DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
Simple, only one factor was required. The will of God through the Holy Spirit. Next question.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
New Testament - can someone help please
- Thread starter Te Reweti Wharepapa
- Start date
Simple, only one factor was required. The will of God through the Holy Spirit. Next question.
There's only one basic biography of Jesus in the NT, and that's by the author of Mark. The authors of Luke and of Matthew borrowed the outline and the key events from him and each added sayings and embellishments, partly (it seems) from a lost collection of sayings, and partly by personal taste.
And if you're familiar with the debate over whether an historical Jesus did or didn't exist, you may have come across the observation that the spine of the Mark version can be constructed by having someone's list of purported messianic prophecies from the Tanakh and moving Jesus across a storyline that ticks off the items on the list.
Thus historically (as distinct from religiously) there is division rather than acceptance, and serious debate on what is true and what is conventional embellishment for venerated holy man, and what is made up to satisfy the things on the list of purported messianic prophecies.
The author of Mark may have been motivated to write what he did both out of dedication to his proto-Christian religion, and a consciousness that no one was really sure who Jesus had been as a human. That's guesswork, of course, but probably not controversial.
Are you wanting someone to write a school assignment for you?
Since the Bible itself says "All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work." ....it seems obvious that God wanted the ministry of his son recorded, and since Jesus himself wrote nothing down, it was up to human secretaries (mostly his apostles) to record his teachings for the Christians who would follow.
Roman 15:4 says..."For all the things that were written beforehand were written for our instruction, so that through our endurance and through the comfort from the Scriptures we might have hope." Jesus knew that hard times were to come, so the scriptures were also to bring comfort and hope for the future to his disciples.
Hope that helps.
"All things written beforehand", is in reference to the OT, and not the new testament. 2/3 of the NT was written by the false prophet Paul, and his cohorts.
In the first century it meant the Hebrew scriptures, but for the followers of Christ, it meant all the holy writings...the whole Bible....including all that the apostles wrote after Christ's departure.
Paul was an apostle, taught personally by Jesus like the 12, only post resurrection.....and because his writings form a major part of the NT, they are part of "all scripture". If you believe that God inspired scripture, then you must also believe that his spirit can preserve and protect its authentic content. You haven't thought this through very well, have you?
If Paul was a false prophet, then all Christians who believe his writings are on the road to death. You think God would allow that? God's word is "GOD'S word, so it must be available to all, otherwise he is not being fair to any genuine truth seeker.
Who authorized you or anyone else to accuse Paul of such a thing? If he was accepted by the 12, then God was misleading them too. Is God stupid? A deceiver? Deliberately allowing a false prophet to mislead his worshipers?
Really?
Faithofchristian
Well-Known Member
In the first century it meant the Hebrew scriptures, but for the followers of Christ, it meant all the holy writings...the whole Bible....including all that the apostles wrote after Christ's departure.
Paul was an apostle, taught personally by Jesus like the 12, only post resurrection.....and because his writings form a major part of the NT, they are part of "all scripture". If you believe that God inspired scripture, then you must also believe that his spirit can preserve and protect its authentic content. You haven't thought this through very well, have you?
If Paul was a false prophet, then all Christians who believe his writings are on the road to death. You think God would allow that? God's word is "GOD'S word, so it must be available to all, otherwise he is not being fair to any genuine truth seeker.
Who authorized you or anyone else to accuse Paul of such a thing? If he was accepted by the 12, then God was misleading them too. Is God stupid? A deceiver? Deliberately allowing a false prophet to mislead his worshipers?
Really?
Your Absolutely right on everything that you said.
Alot of what Paul wrote about is supported by the old testament Prophet's, If anyone understands the old testament and what the Prophet's wrote.
Paul also wrote alot of things that John wrote in the book of Revelation. So how did Paul do that, seeing him and John were miles apart, and John was in prison on the isle called Patmos.
It was Christ Jesus through his Holy Spirit that gave unto John and Paul and the other disciples the Inspiration what to write in their
Epistles ( Letters )
"But the Comforter, which is the Holy Spirit, Whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you" John 14:26
Last edited:
Muffled
Jesus in me
It isn't a debate if I am always wrong. The idea of a debate is to present arguments that support a view so the other person can see the rationality of belief.
This is the question New Testament expert and leading Scholar of the Greek Manuscripts, Professor Bart Ehrman asked himself during his 30 years of study.
Bottom line is, what you have today is far removed from the original 'inspired' words of ALLAH swt.
My goodness.....after viewing that video, all I can say is....what load of codswallop! Ehrman is imposing his own experience on everyone else, just like all disillusioned ex-believers do.
Who does this guy think he is? Obviously he feels like a man on a mission....it's a shame that his mission is so misguided. The undecided have a very important message to convey.....I discovered a fraud so I have to warn everyone else.....it never a case of "I misunderstood the whole thing in the first place because my teachers had no idea that they were teaching lies". The quest for truth comes at the ignoring of another scenario, which because it relates to a faith given up as hopeless, cannot have any answers.
Here is his own explanation of his spiritual journey and the reasons for his conclusions....
Bart Ehrman: How the Problem of Pain Ruined My Faith - Blogalogue
Having received his education at Christendom's schools, no wonder he is misguided! What he learned at those institutions was not Christianity at all....it was "churchianity".....big difference. There are no answers there because they are false teachers.
Here is his conclusion after all his research resulted in agnosticism....suffering was a huge reason for his reasoning....
"We live in a world in which a child dies every five seconds of starvation. Every five seconds. Every minute there are twenty-five people who die because they do not have clean water to drink. Every hour 700 people die of malaria. Where is God in all this? We live in a world in which earthquakes in the Himalayas kill 50,000 people and leave 3 million without shelter in the face of oncoming winter. We live in a world where a hurricane destroys New Orleans. Where a tsunami kills 300,000 people in one fell swoop. Where millions of children are born with horrible birth defects. And where is God? To say that he eventually will make right all that is wrong seems to me, now, to be pure wishful thinking.
As it turns out, my various wrestlings with the problem have led me, even as an agnostic, back to the Bible, to see how different biblical authors wrestle with this, the greatest of all human questions. The result is my recent book, God’s Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question–Why We Suffer. My contention is that many of the authors of the Bible are wrestling with just this question: why do people (especially the people of God) suffer? The biblical answers are striking at times for their simplicity and power (suffering comes as a punishment from God for sin; suffering is a test of faith; suffering is created by cosmic powers aligned against God and his people; suffering is a huge mystery and we have no right to question why it happens; suffering is redemptive and is the means by which God brings salvation; and so on). Some of these answers are at odds with one another (is it God or his cosmic enemies who are creating havoc on earth?), yet many of them continue to inform religious thinkers today.
My hope in writing the book is certainly not to encourage readers to become agnostic, the path that I took. It is instead to help people think, both about this biggest of all possible questions and about the historically and culturally significant religious responses to it that can be found in the most important book in the history of our civilization."
Since he discovered no answers, are we to assume that there aren't any? Does God leave his faithful ones in any doubt?
The religion that is Islam is as fragmented and lost as any other in this world. It seems to me that every Muslim nation on earth is in turmoil. Muslims kill other Muslims just the same as any other religion does. So what makes it a superior religion in your opinion? I see all religions who engage in violence and bloodshed to be alienated from the God of Jesus Christ. Who does that leave out?
Bottom line is....all who worship a nameless "Lord" are following a false god.
Who is "Allah"? He is not YHWH.
Professor Ehrman is just ONE Scholar in a long list going back Hundreds of Years in the field of textual criticism of the Bible.
GOD doesn't judge a individual on the actions of others. You go to the grave with your own deeds, thoughts and actions. It doesn't matter if you belong to the largest Religion on the Planet or belong to a cult of a few Million, you either follow and obey GOD or follow your own desires.
What does Yod He Wav He mean? That's not a name. Nor it it something uttered by Jesus pbuh. Rather he called his God, Allaha.
I really have little regard for any scholar who has been trained in Christendom's institutions. It gives them a pre-conception about what the Bible ought to say to back up their beliefs.
If a study of scripture results in agnosticism or atheism, then they were never taught the truth in the first place.
God's word sown in the right heart has a powerful effect for building and strengthening faith. If it isn't, then the heart of that individual is the wrong 'soil'.
It is my belief that the original "serpent" in the garden of Eden was satan the devil. His agenda has never altered from day one......and that is to lead those with little experience and scant spiritual education away from the true God.....filling them with doubts, false beliefs and false expectations.
The last book in our scriptures describes a "harlot" who is having immoral relations with "the kings of the earth". This is a description of the ungodly alliance between 'church and state'. It is religion dictating to, and supporting the agenda of the politicians of their nations.
