A Question for Jehovah's Witnesses

Wrangler · May 7, 2024

Wrangler said:
Do you see no significance in the inconsistent use of "ho" before the word "theos?

RedFan said:
Here is what I see: In John 3:2

You do like to change the subject and not answer questions. I've asked several times referring to John 1:1, if you see no significance in the inconsistent use of "ho" before the word "theos?

You can't seem to give a straight answer.

I don't think John 3:2 is comparable. This is because
1. John 1:1 equates the word (of God) to God, IS.
2. John 3:2 relates Jesus and God - FROM and WITH.

Word <>Jesus. FROM and WITH <> IS. Hence, the importance of the inconsistent use of "ho" before the word "theos" in John 1:1. Clearly, a figurative or poetic way to begin the prologue. John 3:2 is not poetic or figurative. Comparing very different verses for reasons unclear about a thread asking about our denominational friends.

RedFan · May 7, 2024

Wrangler said:
You do like to change the subject and not answer questions. I've asked several times referring to John 1:1, if you see no significance in the inconsistent use of "ho" before the word "theos?

You can't seem to give a straight answer.

I've given you an answer you just don't like:

RedFan said:
The significance I see in this is that neither the article nor its absence is dispositive of the question.

So maybe you'll like this one better:

"“A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb. … The opening verse of John’s Gospel contains one of the many passages where this rule suggests the translation of a predicate as a definite noun. The absence of the article [before θεος] does not make the predicate indefinite or qualitative when it precedes the verb; it is indefinite in this position only when the context demands it. The context makes no such demand in the Gospel of John." Colwell, "A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament," Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 52, No. 1 (Apr., 1933), p. 21.

Rella ~ I am a woman · May 7, 2024

Keiw said:
Thomas wasn't calling Jesus his God, He called Jesus his Lord and most assuredly looked to heaven and said my God. The darkness cannot see it because they refuse to believe Jesus who clearly teaches-John 17:3-the one who sent him= FATHER is THE ONLY TRUE GOD.

Is there any translation of the Holy Bible that you regard as fact?

Greek interlinear? Pishetta? (Both were the languages well known of that day and both languages Jesus spoke.

Perhaps Codex Vaticanus of which it is said Although the New Testament as we know it is essentially a “collage” of various surviving manuscripts, it relies heavily on one particular, parchment manuscript—the fourth-century Codex Vaticanus, or the Vatican Codex. In the mid-20th century, explains Nongbri, “most New Testament textual critics believed that the text of the New Testament preserved in the Codex Vaticanus was the result of an editorial revision that took place in the fourth century. Then in 1961, a papyrus codex containing the Gospels of Luke and John in Greek (P.Bodmer XIV–XV or P75 to specialists) was published. It is often called the most important New Testament papyrus so far discovered because it was dated, on the basis of its handwriting, to about A.D. 175–225, and its text agrees very closely with that of Codex Vaticanus.”

Or does it freighten you to know that other manuscripte other then the one you read from tour church might say something different.

Listen I have been a member of the same mainstream Protestant denomination for 70 years (on the 22nd of this month)

It took me a long time... much reading and studying to come to the knowledge that my church is not 100% right. And my personal exegesis and eisegesis have changed.

What are those you ask??? Exegesis is a method of biblical interpretation that lets the text reveal its meaning, while eisegesis is a method that imposes a preconceived meaning on the text.

But this is not about me.... it is about the reason we all should be here and that is to learn and "think for ourselves"

And to know that the translations that are closest to the first century AD stand a better chance at offering the best evidence for any knowledge we might seek.

For me it is Greek Interlinear and the Peshitta (Aramaic) two of the common languages of Jesus.

Just for your knowledge and personal edification lets just look at John 20:28

Greek interlinear.... (translated exactly as it had been written in Greek)

Answered Thomas and said to Him The Lord of me and the God of me

Peshitta

And Thomas answered, and said to him: My Lord, and my God!

I could post at least 20 more current translations but wont.

Just give consideration and know, without shadow of a doubt that the most learned of men do not always get it right....

Rella ~ I am a woman · May 7, 2024

TheHC said:
I’m sure you don’t think the Bible contradict itself.

Saying “the Word was God”, openly contradicts Jesus’ prayer, where He calls His Father, “the only true God.”

But Catholic priest (ie., a trinitarian) and acclaimed scholar John L. McKenzie translates the latter part of John 1:1 (into English) as, “…and the Word was a Divine Being”, and that doesn’t contradict.

— “Dictionary of the Bible“, p.617

If you go to the RCC for guidance then you have a screw loose.. they are notorious for changing the word of God to fit their meanings.

MEDERATORS...I am SELF REPORTING AND PUTTING MYSELF ON NOTICE ...

I am going to touch on the forbidden subject

Even though I am not going to get into things indepth if anyone cannot understand that Jesus can be both son and God at the same time they do not know, or have not read their Holy Bibles because IT IS FACT.. unless someone dummies down the wording.... such as this John L. McKenzie .

