claiming to be christian as false religions. Billions of $$ lost yearly to tell that truth. And assuredly sued by 2 billion humans because they( the supposed scholars) know its fact and will say nothing.
Olde Tymer
Well-known member
.
In the story told at Luke 16:19-31, there's a rich man dead and buried (Luke
19:22) and there's the patriarch Abraham dead and buried. (Gen 25:9)
Well; the thing is: the rich man is able to see from his grave over to Abraham's
grave, and they are able to communicate from grave to grave. I am very curious
how Abraham's corpse, and the other guy's corpse, are able to communicate with
one another at all let alone through the ground like that.
Now, according to Solomon, the dead know nothing (Ecc 9:10) yet here in Luke we
find the rich man's corpse and Abraham's corpse no less sentient than they were
in life.
There's also a pauper in the story who, when he passed away, was more than likely
disposed of in a city dump rather than given a decent burial; yet there he is
apparently right alongside Abraham in the very same grave.
So just how is it that the rich man could see the pauper below ground when quite
possibly his remains were above ground in a dump?
_
In the story told at Luke 16:19-31, there's a rich man dead and buried (Luke
19:22) and there's the patriarch Abraham dead and buried. (Gen 25:9)
Well; the thing is: the rich man is able to see from his grave over to Abraham's
grave, and they are able to communicate from grave to grave. I am very curious
how Abraham's corpse, and the other guy's corpse, are able to communicate with
one another at all let alone through the ground like that.
Now, according to Solomon, the dead know nothing (Ecc 9:10) yet here in Luke we
find the rich man's corpse and Abraham's corpse no less sentient than they were
in life.
There's also a pauper in the story who, when he passed away, was more than likely
disposed of in a city dump rather than given a decent burial; yet there he is
apparently right alongside Abraham in the very same grave.
So just how is it that the rich man could see the pauper below ground when quite
possibly his remains were above ground in a dump?
_