The scripture goes on to describe the actions of those kings, who turn on her unexpectedly and completely destroy her. Even they are surprised by their own actions but will see them as unavoidable if they are to carry out their final agenda.
In some secular countries, this influence is not so obvious, but in many others it is staring us in the face....and causing monumental problems. It ends up being religion against religion rather than just nation against nation. Without the support of their people of faith, they would never be able to elicit the kind of support they need to commit the atrocities that they do in the name of their God....(the one who has no name!)
Jesus said we must be "no part of the world" if we want to become his disciples.....so one has to ask why the churches and other religions are so tied up in politics? God views this as an unholy alliance......do we?
How much does religion influence government really? Think of any country and ask that question.
I have to disagree with that. In Israel, the actions of one man affected the whole nation. (Joshua 7:1-26)
The actions of Israel's kings brought punishment on all the people. We will indeed pay for our own sins, but God formed his people into one nation and Jesus said that 'salvation originated with the Jews'.
John 4:22....Jesus said to the Samaritan woman....
"You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, because salvation originates with the Jews."
It was not to finish with them however, since they were covenant breakers all through their history. God's promises were to be fulfilled through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob according to Exodus 2:24, but God told Abraham that people of all nations would also inherit the promise.
Since there is but "one Lord, one faith and one baptism"....where does Islam fit into this picture?
Jesus taught us to be a meek and peaceful people, so anyone who is a supporter of violence is not following the teachings of God's prophet. What religion on earth refuses to participate in violence...not even under the most severe provocation? Islam? Judaism? Christianity? Hinduism? Buddhism? What is wrong with this picture?
If all these religions simply put down their weapons and said that they would follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, then no conflict would be possible except among the godless. Since peace is assured by God for the new world to come, who do you think will be missing?
That is not actually correct. Jesus stood up in the synagogue and read the words of Isaiah 61:1-2 which contained the Tetragrammaton YHWH, the sacred name of God.
"The spirit of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah is upon me, Because Jehovah anointed me to declare good news to the meek. He sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives And the wide opening of the eyes to the prisoners
2 To proclaim the year of Jehovah’s goodwill, And the day of vengeance of our God, To comfort all who mourn,"
So he did use the sacred name, three times in that one passage. (John 17:6; 26)
Can we be in any doubt about the importance of God's name....?
Exodus 3:15... "Then God said once more to Moses:“This is what you are to say to the Israelites, ‘Jehovah (YHWH) the God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and this is how I am to be remembered from generation to generation"
This was God's name "forever"? Who is identified by the holy name of God? Islam? Judaism? Christianity? God's people have always been identified by his name. Those who claim to worship the God of Jesus Christ, the Jewish God and the God of Islam all fail to use the name God gave to his people as an identification of belonging to him. All these worship a nameless "Lord"....a "Baal".
That is the sad and honest truth as I have come to understand it after many years of study. I once worshiped this nameless "Lord" but when I got introduced to the true God, I realized that you can't have a close and personal relationship with someone you call "Sir". Friendships begin with revealing your name....and then they flourish as you get to know that person and communicate with them regularly.
Worship is not about ritual or performance or learning words by rote....its about knowing God and being known by him on a personal level.
The four Gospels different perspectives are precisely why they strike me as true. Ask any four witnesses to explain something and all four will give you a different perspective. Had all four been identical if would be more skeptical. The accounts of the Gospels were largely first person, John reminded people that he walked with, supped with and held Christ. Mathew, John and Mark (thought to be Peter's accounts) lived and witnessed the events of Christs' ministry. They demonstrate a conviction that only someone who knows and is speaking of the truth. Remember, these early Christians were horribly persecuted and the books of the Gospels, Paul's letters and the other books were passed on at great risk among the early Christians. It was not until the ecumenical council, in Nicaea, did many of the Christian martyrs and leaders were able to openly put together the New Testament and establish the cannons of Christian theology. The Gospels and accounts of Christ's ministries are some of the most supported (Christian and non-Christian) in history.
I don't think Jesus pbuh actually said that. It's the sort of thing a occupying force would have its agents write into a narrative to ensure a compliant populace. In fact the NT also says, Jesus pbuh will return to Politically Govern the World and rule it using Shariah, (God's Laws).
Obviously the actions of a leader will affect the whole Nation. That's nothing to do with being judged in the grave and beyond for the actions of others. That would be totally irrational and unjust.
At that time it was true, salvation lay in following the Religion of Abraham pbuh who neither a Jew or Christian. Abraham pbuh submitted his will to GOD and followed instructions on how to live a life pleasing to his Lord.
Abraham pbuh also asked GOD to bless Ishmael pbuh, and GOD said He would personally take care of him, ensuring he would be father to a Great Nation obedient to Him.
Fits in perfectly as GOD promised to raise a Prophet from amongst the brethren of the Israelites, (Deut 18:18) a Prophet who would come from Arabia, (Isaiah 21 & 42) one who would be unlettered and given a book which he would say, I am not learned, (Isaiah 21:12).
They were waiting for such a Prophet in the First Century, and Jesus pbuh made it clear, this particular Prophet would come after him and explain many things.
Again Jesus pbuh meek, roll over for your enemies..... sounds like Roman propaganda. Bring those enemies of mine who do not want me to rule over them and slay them. Ring any bells? What about the mother of all wars when he returns to kill anyone who doesn't want him as their ruler?
When Jesus pbuh became a Prophet, the Jews were under occupation, when he left, they remained under occupation. No wars ceased when he was on Earth, and the bloodshed has continued since unabated. If there was no religion, mankind would find reasons to fight based on Land and Resources.
The Jewish Bible reads;
Adonai Elohim, (Lord GOD)
YHWH:
Of the names of God in the Old Testament, that which occurs most frequently (6,823 times) is the so-called Tetragrammaton, Yhwh (
This name, according to the narrative in Ex. iii. (E), was made known to Moses in a vision at Horeb. In another, parallel narrative (Ex. vi. 2, 3, P) it is stated that the name was not known to the Patriarchs. It is used by one of the documentary sources of Genesis (J), but scarcely if at all by the others. Its use is avoided by some later writers also. It does not occur in Ecclesiastes, and in Daniel is found only in ch. ix. The writer of Chronicles shows a preference for the form Elohim, and in Ps. xlii.-lxxxiii. Elohim occurs much more frequently than Yhwh, probably having been substituted in some places for the latter name, as in Ps. liii. (comp. Ps. xiv.).
NAMES OF GOD - JewishEncyclopedia.com
See above
Yes so important that no Jew or Christian actually knows what it is :/
“Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh [I am/will be what I am/will be],” Looks like a statement of being, rather than a name. The most common name as shown was Elohim made up of Eloh and 'im' denoting respect.
Elohim:
The most common of the originally appellative names of God is Elohim (
The root-meaning of the word is unknown. The most probable theory is that it may be connected with the old Arabic verb "alih" (to be perplexed, afraid; to seek refuge because of fear). Eloah, Elohim, would, therefore, be "He who is the object of fear or reverence," or "He with whom one who is afraid takes refuge" (comp. the name "fear of Isaac" in Gen. xxxi. 42, 53; see also Isa. viii. 13; Ps. lxxvi. 12). The predominance of this name in the later writings, as compared with the more distinctively Hebrew national name Yhwh, may have been due to the broadening idea of God as the transcendent and universal Lord.
NAMES OF GOD - JewishEncyclopedia.com
Jews, Arab Christians and Muslims worship Eloh, Alaha or Allah. Your sect of JW appear to be the odd ones out along with the Trinitarians who mostly openly blaspheme against Allah, something they will bitterly regret as soon as the soul reached their throat.
Sounds like you are just following your own desires. Let me ask you, do Freemasons worship GOD?
This is what Jesus pbuh said on obtaining salvation as found in the earliest Gospel:
Mark 10:17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.
21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
And in Matthew 5..
17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
How do you measure up? or are you another of those who follow the wolf who crept into the early Church?
Jesus told us to be "no part of the world" for a number of reasons, not the least of which is incurring bloodguilt before our God. (Isaiah 1:15)
The main reason however, is because of who is described as this world's ruler.
1 John 5:19..."We know that we originate with God, but the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one."
Since this "whole world" is under the control of God's adversary, any involvement in its political agendas, its goals and its bloodshed are supporting the activities of God's enemy and all who follow him, even unwittingly will come to grief. Followers of Christ are at peace with all men...even if they are threatened or mistreated. That is the proof of discipleship. We are to love even our enemies. (Matthew 5:43-45)
God expects that the ones he appoints to lead his people will do their job at 'shepherding' God's 'sheep'. If sins go unconfessed and undiscovered, he will withdraw his spirit until the matter is cleared up. In the case of Israel all suffered because of the sins of others. This is called community responsibility. If individuals, such as Achan failed to obey God, the whole nation suffered a withdrawal of God's favor and backing until the matter was settled. It was a way to demonstrate that others can share in a sin by not divulging it. Achan's whole family perished because of what he did....they were accomplices because of not exposing his wilful disobedience. Loyalties are often tested and loyalty to God has to come first before misplaced loyalty to family members.
Indeed, he is the only person in all of scripture who is called "Jehovah's friend". Abraham is before us as a wonderful example of faith.
His willingness to offer up his son when God asked him to do it, was an amazing example of his complete trust in his God. All of God's promises were to be fulfilled in Isaac, so God put his son completely in God's hands. He also provided a living example of a father's willingness to sacrifice a beloved son because it was the will of God, picturing his own feelings of offering his own son in sacrifice.
I cannot see in scripture where the last part of that statement is written....that the people of Ishmael would be obedient to God.
"When informed that Sarah would also have a son from whom “kings of peoples” would come, Abraham petitioned God in behalf of his firstborn: “O that Ishmael might live before you!” God’s reply, after declaring that the future son Isaac would be the covenant heir, was: “As regards Ishmael I have heard you. Look! I will bless him and will make him fruitful and will multiply him very, very much. He will certainly produce twelve chieftains, and I will make him become a great nation.” (Genesis 17:16, 18-20)
After dismissing Hagar and her son from Abraham's dwelling place, God allowed him to live after the pair running out of water on their journey. Ishmael went on to become an archer. As a nomadic inhabitant of the Paran Wilderness, he fulfilled the prophecy that said of him: “He will become a zebra of a man. His hand will be against everyone, and the hand of everyone will be against him; and before the face of all his brothers he will tabernacle.” (Genesis 21:17-21; 16:12) Hagar found an Egyptian wife for her son, and he in time fathered 12 sons, chieftains and family heads of the promised “great nation” of Ishmaelites. Ishmael also had at least one daughter, Mahalath, who married Esau.—Genesis 17:20; 21:21; 25:13-16; 28:9"
Ishmael — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
I can find no such words in Isaiah 21 or 42. Can you provide a verse reference please?
Yes, they did expect a prophet, but Jesus made no mention of one who would come after him. Can you give me a reference for this?
Moses was the one who said a prophet like himself was to come....I believe that was Jesus.
Centuries in advance Daniel’s prophecy pinpointed the exact year of the Messiah’s arrival. There is no confirmation that the Jews in the first century C.E. had made calculations on the basis of Daniel’s prophecy for Messiah’s appearance. But the Bible reports: “Now as the people were in expectation and all were reasoning in their hearts about John: ‘May he perhaps be the Christ?’” (Luke 3:15) Although they were expecting the Messiah, they evidently could not pinpoint the exact month, week, or day of his arrival. Therefore, they wondered whether John was the Christ, even though John evidently began his ministry in the spring of 29 C.E., about six months before Jesus presented himself for baptism.
The angel Gabriel further said to Daniel: “After the sixty-two weeks Messiah will be cut off, with nothing for himself.” (Daniel 9:26)
Jesus was cut off after the "sixty two weeks".
It might sound like a lot of things to a lot of people, but Jesus himself was never an advocate for overturning world rulers until it was God's time to do so. Again we look to the prophet Daniel and confirm that the appointed world rulers had not run their course in Jesus' day. There was a succession of world powers and another after Rome was to take the stage in the outworking of Bible prophesy.
According to Daniel chapter 2, the dream of King Nebuchadnezzar involved an immense image with a head of gold, breasts and arms of silver, belly and thighs of copper, legs of iron, and feet of iron mixed with clay. These represented world powers who had influence over God's people. Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar: “You, O king, . . . you yourself are the head of gold.” (Daniel 2:37, 38) Nebuchadnezzar headed a dynasty that ruled over the Babylonian Empire. It was overthrown by Medo-Persia, represented by the image’s breasts and arms of silver. Next came the Grecian Empire, signified by the belly and thighs of copper.
It was Rome that crushed and shattered the Grecian Empire. Showing no respect for God’s Kingdom proclaimed by Jesus Christ, the Romans put him to death on a torture stake in 33 C.E. In an effort to shatter true Christianity, Rome persecuted Jesus’ disciples. However, the iron legs of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream image pictured not only the Roman Empire but also its political outgrowth—the Anglo-American World Power. That takes us down to the present day...and "the feet of clay". There are no world powers after that because God's kingdom is seen crushing all human rulership out of existence and replacing them with a Kingdom that would never be overthrown. (Daniel 2:44) The time for that to take place grows ever shorter.
What happened after Christ's death is exactly what the Bible foretold. The world in these last days was to spiral deeper and deeper into political, moral and spiritual chaos. That is what we see with our own eyes. The ones who stand out in this world are the ones who are honest, trustworthy, moral, at peace and separate from this world in all the important ways. If we are part of this world, the love of God is not in us. (1 John 2:15-17) Only those doing the will of the Father will survive.
This is what I believe.
The Jewish Bible reads;
Adonai Elohim, (Lord GOD)
YHWH:
Of the names of God in the Old Testament, that which occurs most frequently (6,823 times) is the so-called Tetragrammaton, Yhwh (), the distinctive personal name of the God of Israel. This name is commonly represented in modern translations by the form "Jehovah," which, however, is a philological impossibility (see Jehovah). This form has arisen through attempting to pronounce the consonants of the name with the vowels of Adonai (= "Lord"), which the Masorites have inserted in the text, indicating thereby that Adonai was to be read (as a "ḳeri perpetuum") instead of Yhwh. When the name Adonai itself precedes, to avoid repetition of this name, Yhwh is written by the Masorites with the vowels of Elohim, in which case Elohim is read instead of Yhwh. In consequence of this Masoretic reading the authorized and revised English versions (though not the American edition of the revised version) render Yhwh by the word "Lord" in the great majority of cases.
This name, according to the narrative in Ex. iii. (E), was made known to Moses in a vision at Horeb. In another, parallel narrative (Ex. vi. 2, 3, P) it is stated that the name was not known to the Patriarchs. It is used by one of the documentary sources of Genesis (J), but scarcely if at all by the others. Its use is avoided by some later writers also. It does not occur in Ecclesiastes, and in Daniel is found only in ch. ix. The writer of Chronicles shows a preference for the form Elohim, and in Ps. xlii.-lxxxiii. Elohim occurs much more frequently than Yhwh, probably having been substituted in some places for the latter name, as in Ps. liii. (comp. Ps. xiv.).
NAMES OF GOD - JewishEncyclopedia.com
Would we expect to see the divine name still attached to a disobedient and abandoned nation? They can make up all the excuses they like, but I believe it will cut no mustard with the God they failed to obey, whose covenant they broke....and the Messiah they failed to accept. (Matthew 23:37-39)
The Tetragrammaton is used thousands of times in the Hebrew scriptures by Bible writers who had no superstitious ideas about uttering the sacred name. It was used freely and reverently. To substitute God's personal name with a title is disrespectful to say the least. Where will I find authorization from God to make such a substitution? It began with refusing to say it and progressed to its substitution in their written texts. Imagine a noted human writer of published works whose name was removed from his books and substituted with the word "Author"? Who would tolerate such a thing? Can you imagine God, after telling Moses that this was his name "forever" and a memorial to all generations, not being rather offended by such an action?
The sacred name may have lost its precise pronunciation in Hebrew, but the name is still preserved down to our day. How we pronounce it in English is of little consequence if we retain the meaning. (which never was "I AM")
I hear people objecting to God's name being pronounced "Jehovah" in English, but not when they say "Jesus" instead of Yeshua. There are no "J" names in Hebrew, so we would have to go and change every name that begins with "J" in our English Bibles. Most of those incorporated the divine name. The arguments over pronunciation are invalid IMV. Jehovah recognizes his name in any language. It is written in many more languages than just English.
You can judge a religion by the kind of people it produces. Jesus used the illustration of a fruit tree.
Matthew 7:15-20....“Be on the watch for the false prophets who come to you in sheep’s covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves. 16 By their fruits you will recognize them. Never do people gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles, do they? 17 Likewise, every good tree produces fine fruit, but every rotten tree produces worthless fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear worthless fruit, nor can a rotten tree produce fine fruit. 19 Every tree not producing fine fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Really, then, by their fruits you will recognize those men."