What are you ALL afraid of? Why does it scare you so much you need a work around?

Those are the things that should be searched out for understanding. It is not difficult... except that God is keeping your blinders on for a reason. Perhaps some day we all will know why

TheHC said:
in those instances, read the context. Please.

Did the 1st-century Christians (Peter, Paul, Martha, etc.) worship Jesus? No. As Jews, they worshipped Yahweh…. And in fact, they referred to Jesus as God’s “Holy Servant.” (Acts 4:24:30)

Do you worship Jesus now? If not, why not?

TheHC said:
So when referencing Yahweh, when they said “God”, or wrote “God”, there was no need to specify “the God”; others knew who they meant.

Back then, people had to be taught about Jesus, that he was mankind’s Savior; everyone knew the God of the Bible was Yahweh.

Who was Jesus other then the Word? You claim to read the holy bible but what do you understand other then a handful of disjointed scriptures.

Jesus was a mortal man... NO ONE should have worshipped this mortal. Most did not understand what He was even doing on earth.... He had a flock to follow him around and when He told that flock to go teach in the various cites the dutifully obeyed....

But even some of them had no clue. Judas did not. Not until it was too late.. Thomas demanded a proof that he got from a dead man.... and at that you cant even bring yourself to actually know who Christ Jesus was .

TheHC said:
Today, it’s the opposite: everyone knows about Jesus, but no one knows sbout Yahweh!

This suggests that 1 John 5:19 & Revelation 12:9 speak truth.

We know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in the evil one. AND

And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

has exactly nothing to do with the subject at had....

But nice try at deflection

Runningman · May 7, 2024

Rella ~ I am a woman said:
Just give consideration and know, without shadow of a doubt that the most learned of men do not always get it right....

I believe we should also carefully consider who we are following in the Bible. Are we following Thomas' lone opinion? Are we following what the opinion of the Pharisees was who said Jesus was a sinner who broke the Sabbath? A lot of things are said in the Bible, but many things are not all prescription, but rather description of something.

I think if we just follow what Jesus said, who never said he is anyone's god or God, then how can one go wrong with that?

Wrangler · May 7, 2024

RedFan said:
I've given you an answer you just don't like

Nope. I asked a simple yes or no question. Your answer implies no. Implying no is not the same thing as explicitly saying no, is it?

RedFan · May 7, 2024

Wrangler said:
Implying no is not the same thing as explicitly saying no, is it?

No.

Wrangler · May 7, 2024

RedFan said:
it is indefinite in this position only when the context demands it.

The context of John 1:1 totally demands the indefinite form. How can something be WITH something and BE that same thing? It cannot - unless figurative language is used.

"With" X and "is" X are not the same thing. Prepositions are not verbs. "With" is a preposition. "IS" is a verb. Example.

Suppose a water molcule is bombarded with a radioactive isotope. We can refer to this as THE water molecule. However, a water molecule next to this is not THE water molecule, is it - even though it is a water molecule? There simply is no other logical scenario. Therefore, The context of John 1:1 totally demands the indefinite form for the theos that is missing the ho.

Wrangler · May 7, 2024

RedFan said:
No.

That explains this graph, huh?

RedFan · May 7, 2024

Wrangler said:
I don't think John 3:2 is comparable. This is because
1. John 1:1 equates the word (of God) to God, IS.
2. John 3:2 relates Jesus and God - FROM and WITH.

Word <>Jesus. FROM and WITH <> IS. Hence, the importance of the inconsistent use of "ho" before the word "theos" in John 1:1.

I respect your opinion, although I don't share it. John 3:2 has Nicodemas using God twice, once with the article and once without. Just like John 1:1. The "from" and "with" references don't detract from this fundamental affinity.

RedFan · May 7, 2024

Wrangler said:
That explains this graph, huh?

View attachment 44861

You've lost me. Is there a relevant point to this graph?

Wrangler · May 7, 2024

RedFan said:
You've lost me. Is there a relevant point to this graph?

Lookey there, a yes or no question from the guy who does not give such simple answers to simple questions.

Well, I know that is a yes or no answer but you have inspired me to never answer questions in a simple manner. If you look at the top and bottom 3 on the list of most and least respected jobs, you could draw a correlation that straight talk is respected and those that tend to engage in double talk are least respected, e.g., lawyers, CEO's and worst of all lobbyists.

You seem to be lobbying for a certain idea that cannot quite be understood with words, a certain je ne sais quoi.

Keiw · May 7, 2024

RedFan said:
Since you would have had to be in the room to most assuredly know this, why didn't you take a video of Thomas looking up to heaven as he mouthed "my God," so we could all see?

And the opposite is true as well. But one can believe the one they claim to follow-John 17:3--Jesus teaches-The one who sent him=Father is THE ONLY TRUE GOD.

Keiw · May 7, 2024

Jack said:
What makes you think you're right and all Bible believing Christians are wrong? Kingdom Hall told you maybe?

The teachings of Jesus in every translation on earth, back the JW,s and not the trinity religions. The facts of the true God Israel served from Moses on up until today, back the JW,s and not the trinity religions.

Keiw · May 7, 2024

Rella ~ I am a woman said:
Is there any translation of the Holy Bible that you regard as fact?

Greek interlinear? Pishetta? (Both were the languages well known of that day and both languages Jesus spoke.

Perhaps Codex Vaticanus of which it is said Although the New Testament as we know it is essentially a “collage” of various surviving manuscripts, it relies heavily on one particular, parchment manuscript—the fourth-century Codex Vaticanus, or the Vatican Codex. In the mid-20th century, explains Nongbri, “most New Testament textual critics believed that the text of the New Testament preserved in the Codex Vaticanus was the result of an editorial revision that took place in the fourth century. Then in 1961, a papyrus codex containing the Gospels of Luke and John in Greek (P.Bodmer XIV–XV or P75 to specialists) was published. It is often called the most important New Testament papyrus so far discovered because it was dated, on the basis of its handwriting, to about A.D. 175–225, and its text agrees very closely with that of Codex Vaticanus.”

Or does it freighten you to know that other manuscripte other then the one you read from tour church might say something different.

Listen I have been a member of the same mainstream Protestant denomination for 70 years (on the 22nd of this month)

It took me a long time... much reading and studying to come to the knowledge that my church is not 100% right. And my personal exegesis and eisegesis have changed.

What are those you ask??? Exegesis is a method of biblical interpretation that lets the text reveal its meaning, while eisegesis is a method that imposes a preconceived meaning on the text.

But this is not about me.... it is about the reason we all should be here and that is to learn and "think for ourselves"

And to know that the translations that are closest to the first century AD stand a better chance at offering the best evidence for any knowledge we might seek.

For me it is Greek Interlinear and the Peshitta (Aramaic) two of the common languages of Jesus.

Just for your knowledge and personal edification lets just look at John 20:28

Greek interlinear.... (translated exactly as it had been written in Greek)

Answered Thomas and said to Him The Lord of me and the God of me

Peshitta

And Thomas answered, and said to him: My Lord, and my God!

I could post at least 20 more current translations but wont.

Just give consideration and know, without shadow of a doubt that the most learned of men do not always get it right....

And those who follow Jesus, believe HIM--John 17:3--He teaches-the one who sent him=Father, is THE ONLY TRUE GOD.--in every translation on earth.

Jack · May 7, 2024

Keiw said:
The teachings of Jesus in every translation on earth, back the JW,s and not the trinity religions.

No they don't! lol Every English Bible translation that you called Satanic and errors teach that Jesus is God and Hell fire is everlasting, even the JW bible!

Keiw said:
The facts of the true God Israel served from Moses on up until today, back the JW,s and not the trinity religions.

Says the WatchTower! Not the Bible.

RedFan · May 7, 2024

Wrangler said:
If you look at the top and bottom 3 on the list of most and least respected jobs, you could draw a correlation that straight talk is respected and those that tend to engage in double talk are least respected, e.g., lawyers, CEO's and worst of all lobbyists.

The Gallup poll you shared contains no indication that the members of any particular profession "tend to engage in double talk." (I know lawyers don't!) Is there another poll that fills in this missing detail? I'd hate to think you made it up.

Wrangler · May 7, 2024

RedFan said:
The Gallup poll you shared contains no indication that the members of any particular profession "tend to engage in double talk." (I know lawyers don't!) Is there another poll that fills in this missing detail? I'd hate to think you made it up.

I have the capacity for independent thought. Perhaps you think there is no correlation to character on such lists?

Heads up. No group does more double talk than lawyers on the list to the general public. (CEO’s and lobbyists speak to much more select audiences).

As long as you can sleep at night, that’s what’s important.

Not to change the subject but what are you a red fan of? I used to watch the Red Sox and lived in Cincinnati for a time.

Keiw · May 7, 2024

Jack said:
No they don't! lol Every English Bible translation that you called Satanic and errors teach that Jesus is God and Hell fire is everlasting, even the JW bible!

Says the WatchTower! Not the Bible.

Its recorded history Jack. Israel from Moses on up until this very day, teach, serve and worship a single being God-YHVH(Jehovah) So yes the Jw,s teach fact on the matter. We are Jehovah witnesses Jack, not watchtower. Stop disrespecting us or we are through.

RedFan · May 7, 2024

Wrangler said:
Not to change the subject but what are you a red fan of? I used to watch the Red Sox and lived in Cincinnati for a time.

"RedFan" is actually a nod to the Cornell Big Red, my alma mater (both undergrad and law school)

A Question for Jehovah's Witnesses

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Attachments

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads