Who Can Answer This? - Christianity Etc (3) - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum › Nairaland General › Christianity Etc › Who Can Answer This? (4785 Views)
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Chrisbenogor(m): 10:45am On Nov 01, 2008 |
Perriotu, I have been reading with keen interest, the points you make are quite disturbing so I did a bit of research and dug up some things for you since my guess is that you do not bother to do that any longer. Jesus spoke aramic and not greek, so that leaves us to wonder the competency of luke in rendering the text. If we look at the text well you should see that your explanation has holes in it, jesus was speaking on that day, not the day before and not the day after, putting the comma where it is would mean he was lying all along, is that what you are saying? Now about your claim for consistency let us look at the character of jesus, did he have a particular syntax when saying things like this? Yes he did, here are some examples I came up with Matthew 5:26 I tell you the truth, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny Matthew 6:2 I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. Matthew 8:10 "I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. Matthew 10:15 I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town. Matthew 10:23 I tell you the truth, you will not finish going through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes. Matthew 10:42 I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward." Matthew 11:11 I tell you the truth: Among those born of women there has not risen anyone greater than John the Baptist; yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. Matthew 16:28 I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." Matthew 18:3 And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. My dear perriotu if you are really seeking consistency of jesus, I think the way he structures his sentence should remain the same, which in this case is: "I tell you the truth" - "(What he has to say)" So how do we interpret the passage in question? Easy, since we know how Jesus uses the phrase "I tell you the truth" there is no need to read it as "I tell you the truth today." Luke 23:43 "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." One thing you have to keep in your head is it all boils down to the individual or sect, we could go down the road of analysing it from aramic to greek to hebrew to english and even to your mother tongue and you will see how one needs more than the spirit to really fully understand the bible. Be careful dude. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by pilgrim1(f): 1:30pm On Nov 01, 2008 |
Chrisbenogor:@Chris, you have done it again - welldone. You have actually done some research, and there's no denying that at all, unless the reader just wants to deliberately deny the fact! This has served to help me reconsider my thoughts about paradise and hades. Thank you again for your calm and astute reasoning there. https://images.zaazu.com/img/clap-animated-animation-clap-000340-large.gif |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Perrito4u: 1:33pm On Nov 01, 2008 |
It was not until the 9th century C.E. that punctuation came into general use. Luke was written, what, 1st Century? Luke was written in[b] GREEK[/b]!! Therefore when this book was written there were no punctuations. They were added in translations. I think my explanation of why the comma doesn't go where you think, is clear. If it was true what you say than the Bible is clearly contradicting itself. I don't think that's possible. Do you? Or was Jesus Lying? According to the Bible, "Today" or "that same day" Jesus didn't got to paradise. I posted alot of proof of this. Be careful dude. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by pilgrim1(f): 1:46pm On Nov 01, 2008 |
Perrito4u:Em, Perrito4u. . there are a few things that interest me in your submissions. 1. Could you address Nimshi's request, please? He asked for the references of your reflections. 2. Since there were no punctuation marks in the early Greek manuscripts, what justifies your own inclination to use preferred versions where the comma comes just after "Today"? 3. What about the enquiry on Luke 16:23? |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Perrito4u: 4:47pm On Nov 01, 2008 |
Pilgrim.1 I don't really think is important my references but the fact that what I posted makes alot of sense. Will soon post the Luke 16:23 question. ************************* Chrisbenogor: Matthew 5:26 (New Living Translation) And if that happens, you surely won’t be free again until you have paid the last penny. Matthew 11:11 (New Living Translation) “I tell you the truth, of all who have ever lived, none is greater than John the Baptist. Yet even the least person in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he is! This is proof that the translations change. Same Bible, 2 examples from your posting. Different how they began the sentence. This same translation starts Luke 23:43 with I assure you. What was your point again? |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Chrisbenogor(m): 7:22pm On Nov 01, 2008 |
@Perrito4u This could have gone down easily, but you have decided to make it a bit difficult, tell me what degree you have in rendering text, can you not see that you are at an obvious disadvantage. Let me humor you anyway Matthew 5:26 (New Living Translation)The parts in bold red above can be seen as introductory statements, they always come first. It still doesn't change anything the introduction comes first and then the message follows, but if you still have even a morsel of the real quest for truth you will ask yourself why only that verse was modified, ask them to show you which of Jesus statements are similar to the explanation they are giving. Let me do to the above verses what they did to that verse in the book of luke Matthew 5:26 (New Living Translation) And if that happens you, surely won’t be free again until you have paid the last penny. Matthew 11:11 (New Living Translation) “I tell you the truth of all, who have ever lived, none is greater than John the Baptist. Yet even the least person in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he is! Can you see how the meaning changes if I do to the verses what was done in the book of luke? I know you are beginning to sway their way already, but something brought you close to this people in the first instance, which is the real quest for the truth, so try and balance things out here, take what they tell you and bring it here for others who have a different opinion to see, then you can carefully sit and ponder, then pray to your God also to help you. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Perrito4u: 8:23pm On Nov 01, 2008 |
Matthew 5:26 (New Living Translation) And if that happens you, surely won’t be free again until you have paid the last penny. Matthew 11:11 (New Living Translation) “I tell you the truth of all, who have ever lived, none is greater than John the Baptist. Yet even the least person in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he is! These don't change the meaning. They don't sound right but can be understood the same way if you think about it. But if you do change Luke 23:43 it changes the meaning and contradicts other verses. I already posted why. Very clearly!!! Here, let me post it again. Let me copy/paste: Jesus was not resurrected on the day he died, but on the third day from his death. Thus, he could not have come into his kingdom on the day of his death. Then where was he during those three days, before his resurrection? Acts 2:24 says: "God resurrected him by loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to continue to be held fast by it." So Jesus was in the grip of death during that time. Acts 2:27 further says concerning him: "You will not leave my soul in Hades, neither will you allow your loyal one to see corruption." Hence, Jesus was in Hades, which is mankind's common grave. And the Bible says that there is "no work nor devising nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol [LXX, Hades]." So he was out of existence in Hades, as was the evildoer.―Eccl. 9:5, 10. Then, on the third day from his death, God raised Jesus from the dead as a mighty spirit creature. But the evildoer was not raised; he stayed in the grave.―1 Pet. 3:18. When Jesus, after his resurrection, materialized to appear to his disciples, they asked him: "Lord, are you restoring the kingdom to Israel at this time?" (Acts 1:6) Jesus showed that the answer was, No. The time had not yet come for his kingdom to be established. Then, was God's heavenly kingdom, with Jesus as king, established at any time during the lives of the apostles? No, for about sixty-three years after Jesus' death and resurrection the apostle John was inspired to write that God's kingdom was still in the future. (Revelation chapter 12) And it would be under that future kingdom that paradise would be restored. Thus, the Translation I use, in its rendering of Luke 23:43, is consistent with the truth of God's Word concerning the establishment of God's kingdom, the Paradise earth that will be restored under Kingdom rule, the condition of the dead, and where Jesus was during those three days. Other translators have also seen the difficulty involving the comma in this scripture. The Riverside New Testament avoided the problem by not putting in a comma at all, rendering it: "I tell you truly to-day you will be with me in Paradise." On the other hand, The New Testament by George M. Lamsa renders it: "Truly I say to you today, You will be with me in Paradise." Also The Emphasised Bible by Joseph B. Rotherham reads: "Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise." So what Jesus was saying was that when God's kingdom by Christ was established at a time then future, and when Paradise was restored to the earth, this evildoer could expect to be resurrected to have an opportunity for eternal life. I think the Bible doesn't contradicts itself. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Nimshi: 12:18am On Nov 02, 2008 |
Perrito4u: you're still not citing your references. This should be easy since you appear to be using the Watchtower CD ROM. And, is your favourite translation the New World Translation? Citing the references is important; and it should be easy for you to do. Your arguments are consistent with what JWs teach. The punctuation in the scripture under discussion was adopted by JWs because it appears consistent with the rest of JW theology, viz: paradise will be established here on planet earth; Jesus will be the ruler of the new 'system of things', but ruling from heaven; the criminal will be with Jesus in the sense that the criminal will be ressurected after Armageddon and will be part of the "new earth"; a spin-off of the above is that the administration of the new Earth will be presided over by the JWs, who will welcome the faithful who have died; this is one fo the reasons the JW leaders purchased placed "Beth Sarim", for example, to welcome people like Abraham, Devid, etc etc who JW say will not be in heaven, but will be part of a paradise earth, since heaven is open for only 144,000 humans who must have died after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ. . . pilgrim.1: regarding Hell and Hades: to JWs these two are interchangeable. The trick, however, is in understanding what they mean. Hell, or Hades or Sheol is the "common grave of mankind"; it is not a fiery place, but is a place of "inactivity". In the Hebrew Scriptures (OT), Sheol is the word used. Therefore, in JW theology: Hell = Hades = Sheol = 'common grave of mankind"; again: Hades is Greek, Sheol is Hebrew. The above is important: JWs believe that Jesus went to Hell, and that happened during the parts of three days for which he was dead. They cite Acts 2:31 to support this: 31Seeing what was ahead, he spoke of the resurrection of the Christ,[a] that he was not abandoned to the grave, nor did his body see decay.The above is from the NIV. The KJ version uses "hell" in place of "grave" But to make it all appear consistent, JWs explain that Luke 16:19-31 isn't literal; thus the "fire" in hell is not literal, but symbolises total "destruction", just like fire consumes (a little kid asked about the ashes; but I don't know JWs response to that; perhaps Perrito4u could help. . .) Perrito4u: which Jehovah's Witness book are you currently "studying" with Jehovah's Witnesses? And, on what page are you in the book? . |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Nimshi: 12:44am On Nov 02, 2008 |
Chris: brilliant work; no condescension. Below, I offer additional comments to help in understanding JW teaching, and on the fundamental result of your comment about Jesus and the consistency of interpreting Luke 23:42. . . The rendering Chris offers is the one most supported by scholars; but no amount of reasoning or proof will make any JW agree with you. The reason is hidden in Perrito4u's words: "I think the Bible doesn't contradicts itself", which, properly read, means: "I think the bible cannot contradict the Jehovah's Witness interpretation". JWs will reposition clauses, and remove (completely) from their translation of the bible anything they think could contradict their theology. Why would a JW (and, most likely P[b]errito4u[/b], since he's about one of JWs) not agree regardless of the evidence? Here: Correctly placing the comma - as Chris suggests - will destroy at least two of the JWs' doctrines: 1) Jehovah's Witnesses believe that most humans will not go to heaven (hence, the criminal will not go to heaven) 2) Jehovah's Witnesses believe that that humans do not possess a "spirit" (as in body, spirit, soul); they also believe that humans do not posses a soul.¨ The above are fundamental and non-negotiable for JWs. A note on Chris' post: Jesus is reported to have used the expression "I tell you the truth" or "Truly I tell you today" at least 70 times, and nowhere - as Chris correctly shows - is the JW version translated as they presented it. Note the quote from Perrito4u: Other translators have also seen the difficulty involving the comma in this scripture. The Riverside New Testament avoided the problem by not putting in a comma at all, rendering it: "I tell you truly to-day you will be with me in Paradise." On the other hand, The New Testament by George M. Lamsa renders it: "Truly I say to you today, You will be with me in Paradise." Also The Emphasised Bible by Joseph B. Rotherham reads: "Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise."The two translations mentioned above are the only two known translations that agree with the JW translation. The one by George Lamsa "is not a translation of the Greek New Testament at all, but rather a translation of the Syriac (Aramaic) Peshitta.". Perrito4u: ask your JW handlers about this. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Perrito4u: 12:56am On Nov 02, 2008 |
Nimshi Did Jesus go to paradise "Today", meaning the same day? If Yes, then what bible reference do you have to support that? I have Bible reference to support that he didn't, |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by pilgrim1(f): 2:35am On Nov 02, 2008 |
Hi guys, I have been enjoying the discussions and indeed have benefitted from all perspectives. Like I said, Chrisbenogor's entry and astute outline give me some food for thought. @Nimshi, Nimshi:Incisive, many thanks. For now, I shall just observe and enjoy the discussion and then come back at some point to throw in a few comments.  |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Chrisbenogor(m): 7:07am On Nov 02, 2008 |
@perrito How body, before I go into expanding, do you have a copy of George lasma's translation you were talking about? Well my scavengers dug it up and this is what it really says George M.Lamsa's translation from the Aramaic of the Peshitta The New Testament From The Ancient Eastern Text being a later printing of a 1957 edition published by A.J.Holman. Lamsa' translation herein reads at Lu.23:43: "Truly I say to you, Today[2] you will be with me in Paradise."-the footnote reading: "2 Ancient texts were not punctuated. The comma could come before or after today." My dear perriotu this is being honest, leaving things as they should be and not forcing interpretations. You were talking also about translations did your handlers inform you that the following translations either place the comma before 'today' or convey the idea as if it were so: NASB, ESV, AMP, HCSB, NLT, NIV, NRSV, NJB, JNT, NAB, ALT, ASV, BBE, CEV, Darby, DRB, EMTV, GNB, GW, HNV, ISV, KJV, LITV, JBPhillips, MSG, Webster, WNT, YLT, NET etc. Next you asked if the bible contradicts itself, I really do not like to use the word contradictory, I prefer symmetry, do you realise the bible was not a fully compiled until many years after Jesus, I do not want to derail this thread, there are some people here on nairaland that are really good at that I will point you towards kunleoshob he can give you a lesson on that then we can come back and talk about biblical symmetry. That said one must ALWAYS stick to the text first, the text in this case not being determinative. However, style comes before theology. It is dishonest to allow theology to determine meaning when there is a less biased way of figuring this out. The less biased way is noting that "Truly I say to you" is an introductory formula through the Gospel, and therefore "today" is the beginning of the reply. Any other answer uses theology to trump exegesis(pilgrim can expand on this for you), and thus one becomes an eisogete, reading into the text what one wants and not what the text says. Theology should be taken from a text and not to a text. When you are reading the history of the bible take note of the differences in the accounts of the apostles, because that will be key in your understanding that the bible was not one when they were alive, take note to look at the differences in the first 5 gospels. What you should be asking what we think jesus meant by paradise that should make the text clearer, the best way to judge this is with the character of Jesus, what was his view on heaven and hell? |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Perrito4u: 1:21pm On Nov 02, 2008 |
Chris, you say:"leave things as they should be and not force interpretations". Then Luke 23:43 should read:"Jesus answered him I tell you the truth today you will be with me in paradise" NO COMMA. Now let me ask you what I asked Nimshi: Did Jesus go to paradise "Today", meaning the same day? If Yes, then what bible reference do you have to support that? So we can understand what Jesus really meant since we not using any commas. They were added in translation. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by pilgrim1(f): 2:38pm On Nov 02, 2008 |
@Perrito4u, Perrito4u:Hi there. I would like to say that there's good sense in what Chrisbenogor and Nimshi have pointed out earlier. It was not my intention to weigh in at this point, but having waited for your answer to my request and found none, it might be best to throw in a few here. If you maintain that sheol = grave = hell, there would definitely be problems with holding that view. I don’t think the Biblical texts maintain such a position – and that was why I had asked about Luke 16:23 on the pointer to Hadēs (Greek Ἅιδης, Aidēs, Āidēs, Haidēs). The word Hadēs (or Haidēs) should not be confused for ‘grave’. The NT uses a different word in reference to our ‘common’ grave: [list]Grave (Greek μνημειον – mnēmeion), or Graves (μνημα – mnēma) ● John 11:17 (KJV) – ‘Then when Jesus came, he found that he had lain in the grave (mnēmeio) four days already.’ ● John 11:38 (KJV) – ‘Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to the grave (mnēmeio). It was a cave, and a stone lay upon it.’ ● Rev. 11:9 – ‘And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves (mnēma).’ ● Matt. 27:52-53 (KJV) – ‘And the graves (mnēma) were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves (mnēma) after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.’[/list] The words ‘grave/graves’ occur in those verses in many English translations and versions in agreement with the KJV. The word ‘grave’ also answers to ‘sepulchre’ as in Acts 13:29 in the KJV – ‘And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre (mnēmeion)’. In this verse, other translations use various words such as: [list]● Tomb Amplified [AMP] Analytical Literal Translation [ALT] American Standard Version [ASV] Contemporary English Version [CEV] English Standard Version [ESV] English Majority Text Version [EMTV] Gods WORD [GW] Holman Christian Standard Bible [HCSB] International Standard Version [ISV] Literal Translation [LITV] New American Standard Bible [NASB] New Century Version [NCV] New English Translation [NET] New International Version [NIV] New King James Versions [NKJV] New Living Translation [NLT] Revised Version [RV] Weymouth NT [WyNT] Young’s Literal Translation [YLT] ● Sepulchre Darby Douay Rheims Bible [DRB] Geneva James Murdock NT [JMNT] Webster ● Grave Wycliffe New Testament [WNT][/list] There’s no confusing these terms, for we can see that the ‘tomb’ in Matt.27:60 (KJV) answers to the ‘sepulchre’ in Luke 23:52 (KJV). |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by pilgrim1(f): 3:00pm On Nov 02, 2008 |
However, hadēs (αiδης, commonly translated as ‘hell’ in our English Bibles) should not be confused for mnēmeion (μνημειον – tr. as grave, tomb, or sepulchre). The nature and experiences between these two spheres are not pointing to the same things. The difference is this: ● the body is buried in the grave (mnēmeion) ● but the spirit/soul leaves the body and goes on to hadēs (αiδης Death is defined as ‘the body without the spirit’ (James 2:26). Long before that, Eccl. 12:7 noted that man’s body is dust that returns to earth while the spirit returns to God who gave it. What all these point to is that man’s spirit and soul survive beyond the grave – and that is what is shown in Luke 16. In Luke 16, both Lazarus and the rich man died and were buried (v. 22); but the experiences after death gives us the understanding that their incorpreal parts (spirit and soul) survived the grave and were very conscious to engage in some activity of sorts – as in the case of the rich man in verse 23 & 24: ● in hell (hadēs) he lift up his eyes ● he was in torments ● he saw Abraham afar off ● he cried and said Dear Perrito4u, think on these things and maybe they will then help you reconsider what you argue about hell - for the Bible demonstrates that Hell is not the grave. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Nimshi: 6:53pm On Nov 02, 2008 |
Perrito4u:Perrito4u: I'll attempt a response your question; the bulk of my response will be to show why the JW interpretation of Luke 23:43 is self-serving to JW theology, and the attempt of the Governing Body of JWs to impose meanings convenient to their interpretation of scripture on the text. I don't claim to have the correct answer to the interpretation of Luke 23:43, but I can say - without being pretentious - that the JW interpretation could be shown to be faulty. Below, from an old friend who has done the good work of responding to this as well as anyone with his understanding of JW theology would. Notes for clarification "Society" below refers to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, that is, one of the legal bodies representing Jehovah's Witnesses. The JWs use "Society" to mean the leaders of the JW organisation; this group (exclusively men) are also called the "Governing Body" (GB), or the core of the "Faithful and Discreet Slave Class (FDS). These are all JW buzz-words; so it is enough to know that "Society", GB, FDS all refer to those who determine the doctrine of Jehovahs Witnesses. " Part of the confusion for individual Jehovah's Witnesses stems from the fact that according to Watchtower doctrine, the paradise spoken of by Jesus at Luke 23:43 refers, not to heaven, but to an earthly paradise, to be established during Christ's millennial reign. Christ, so says the Society, could not have promised the man paradise that very day, since the paradise refers to a future time and place. (Hence, the NWT rendering of Luke 23:43.) The Society offers nothing other than their dogmatic claim that such is the case. The Greek word translated "paradise" at Luke 23:43 is paradeisos, and it is used only three times in the New Testament. It consistently refers to heaven, not an earthly paradise as the Watchtower Society dogmatically states. Consider: I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know--God knows. And I know that this man--whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows--was caught up to paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that man is not permitted to tell. --2 Corinthians 12:2-4 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who overcomes, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God. --Revelation 2:7 If we allow scripture to translate scripture, there is no reason to doubt that paradeisos at Luke 23:43 refers to heaven, as it does in each of the other NT occurrences. And, as noted, the Society has offered no evidence to the contrary. But what about the fact that Jesus went to the tomb for three days? How is this to be reconciled with Jesus' promise to the evildoer that they would be together in paradise that very day? Again, it is Watchtower doctrine - not scripture - that clouds the issue. The Watchtower Society denies that Jesus and mankind in general possess an immaterial spirit element; therefore, according to the Society, the fact that Jesus' body was placed in the tomb for three days precludes any possibility of His having gone to heaven. But such a position contradicts Jesus' own words at Luke 23:46: Jesus called out with a loud voice, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." When he had said this, he breathed his last. Compare the prayer of Stephen recorded at Acts 7:59: While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit."Both Jesus and Stephen confirmed the existence of the incorporeal spirit element of man. Both expected their spirit to leave their body at the moment of death and return to God, as taught in scripture: and the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it. --Ecclesiastes 12:7There is not a shred of evidence to support the Society's claim with regard to Luke 23:43. In the name of all that is logical, how can one honestly accept the Society's dogmatic position on Luke 23:43 in view of the facts? The burden of proof lies squarely on the shoulders of the Watchtower Society. They have offered nothing other than the obvious: that the scholarly translation of Luke 23:43 conflicts with their doctrines, and therefore must be a mistranslation. We see the Watchtower Society once again conforming their scripture to their doctrine rather than their doctrine to scripture. " Perrito4u: 1) Which book are you "studying" with JWs at the moment? 2) Are you studying with and "elder", a "pioneer", a "publisher", or an "elder-pioneer"? . |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Perrito4u: 3:34am On Nov 03, 2008 |
Nimshi Did Jesus go to paradise "Today", meaning the same day? If Yes, then what bible reference do you have to support that? You didn't answer We can talk about the topic you posted from your friend but lets not cross that bridge yet. I still have to answer Pilgrim.1's question too. Lets go a step at a time. And If you can, don't bring up religion, lets talk about the Bible not religion. I have no idea what religion all of you are and it doesn't really interests me. I came here to have conversations about the Bible, not religion. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Nimshi: 6:43am On Nov 03, 2008 |
You apparently didn't read the whole of the post; the answer to your question is clear from there. You expected a "Yes" or "No" answer; you should know - as JWs do well to pretty know - that seldom are complex issues resolved by "yes" or "no"; read the post with your JW bible "study" mind. You're yet to answer the simplest questions about your 4-month bible "study" with JWs: Perrito4u: 1) Which book are you "studying" with JWs at the moment? 2) Are you studying with and "elder", a "pioneer", a "publisher", or an "elder-pioneer"? Why haven't you answered? I could tell you why this is important to the question fo this thread and the subject of the other thread. But you aren'te giving anywhere near as much as I have. Read the response to Luke 23:43 and JWs interpretation of it, eh. And, if you insist on "Yes" or "No", I could give you several "Yes"/"No" types that your JW handlers will back off quickly from. For instance: 1) Does the bible mention organ transplants? 2) Or, even simpler: does the bible mention anything about smoking? 3) Or, does the bible mention anything about having an "Elder's Manual"? (I bet you don't know about this JW book; only Elders have it, and you won't lay your hand on one even if you're a Ministerial Servant.) 4) Is there anywhere where the bible mentions to do Wathctower Study? Justice couldn't be done to these questions by "Yes"/"No", one reason being that these aren't those sort of questions. If you're able to read the text in blue in my last post, we could have a further discussion on this topic; if not, then discussion has about ended on that topic along that path. And, let's go step by step: give direct answers to the questions I have asked on this thread prior to your last question; that'll be fairness. Setting the agenda as the study conductor does in the JW sessions appears to be rubbing off, eh. And, er, we're talking about the JW religion (that trick about "religion is a snare and a racket" got tossed years ago); JWs peddle their religion as the one true religion, so, what're you about saying "let's talk about the bible, not religion"? And, which bible? The New World Translation? Meanwhile: you appear to have disappeared from this thread: https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-4050.96.html ; there's stuff there needing your attention. . |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Chrisbenogor(m): 9:33am On Nov 03, 2008 |
Elders manual? This is creepy, Did the bible say anything about transfusion? |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Perrito4u: 12:58pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
Nimshi you cant give me a straight answer cause you know I'm right. Your actually trying to avoid the question. All you talk about is JW's, but you try to avoid the Bible. You know alot about JW's, are you disfellowship or something? Im not wasting my time here anymore, I cant have Bible conversations with Chris or Pilgrim about the Bible without you jumping in and bringing up religion and bringing up other topics. Just remember you could not answer me the question,  |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by pilgrim1(f): 1:08pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
Em. . . Perrito4u, Perrito4u:I'm sorry to observe you're wrong. Just stating you're right when you have refused to offer answers to his questions is quite suspect, don't you think? Perrito4u:That is not true - unless you're trying to deliberately confirm that you refused to even read through his answers. Perrito4u:Were the verses cited in his replies from the JW magazines or from the Bible? Perrito4u:Why did you not simply answer his questions, Perrito4u? We all have been talking about the same issues from the Bible, no? Perrito4u:Do I take it that it is because you have searched and not been able to offer simple answers to simple enquiries? |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by IDINRETE: 2:03pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
pilgrim.1: |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by pilgrim1(f): 2:34pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
@IDINRETE, I'm doing okay, and you? IDINRETE:Well, what exactly would you like me to focus on? The rising of the saints who left their graves. . in relation to Chrit's resurrection; or what might have happened to those same saints? I've had questions of this sort sent my way previously; but I don't want to presuppose yours. It would be my pleasure to share what I think when you can direct me on what you really would like me to address. Cheers. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by IDINRETE: 2:52pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
Hi Pilgrim Im fine thank you. my questions is on the two verses 52 and 53 of Matthew ch 27 "And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many" cheers. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by naomijt(f): 4:12pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
@naomijt,Thanks pilgrim1. I can see you are doing a good job helping out on the issue Basically, i'm too lazy to read through. Av been watching out for responses since i posted but din't get any b4 i gave up. Can u tell me in brief what Idenrete question is? Thanks |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by pilgrim1(f): 5:11pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
@naomijt, I should rather be thanking you. With regards to IDINRETE's enquiry, I'll try and give it a go (hoping that I don't get him wrongly). |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by pilgrim1(f): 6:03pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
@IDINRETE, IDINRETE:Well, I know the enquiry is on Matthew 27:52-53. What I'm a lil wondering about is what exactly (or how precisely) we should be looking at the enquiry; but let me share a few - and then if it happens that it does not relate to your enquiry, I would be glad to reconsider. ● Matthew 27:52-53 ● And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many. This verse points me to the event following the death and resurrection of Christ. Death is defined as ‘the body without the spirit’ (James 2:26). As we have seen, the body of Christ was buried in the grave (or sepulchre - Matt. 27:60 & Mark 15:46), but His human spirit was went on to the nether world, which we commonly refer to as the realm of the spirit. This spirit-realm perhaps is one of the issues that many people have wondered about. Of course we know that the death of the body does not mean the non-existence of the human spirit. But then, where did Jesus go after the burial? The Bible speaks about that event in at least two ways: ● Act 2:31 - Jesus went to Hell (ie., hadēs, αiδης) He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. ● 1 Peter 3:19-20 - Jesus went to the spirits in "prison" By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. In my thinking, these two spheres where Jesus went after His burial are not the same - and Luke 16:26 reminds us about the great gulf that divides them. Only Jesus alone was able to go to both spheres, for He alone emerged with the keys of hades and death (Rev. 1:18). In any case, Scripture records that those dead saints who rose from the dead and appeared to many people happened to have done so following the resurrection of Jesus (Matt. 27:53). I believe this was in fulfillment of prophecies in part, such as the following: ● Isaiah 26:19 Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. It doesn't stop there, though. One may ask what followed upon His descending to hadēs (αiδης). It seems that, first He went to declare two things to the disobedient spirits in "prison" - these two things were: (a) His victory; and (b) their judgement. Following that, He heralded His authority over all things - including hadēs and death (Rev. 1:18). I shall pause here for your comments; and if per adventure I had trailed off from what you had in mind, I shall be glad to retrace my steps and attend upon what you present. Cheers. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Nimshi: 9:00pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
Pilgrim.1: I must thank you for your post #84 above in respose to Perrito4u; it is encouraging to know that I'm not the only one feeling he's attempting to weave through and not giving as much as he's been receiving. I have a question for you, Pilgrim.1, and it is a brief one: is the answer to Perrito4u's question clear from the text of my post in blue? If yes, fine; if not, please let me know why not. I quoted that explanation because I thought it was eloquent and, more importantly, to the point; Perrito4u denies this, so I'll like to have another's opinion. Thank you. Perrito4u:First, I don't think you're right; so it's very much presumptuous of you to say that I know you're right; I don't think you are. I'll address the rest of the part I have highlighted in bold below: You have accused me of not using the bible; I tell you, that's either because I've been addressing issues of common sense, and/or because I have - admittedly - been lazy. But, the Bible I'm happy to talk about. Fortunately, there are several translations. The 'Jehovah's Witness bible' is the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (NWT for short); have you bought a copy yet, or have your handlers been gracious to hand you one? Could you consult it and let's discuss the following bible verse: 1) I John 5:7 ;-) Ok; I know that's unfair because the Jehovah's Witness Bible has a peculiar take on this scripture. ;-) Of course, there's a perfect explanation for why this is so. This is partly a reason you'll have to stow away your other bible translations and only use the officially approved Jehovah's Witness translation. Your JW handlers will of course be happy to "perfectly explain" why this verse is so in the NWT. But you'll have a harder time with informed "householders*". Now, seriosuly, I'll take the rest of your loaded post in subsequent posts. *Householder: JW buzz word; this is what JWs call people they meet at home when they go knocking from door-to-door. . |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Nimshi: 9:15pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
Perrito4u:You claim you want to talk about the bible; is it also a coincidence that your take on the bible mirrors the doctrines of Jehovah's Witnesses? You claim to be talking about the bible; yet, that's only what JWs told you. Why have you refused to tell the book you're "studying" with JWs? For one, I'm certain that the book - which is the basic textbook you're using in your "study" - isn't the bible; it is a book about the bible written by Jehovah's Witnesses, specifically, written by the Writing Department in Brooklyn, under the direction of the Governing Body* of Jehovah's Witnesses. Which of the JW brochures have you read? List them, eh. It appears you're interested in, and have an affinity for bible discourse; but because your knowledge is yet limited, you're a prime recruit for JWs: already, you've been thoroughly impressed, and are already toeing the party line in a few short months. It is because JWs attempt to becloud the issues concerning their practice of Chritianity that they continually tell potential recruits that they're only talking about the bible; yet the "textbook" for bible study isn't primarily the bible, but books written by the relevant department as directed by the Governing Body in Brooklyn. So much about discussing the bible. *Governing Body: this is the name given to the 12 or so wise men who're the top decision makers in spiritual matters in the JW organisation. They are all part of the group of 144,000 who will eventually go to live forever in heaven; JWs call them the anointed class; in fact, JWs believe that this group cosntitutes (part of) God's visible government on earth, and that the men are part of God's Faithful and Discreet Slave. To keep this government going, they meet weekly in Brooklynn New York. And no, I'm not kidding; this is it; you can't make all this up. . |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by pilgrim1(f): 9:20pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
@Nimshi, Nimshi:First, I should rather be thankful to you guys for helping me reconsider my thoughts about paradise. Whatever were my previous thoughts, it was refreshing to be stirred to once again go back and see if they were quite well established. As regards your answers to Perrito4u, I thought the part in blue was brilliant. I have read it through several times over and used it to check every single verse on the subject in my study note. If there was something therein that would have aroused my attention, I sure would have raised it. Well done again, and many thanks. |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Nimshi: 9:30pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
Perrito4u wrote:Perrito: I see you've resorted to the regular JW tactic of attempting to demonise someone who as much as questions your beliefs. You asked: ", are you disfellowship (sic) or something?". First off, I must commend you for writing even the obvious, viz: "You know alot about JW's. . . "; if that admission was meant as a complement, then it is acknowledged. Now, for the benefit of the others following this discussion (and yourself, since you're - by your own words - only 4 months or so into the JW world), I will write a few things about disfellowshipping amongst JWs. JWs will "disfellowship" (or excommunicate) members who have defaulted in some way. The problem? Default could take any number of forms. As expected, they will disfellowship members who commit a number of sins. The regular, for which many JWs are disfellowshipped yearly - up to about 40,000 - is "fornication", or "porneia"; the definition of porneia in JW-land includes a number of sexual acts; "adultery" is a subset of porneia too. But you could be disfellowshipped for a whole lot of other things: if you disagree with JW doctrine and let it be known that you do not agree, you could be disfellowshipped; the absolute most heinous scriptural/spiritual crime a JW could commit is to express the thought that (s)he does not believe the Governing Body (that's the group of men in Brooklyn, New York, see above) are not God's Channel for dissemination of truth to the earth. This is taken as a denial of the presence of God's Government on earth; any JW who holds this view and does not recant and show repentance will be disfellowshipped. The same goes for open disagreement with any number of well-known JW doctrines: you celebrate Christmas, you'll be disfellowshipped (henceforth, DF); you celebrate someone else's or your own birthday, you'll be DF'd; you celebrate Easter? You're DF'd. If you're a JW and you now say you don't want to be a JW anymore? You'll be DF'd. [This is one reason I was asking Perrito to think carefully about what he's getting into; in JW world, there's a very thin margin for thinking things through youself and expressing your opinion; opinion is allowed only if it agrees with the opinion of the GB]. We'll return to this DF theme if this discussion expands. But the worst is yet to come: The "worst" includes what being DF'd means: once you're DF'd, no JW (anywhere on planet earth) is allowed to talk to you [JW "elders" may from time to time, perhaps once in a year, be allowed to talk to you with the aim of bringing you back to the fold if you're ready to face the consequences]. No JW will be allowed to talk to you, including members of your family (if you're not a minor). If you do business with other JWs and are dependent on them, your livelihood may become jeopardised. This draconian JW policy has broken many homes. [If your JW friend accepts a blood transfusion and is DF'd, then you cannot be a friend anymore with the fellow if you're also a JW; you could be DF'd for having a conversation with the fellow]. Essentially, being DF'd amongst JWs means you will be shunned; they wouldn't greet you, nor associate with you, no matter the reason for which you were DF'd; you're spiritually dead to JWs, and for all intents, also physically "dead". You may now have realised why accusing someone of being Disfellowshipped is a first step to getting the fellow 'hanged'. Perrito: it appears you're unaware, but I don't discuss my religion (or lack of it) on this board. What that has meant is that I have been said to be a Christian, a Muslim, a fake Muslim, a Shia Muslim, an unfaithful Christian, and recently, an Atheist; you've sugegsted another: not just one of Jehovah's Witnesses, but a Disfellowshipped Jehovah's Witness. I welcome you to the Club of those not paying attention to what matters but speculating on a poster's religion. I suspect your JW handlers advanced this 'explanation'; this is no surprise. JWs regularly prey on people who don't understand much of their doctrines and their practice of "Christianity"; the informed fellow is their nightmare, and the way they explain this away is to suggest that the person must have been disfellowshipped, which would be why they know so much about JWs; this is one reason JWs decree that their members must not talk to people who have left the religion. My position has been that the recruitment drive of JWs works because there's uneven information and knowledge; you're proving it to be correct. . |
| Re: Who Can Answer This? by Nimshi: 9:49pm On Nov 03, 2008 |
pilgrim.1:It is refreshing to read this fruit of discussion. This is one reason I do like discussion: there's the potential to correct things (like I did much earlier on this board), to reevaluate/reevaluate things (as you've done), to dig into things (as Chris has done), to expose things (as Perrito is doing with help about JW doctrines). As regards your answers to Perrito4u, I thought the part in blue was brilliant. I have read it through several times over and used it to check every single verse on the subject in my study note. If there was something therein that would have aroused my attention, I sure would have raised it.When I received the part in blue, I knew there was nothing to add, and that dilution will be unworthy; so, I'll pass your commendation on (I already have). Thank you! |
Lets See Who Can Answer This Biblical Question About Jesus Death. • Answer This With An Open Mind • Anti-Deity of Yahshua: Please Kindly Help Frosbel Answer This • 2 • 3 • 4
Once Saved Always Saved • Should A Yahoo Boy Pay Tithe With Fraud Money ? • First One Million Years In Christian Heaven