So look at what they do, not just what they say. See that they are following all of Jesus' commands, not just the convenient ones.
Good trees don't produce rotten fruit. Good religion doesn't produce bad worshipers.
2 Peter 3:11-14...."Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, consider what sort of people you ought to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion, 12 as you await and keep close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah, through which the heavens will be destroyed in flames and the elements will melt in the intense heat! 13 But there are new heavens and a new earth that we are awaiting according to his promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell.
14 Therefore, beloved ones, since you are awaiting these things, do your utmost to be found finally by him spotless and unblemished and in peace."
Who today can claim to be "spotless and unblemished and in peace"....and being "no part of the world"? Christianity? Judaism? Islam?
You can answer that question for yourself.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
The JW's? Not, as the "my JW poop don't stink" approach is a facade. As with any other denomination, the JW's are not "spotless or unblemished" nor always in "peace".
Was that idea in my comments metis? Or was I simply demonstrating a common failing among all religions who claim to worship the God of Abraham? Are any of them "spotless, unblemished and in peace"? In what ways are they not in this condition as bodies of believers and why? You already know the answer to that. They fail to live up to the teachings of their own deity. Any who are shedding blood are not at peace with God.
Individually we are all sinners, so if we are not contributing to the 'unblemished and peaceful' condition of the entire body by our own conduct, then we will account to our judge for our own shortcomings....just as individuals did in Israel.
Every religious "body" is made up of individual believers who all contribute to its spiritual condition. So what excuse can we offer to God for any failure on our part? We have God's law and he expects us to keep it. How many people are truly obedient to God today? Why does Jesus say that "few" will be saved? (Matthew 7:13-14) isn't the answer obvious?
Phantasman
Well-Known Member
Mark and Luke weren't eye witnesses. The Gospel according to Matthew was used most by the conforming Jews, as it was written for the followers of Hebrew tradition. (lineage being of importance).
The Gospel of John came last (falling in line with with the synoptics) as an Acts of Jesus as well. The difference being that, as Galatians had shown the Gospels being influenced by Jewish priests that wanted the OT to be the structure the Gospel was based, John cited Jesus saying things the synoptics didn't reveal.
John was written by his followers, the Johannines:
John 21:
24 [k]This is that disciple, which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things, and we know that his testimony is true.
It is in John (chapter 8) that Jesus explains to the Jews that they were not following the Father.
41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.
John chapter 6 has Jesus teaching that the knowledge of the Jews did not come from heaven.
.31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
48 I am that bread of life.
49 Your fathers did eat Manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
John goes into more detail of the two Gods as explained in Marcions Antithesis, and the teachings of Paul.
If you study it enough, the Gospel all comes together. The OT was dropped at the words "it is finished". And the Holy Spirit, that taught Paul, taught the books the catholic ideology denied. The early catholics repaired the veil Jesus tore, and reinstated the priests that taught the "false gospel" Paul mentioned in Galatians 1.
You don't have to believe me. But it doesn't take long to check it for yourself. You may be surprised.
Can I stop you here because you are not actually addressing the points I raised. Jesus pbuh makes clear, those who do not want him to be King and rule over them should be put to death. He is said to be coming back in the future where he will seek to establish himself as a One World Ruler, killing ALL who oppose him.
So which is it? Is Religion supposed to establish itself in ruling and guiding people or not?
Put this point to rest, and I'll then continue in my response to the other points raised.
Jehovah's Witnesses are organised hierarchically, and are led by the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses from the Watch Tower Society's headquarters in Warwick, New York.
Organizational structure of Jehovah's Witnesses - Wikipedia
You even have a form of Governance within your Religion and have 'Elders' to deal with criminal matters internally:
More than 1,000 Jehovah’s Witnesses Have Been Accused of Child Sex Abuse in Australia — And Police Never Knew | VICE News
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
But God has shed blood Himself, according to both testaments.
The issue of non-violence the early church struggled very much with, especially since Torah mandates that we protect the lives of the helpless, including going into a defensive war if necessary. If you actually believe that Jesus upheld the Law, then this must be taken into consideration. OTOH, if you believe Jesus taught that it's fine & dandy to disregard the Law, then he has to be classified as a "false-prophet". There is no in-between-- one either does his/her best to adhere to the Law, all 613 of them, or they don't, although gentiles are exempt from that mandate.
Last edited: