I am discovering that it is impossible to make a good argument. I might go swimming or sort some buttons.
-
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!
Some of the most interesting answers have been OFF TOPIC
- Thread starter savagewind
- Start date
OOPS wrong thread.
I love talking to myself! Sometimes I even get lucky.
The discussion about the Bible's accuracy is moving me to write about something I know to be true.
Are the translators of the NWT infallible?
My understanding is that nothing is truely infallible except the True God. There is even scriptural evidence that the son (this is my son, the beloved, listen to him) is not infallible. It is obvious to the whole world that all scripture that is inspired of God and beneficial is fallible, not infallible.
Someone said the bibles are regularly updated.
I am certain that some scriptures are written in a way that can mislead the mind. The Word is for the mind, is it not?
I know for a fact that Bibles exist that contain scriptures that are misleading. I have taken it upon myself to expose them. Who cares? Nobody cares.
If a scripture actually does have power to mislead the mind printing new Bibles even with every mistake corrected would not do much good for most of the people. How could it? They would still have their incorrect version.
Are the translators of the NWT infallible?
My understanding is that nothing is truely infallible except the True God. There is even scriptural evidence that the son (this is my son, the beloved, listen to him) is not infallible. It is obvious to the whole world that all scripture that is inspired of God and beneficial is fallible, not infallible.
Someone said the bibles are regularly updated.
I am certain that some scriptures are written in a way that can mislead the mind. The Word is for the mind, is it not?
I know for a fact that Bibles exist that contain scriptures that are misleading. I have taken it upon myself to expose them. Who cares? Nobody cares.
If a scripture actually does have power to mislead the mind printing new Bibles even with every mistake corrected would not do much good for most of the people. How could it? They would still have their incorrect version.
I realize I am still on topic but it is a blue thread and I do hate those nasty points even though they serve a very good purpose.
OK Sometimes I ask a question on forum while I'm sure of the answer all ready. I suppose it's annoying. I'm sorry.
But I really do not know what 1 Corinthians 13:5 means and nobody is telling me.
When I was a JW this is what I thought it meant; Love will not allow the person to become troll, but I didn't know they are called trolls then. I thought it meant Love does not change from kind to antagonizing for anything.
But I think some people might think it means love does not get angry (unnecessarily). But then we would need to be the judge of necessity which I do not believe we really are.
But I really do not know what 1 Corinthians 13:5 means and nobody is telling me.
When I was a JW this is what I thought it meant; Love will not allow the person to become troll, but I didn't know they are called trolls then. I thought it meant Love does not change from kind to antagonizing for anything.
But I think some people might think it means love does not get angry (unnecessarily). But then we would need to be the judge of necessity which I do not believe we really are.
Isaiah 4:4
The Lord will wash away the filth of the women of Zion; he will cleanse the bloodstains from Jerusalem by a spirit of judgment and a spirit of fire.
People consider the baptism that saves a person their water baptism. I don't think that is right.
The Lord will wash away the filth of the women of Zion; he will cleanse the bloodstains from Jerusalem by a spirit of judgment and a spirit of fire.
People consider the baptism that saves a person their water baptism. I don't think that is right.
The Wizard
Active Member
When something good or great happens that is above human understanding or conception, many times it is considered a work of God or a higher power. Later on, science or objectivity figures out what happened and then various works of God move to something else or happen in another way in which cannot be understood, predicted and therefore cannot be controlled. When people stop believing in that process or aspect usually referred to as works of God then they severe the link to connecting or experiencing more and more things that hold those qualities... well, usually they will experience less...
Such beliefs in God and miracles will naturally connect us to experiencing or "creating" the experience of more of it in our Lives. It is nearly impossible to convince many that beliefs will create things and manifest in one way or the next, because it cannot be studied or quantified, currently. If the world stops believing in a good God, Creator and miracles then I'm sorry to say, it will see far less of it and that light filled process or door will be slammed shut and replaced with darkness..
If you think and believe that you're in a non-miracle cycle then that is exactly what will happen.. that is what will be experienced. I don't believe in such things as "non-miracle" cycles. Anyone can see it's a set up with ignorant or even worse intentions... imo.
Luke 19:26He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away.
Answers to questions I have are coming in like rain. I believe.
Answers to questions I have are coming in like rain. I believe.
Romans 13:1 is a stop safe. It is obvious that God does not appoint all authorities as some Worldly authorities are worse than demonic.
If anyone claims to be appointed by Jesus, and people do, the words at Romans 13:1 prove it isn't true.
Romans says there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.
How can someone who knows Romans 13:1 say Jesus has appointed him? And why would he?
I do not know how but I think I know why. It is because the Greek NT scriptures are clear Jesus is Lord. If anyone claims lordship from God, there would be two appointed lords. That won't work. So the one claiming authority has to say it is from Jesus.
I do not know any scripture that has Jesus telling us he will send another authority. The only one that might be used (and is) for that is Matthew 24:47.
Regarding Matthew 24:46 I have uncovered another human error. The translations have him saying "When the Lord comes" but it should be saying when the lord goes as it seems the verb can mean either. (please correct me if I'm wrong) That makes more sense. When the Lord of the household GOES and hears that the one put in charge is doing well, he is happy.
Also being put "over all the master's possessions" does not mean the master appoints him special power because of his previous success. It means the Master will allow the servant to continue in his effort, even after the Master has come home. [so he can fish or play golf or something haha)
I'm not kidding. About the golfing I'm kidding.
If anyone claims to be appointed by Jesus, and people do, the words at Romans 13:1 prove it isn't true.
Romans says there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.
How can someone who knows Romans 13:1 say Jesus has appointed him? And why would he?
I do not know how but I think I know why. It is because the Greek NT scriptures are clear Jesus is Lord. If anyone claims lordship from God, there would be two appointed lords. That won't work. So the one claiming authority has to say it is from Jesus.
I do not know any scripture that has Jesus telling us he will send another authority. The only one that might be used (and is) for that is Matthew 24:47.
Regarding Matthew 24:46 I have uncovered another human error. The translations have him saying "When the Lord comes" but it should be saying when the lord goes as it seems the verb can mean either. (please correct me if I'm wrong) That makes more sense. When the Lord of the household GOES and hears that the one put in charge is doing well, he is happy.
Also being put "over all the master's possessions" does not mean the master appoints him special power because of his previous success. It means the Master will allow the servant to continue in his effort, even after the Master has come home. [so he can fish or play golf or something haha)
I'm not kidding. About the golfing I'm kidding.
Last edited:
Genesis 39:1-6 Now Joseph had been taken down to Egypt. And Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh, captain of the guard, an Egyptian, bought him from the Ishmaelites who had taken him down there. 2 The יְהוָ֖ה was with Joseph, and he was a successful man; and he was in the house of his master the Egyptian. 3 And his master saw that the יְהוָ֖ה was with him and that the Lord made all he did to prosper in his hand. 4 So Joseph found favor in his sight, and served him. Then he made him overseer of his house, and all that he had he put under his authority. 5 So it was, from the time that he had made him overseer of his house and all that he had, that the יְהוָ֖ה blessed the Egyptian’s house for Joseph’s sake; and the blessing of the יְהוָ֖ה was on all that he had in the house and in the field. 6 Thus he left all that he had in Joseph’s hand, and he did not know what he had except for the bread which he ate.
Can you see there is no difference really between the first assignment and the second one except the second one is attached to loyalty? The difference between the two is trust and loyalty. The assignment is the same.
People have made a distinction between the first assignment and the second assignment of Matthew 24:45,46,47 but the difference does not exist.
Many people are patiently waiting for the second assignment to begin. There is no second assignment. To most people it does not matter. I do not know if it matters or if it doesn't matter.
Can you see there is no difference really between the first assignment and the second one except the second one is attached to loyalty? The difference between the two is trust and loyalty. The assignment is the same.
People have made a distinction between the first assignment and the second assignment of Matthew 24:45,46,47 but the difference does not exist.
Many people are patiently waiting for the second assignment to begin. There is no second assignment. To most people it does not matter. I do not know if it matters or if it doesn't matter.
Just because it is obvious to me does mean it is obvious to all , so I shall share it here.
Why are Jehovah's Witnesses afraid to admit the first Century Christians might not have included God's proper Name in the text they wrote? We do not know if they did or if they did not. They can't admit the original manuscripts might not have included יְהוָה֙ because that would mean the writers made a mistake. They teach very plainly that God does NOT allow mistakes in God's Word. If it is admitted openly that indeed they did make that grave mistake of omitting יְהוָה֙ then the simple question is born...what else is wrong about The Word?
I am with them agreeing YHVH will not allow the truth to be lost. Is it in the written word? I don't think so. Where is it? It is with the Helper. John 6:63. John 14:6, 16. John 15:20, 26. John 16:7,8. Luke 24:49.
Why are Jehovah's Witnesses afraid to admit the first Century Christians might not have included God's proper Name in the text they wrote? We do not know if they did or if they did not. They can't admit the original manuscripts might not have included יְהוָה֙ because that would mean the writers made a mistake. They teach very plainly that God does NOT allow mistakes in God's Word. If it is admitted openly that indeed they did make that grave mistake of omitting יְהוָה֙ then the simple question is born...what else is wrong about The Word?
I am with them agreeing YHVH will not allow the truth to be lost. Is it in the written word? I don't think so. Where is it? It is with the Helper. John 6:63. John 14:6, 16. John 15:20, 26. John 16:7,8. Luke 24:49.
Wherenextcolumbus
Well-Known Member
Maybe early Christians didn't actually say God's name as much as JWs think they did or as much as JWs do? Maybe they thought the same thing about his name as the Jews do?
I suspect early Christians had more respect for God's Name than Jehovah's Witnesses do because most early Christians were Jews. I am sure they understood what "taking God's Name in vain" meant. I think most people including Jehovah's Witnesses do not know what it means.
I do not know if it is true God's Name went out of use because of superstition or if it was because the religious leaders were just being over the top too careful.
I have heard it said the Catholic Church discouraged the reading of the Bible because of their fear it would be misunderstood by most people. Maybe God's Name was put away because those who put it away were worried people would use it like the commandment says NOT to use it.
And they do, don't they?
This is off the topic of Are the translators of the NWT infallible?
It is believed by some that God breathed means God is the author of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures. What I think God breathed per 2 Timothy 3:16 means is God's Spirit inspired the writers to write it. God is not the writer. The people who wrote it are. When they wrote it they were under the power of The Holy Spirit. They were not actually The Holy Spirit. This is not debating whether there are errors or not. I don't care.
This is debating whether the argument for "The God is the Author so God's Name should be put where it belongs" is properly under the same Spirit as the writers were.
It is argued many times that the translators are not infallible vs they believe they are.
A believer in the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses will never argue that the governing body are infallible because it is in stark contrast to other scriptures they beleive are authored by God Almighty. (I can look those up if you ask).
It is believed they are infallible. How? How can they believe they are infallible and not infallable at the same time? I think how they do it is they believe it is Jehovah's business to be sure we believe The Word as it should be believed. So it is not the people who are infallible. It is The Spirit Of God which is. I believe that.
Now the point is there are no Greek transcripts that have God's Name written. The translation committee of Jehovah's Witnesses thought it best to replace the writer "Lord" with "Jehovah". The reason they give is it sgnified the author better and didn't Jesus himself say he came to "make God's Name known"? So they believe it is their job to make The Name known so they add The Name back where it belongs.
Did the original authors write the Tetragrammaton or did they write "LORD"? I believe so far there is no way of knowing. So it seems certain they have changed the words that were (they say) written under the influence of The Holy Spirit. I also believe the words are written under the influence of The Holy Spirit.
They have taken liberties with God's NAME. Did Jesus take liberties with it*?
*God's Name
It is believed by some that God breathed means God is the author of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures. What I think God breathed per 2 Timothy 3:16 means is God's Spirit inspired the writers to write it. God is not the writer. The people who wrote it are. When they wrote it they were under the power of The Holy Spirit. They were not actually The Holy Spirit. This is not debating whether there are errors or not. I don't care.
This is debating whether the argument for "The God is the Author so God's Name should be put where it belongs" is properly under the same Spirit as the writers were.
It is argued many times that the translators are not infallible vs they believe they are.
A believer in the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses will never argue that the governing body are infallible because it is in stark contrast to other scriptures they beleive are authored by God Almighty. (I can look those up if you ask).
It is believed they are infallible. How? How can they believe they are infallible and not infallable at the same time? I think how they do it is they believe it is Jehovah's business to be sure we believe The Word as it should be believed. So it is not the people who are infallible. It is The Spirit Of God which is. I believe that.
Now the point is there are no Greek transcripts that have God's Name written. The translation committee of Jehovah's Witnesses thought it best to replace the writer "Lord" with "Jehovah". The reason they give is it sgnified the author better and didn't Jesus himself say he came to "make God's Name known"? So they believe it is their job to make The Name known so they add The Name back where it belongs.
Did the original authors write the Tetragrammaton or did they write "LORD"? I believe so far there is no way of knowing. So it seems certain they have changed the words that were (they say) written under the influence of The Holy Spirit. I also believe the words are written under the influence of The Holy Spirit.
They have taken liberties with God's NAME. Did Jesus take liberties with it*?
*God's Name
The point is if it cannot be proved the writers of The Christian Greek Scriptures wrote God's Name where there is now "Lord" written the NWT has changed the original to be accurate. AT THE SAME time they make it obvious the writers did not write is accurately if indeed they wrote "Lord" which all evidence points to, and by their applying their OWN rule to the translation, they teach what is written is indeed God's Word.
They want us to believe where The Name was changed to Lord is wrong, but everything else the penmen wrote is right.
That is what I believe the point of the thread was about.
If it is so important to trust they have done the right thing, then WHY has Jehovah left no evidence to draw the right conclusion.
I am not saying I know what the right conclusion is. I am saying NOBODY knows. By their claiming they DO KNOW puts them under suspicion ino.
How can God lead the world to a new age of righteousness by men who are so obviously suspicious?
How so? Well, the writers of the Word of God are being put under suspicion by the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses by their saying the word that came to us is not right where The Name is concerned.
But The Name is the MOST important and they teach it is true. Guessing should never be attached to what is most important.
They want us to believe where The Name was changed to Lord is wrong, but everything else the penmen wrote is right.
That is what I believe the point of the thread was about.
If it is so important to trust they have done the right thing, then WHY has Jehovah left no evidence to draw the right conclusion.
I am not saying I know what the right conclusion is. I am saying NOBODY knows. By their claiming they DO KNOW puts them under suspicion ino.
How can God lead the world to a new age of righteousness by men who are so obviously suspicious?
How so? Well, the writers of the Word of God are being put under suspicion by the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses by their saying the word that came to us is not right where The Name is concerned.
But The Name is the MOST important and they teach it is true. Guessing should never be attached to what is most important.
It seems to me that some people teach that to worship God a person must know God's NAME. I think I don't agree with that. I am sure I recognized THE I AM and I wished to worship THE I AM before I heard what the Name of I AM is.
No food for me today but fried onions.
Sometimes I wonder if the words I type get morphed by an evil computer troll and what I see is different than what every one else sees.
Uh Oh