@MadCornishBiker Said 
the NWT footnote on Exodus 3:14 says:-
The footnote on John 8:58 point to an appendix in the reference edition which reads:-
On the JWs own changes over time to the meaning of the texts above, and what at first was their bungled attempt to claim that Jesus words should be rendered "I have been" based on it being the "perfect indefinite tense" (which does not exist in Greek), see:
https://neirr.org/egoeimi.htm This page is useful, as it has actual images from the JWs own NWT showing precisely their errors, and their changes to the meaning of the text cited.
On the meaning of ego eimi, see; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego_eimi
Note the discussion therein, of Christ's many "ego eimi" statements, all of which are rendered in English as "I am" - "I am the vine", "I am the light", and so on...
@MadCornishBiker Said It seems you don't fully understand it. The JW belief, and mine, is that Jesus did have a resurrection into a human body, though judging from that fact that his intimate associates didn't recognise him after that resurrection until either they were told, or they realised that his mannerisms and speech was the same it seems apparent that it was not his original body. That also fits in with the biblical promise of a general resurrection onto the earth of the masses. They will all have to be given new bodies since theirs will have disintegrated long ago.
Ok... so... what was the point of Jesus asking Thomas to touch his wounds? The wounds that were in that body bore no relationship to the wounds Jesus received, and these wounds were, therefore, not evidence of his being killed, let alone resurrected. It was, therefore, a confidence trick. The wounds were fake. Call it what you will, but according to the JWs, Jesus lied by deliberately and intentionally deceiving Thomas, and indeed, he (and God) deliberately deceives everyone else that simply reads the text as saying what it says... Do you really believe that the JWs are correct, and that Jesus lied? Why?
Also, why was the tomb empty? What happened to the body? Did God remove it to enhance the deception he played on his followers, by deceiving us all into believing the body of Christ - the very body that Christ affirmed would be raised in three days, had been raised when in fact it had not? Why would God engage in such deliberate falsehood? And, if he did, as the JWs attest, how can we trust someone we know lies to us?
@MadCornishBiker Said The fact that none of the others had seen Jesus "stigmata" also tends to indicate that he had the power to make them appear to satisfy Thomas. No wonder the man was so surprised.
What? Could you explain that please? It does not seem to fit with the biblical account.
Luke 24:36-40:
While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them "Peace be with you." They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds? It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet.
That they thought they saw a ghost strongly implies that they recognised him as who we was.
John 20:19-20.
...Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." After this, he showed them his hands and side...
And, seeing him as who he was, the text also strongly implies that they saw his wounds, otherwise, what was the point of showing them his hands etc.? Was it to show that he *didn't* have the wounds of crucifixion on his body?
Now, it is true that Jesus appeared to some other disciples without them recognising him, but, so what? Does this mean that he appeared to them in a different body? Not at all.
Luke 23:15-16.
As they talked and discussed these things with each other, Jesus himself came up and walked alongside them; but they were kept from recognising him. Luke 23:30-31.
When he was at the table with them, he took bread, gave thanks, broke it and began to give it to them. Then their eyes were opened and they recognised him...
Now, reading the report of Luke, does it suggest that he returned as someone other than himself? No. Again, as in other instances, it seems that the JWs get caught up in entirely the wrong aspect of the Scripture - focusing on incidental parts of the story, as though they are the great truths (like for example, their poor understanding of what Paul is discussing in 1st Corinthians 13, where the whole point is about the pre-eminence of love, but somehow, they come away with a view that prophecy no longer happens, and God no longer heals people)...
Anyway... on Luke 23, what is the focus of the passage? Is it the physical appearance of Jesus? No. It is the confusion of the disciples, and Jesus intent to explain to them what had occurred, and, more importantly, why, and how it was foretold in Scripture. Jesus walked with the disciples explaining what had happened, and opening up the scriptures to them. The fact that, after he had explained everything, then, broke bread with them, they had their eyes opened so they recognised him, suggests that it had been Jesus all along, but, as verse 16 says, they had been kept from recognising him. There is not even a suggestion that the body he was in was a body other than his own - at least, not if one looks at the entire context (and further, adds those other factors, like showing his hands, feet and side to the disciples, including Thomas). To suggest that he did this in a body not his own, is, well, a bit absurd, and is simply an invalid rendering of the text... not to mention making a liar of both God and Christ.
@MadCornishBiker Said There are many instances where Jehovah is said to have appeared, or spoken to someone, or even have done something. There is nothing deceitful in that, it simply means that whichever spirit creature it was had Jehovah's full authority and that they were Jehovah's words not his own.
But again, this is false, and simply cannot be justified by referencing the text.
Genesis 18:17
And Jehovah said: “Am I keeping covered from Abraham what I am doing? 18 Why, Abraham is surely going to become a nation great and mighty, and all the nations of the earth must bless themselves by means of him. 19 For I have become acquainted with him in order that he may command his sons and his household after him so that they shall keep Jehovah’s way to do righteousness and judgment; in order that Jehovah may certainly bring upon Abraham what he has spoken about him.”
20 Consequently Jehovah said: “The cry of complaint about Sod´om and Go·mor´rah, yes, it is loud, and their sin, yes, it is very heavy. 21 I am quite determined to go down that I may see whether they act altogether according to the outcry over it that has come to me, and, if not, I can get to know it.”
Note here, that Jehovah refers to himself as "I". Now, if the JW understanding of this is correct, the bible lied. Only the being themselves can think thoughts, or make statements pertaining to themselves using a first person singular pronoun (that is, "I" ). So, either the bible lied, or, it was Jehovah that Abraham spoke to.
Leave aside the doctrinal issues, and the JWs interpretations of the text that fit with their own bias, and just read the text.
Where in the text in question does it say or imply that Jehovah was not Jehovah? Point to it specifically. It very strongly says, rather than merely implies, that the Jehovah to whom Abraham spoke, was not an angel, as Jehovah is distinguished from the two angels in the text. It is really quite simple, if the JWs are right, the bible has lied. So, which is it? Does the bible lie, or, are the JWs wrong?
@MadCornishBiker Said As for Jesus and Michael. The easiest way to do that is to copy and paste from the Insight book on Michael:-
Well, I see in there a lot of supposition, and not a great deal of substance.
@MadCornishBiker Said One assumes that the God that Adam and Eve hid from was Jehovah himself as He had not gone into his day of rest at that point (see explanation above).
So, Jesus was wrong then? Either that or he lied. I assume Adam was someone. But, if *no one* has seen the father, as Jesus says, then either Adam is not real (ie., he is no one), or, he did not see the father. So, did Jesus lie, or, are the JWs wrong?
@MadCornishBiker Said In John 1:1 according to some translations Jesus is also called a god.
True. These renderings are most likely false though, as the "a" most likely should not be there. But, on this point, I fear that you and I will merely continue to waltz in aimless and pointless circles. I don't think either one of us is qualified enough to do anything else
@MadCornishBiker Said You call those translations inaccurate? I say it is the other translations that are inaccurate, because like the doctored section of the ED they are translated to prove a point, and an apostate one at that. As I say, all the evidence either of us can provide is biased one way or the other, so one has to pick ones way very carefully through it.
Indeed, it is true that bias is inherent in the rendering of text - a thing that scholars seek to eliminate as much as possible. And, bias is often seen in the interpretation of text. The example from Genesis above is a clear example. I read it as merely saying what it says. You and the JWs read it in line with a doctrinal issue. Which of us is right? Personally, I will believe the bible says what it says. When it says Jehovah appeared in human form and spoke with Abraham, I believe that the bible says that Jehovah appeared in human form and spoke with Abraham. Being loathe to call either the bible or Jesus liars, I am also prepared to accept that He spoke the truth when he said that no man has seen the father - meaning that Adam did not see the father, and Abraham did not see the father, but they both saw and talked to the only 'real' existent God.
I may be wrong for believing the bible says what it says, but, if so, I am comfortable with being wrong in this instance.
@MadCornishBiker Said Did they? well in that case they were right, as I have explained elsewhere in answer to you. However it does not mean being the same person, and never could by any twist of the language. I doubt very much if the Jews believed that either, especially since they were awaiting the son of God. The common people certainly didn't. There is no way on earth you could be equal to your father, certainly not in Jewish eyes then or now. In Jewish and Christian households the husband and father are the head of the household.
Yes, but the children are human. My father 'begot' me, and I am a human. He is also a human. I am not a lesser being. A father begets one that is like himself, that is, they are of the same kind.
Again, Paul spoke of how Jesus, in coming to earth in the form of a man, lowered himself - that is, became less than he was, and placed himself in subjection to the father. Does being in subjection mean, being of a different kind, or different essence, than the one to which we are in subjection? Not at all.
@MadCornishBiker Said They still do call the trinity a mystery as do the CoE. I know because3 when trying to discuss it with Priests and vicars that si what they always tell me "it is a mystery we aren't meant to understand it".
Of course. And here we see one major point of issue. In the JW schema, God is rationalised. You have said before that God is explicable to humans, and, that God is not a mystery... Indeed, you said;
@MadCornishBiker Said
If it isn't possible to understand it, it isn't true. There is no mystery about God.
There is no reason to assume this is true, and indeed, it is absurd to think that a God would be entirely explicable to humans. That which is natural is not entirely explicable to us, so, how could a supernatural being be entirely explicable?
Nothing of God is a mystery..? Really..? *How* does he exist? Where is he, precisely? How did he create all that he created? Why did he create a bunch of nuffies like us (humans, I mean)? How does he know future events before they happen?
Are you really able to understand, comprehend and explain all of these things? Is there nothing that God does, or has done, or *is* for that matter, that is beyond you to comprehend? Even Paul, in 1st Corinthians (13:12-13) avowed that he only knows and sees in part. Do you or the JWs claim to know better than Paul and have perfect understanding of a supernatural being? Have you 'read the mind of God'? I think that that would come as a surprise to God, as I am pretty sure he says that no one has done that...
@MadCornishBiker Said That was part of his mission, yes, but his mission had many different aspects, the covenant for a kingdom didn't come into it until what is often called "the last supper".
The covenant came into it before Christ was even born. See the prophecy of Isaiah 53, if nothing else.
"...He was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the Lord has laid on him the iniquity of us all."
One could reasonably speculate from this that dying for us was a plan that existed long before Christ was even born.
*************
I was going to leave this here, as this post is big enough, however, I think this requires a mention.
I admit that my cynical and pessimistic attributes make me suspicious of all things human (in part, because I know myself well enough to know that, despite my endeavours to be scrupulously honest, I regularly fail. I also recognise that I am not objective, and, indeed, that no human being is capable of being objective). However, even attempting to leave my cynicism behind, I still find this affirmation of the total honesty of the JW hierarchy, including those nameless, faceless men that translated the JW bible, intriguing, puzzling, and from a biblical perspective, difficult to justify. Jeremiah proclaims that the heart of a man is above all things, deceitful and desperately wicked. Christ says there is none good, and Paul laments that, whilst he tries to do good, he finds evil is his constant companion, because as a being made of flesh, he is still subject to the flesh, which by its nature is carnal, hostile to God etc.
In saying that the JWs are honest above and beyond question, are you saying what you believe, or, merely what you are taught? Do the JWs, alone among men, prove God a liar by being perfect? Are they able to attain salvation merely through their own efforts? Is sin not a problem for them, as it is for mere humans? Again, this is a case where the JWs and God seem to be in conflict - call me a fool if you will, but I will believe God ahead of mere men.
@MadCornishBiker Said The only thing I know for sure is that despite mistakes the JWs are 100% honest in that they truly believe everything they teach, and they make sure that everything they teach fits in with the entirety of the bible, not just parts of it. The trinity as I recognised even as a child, does not fit in. Why else would the churches say it si a mystery?
And yet again, here, you and I disagree, at least in part. Whilst I am sure that the JWs believe what they teach, this says nothing about whether truth was a factor in it first being promulgated by Russell - this is the guy, remember, who said that JWs do not even need to read the bible, merely read his stuff instead. In fact, at one point he or the JW hierarchy went further, and said that if JWs stopped reading the JW material, and merely read the bible, that the JW would fall back into the errors of apostate religion. I will have to find this quote again, as to me it says much. If people merely read the bible, according to the JWs, they will believe in the trinity, salvation by Grace through faith, that Christ died for the sins of everyone so that everyone would be justified before God through faith, and that humans are too evil to save themselves or be justified before God on account of their own 'righteousness' etc... in other words, all the composite elements of Christianity. If, on the other hand, people read the JW material, they believe whatever it is the JWs believe - like for example, that humans can perfect themselves and earn salvation through works. This says much more about the JW belief than it was intended to, I believe.
@MadCornishBiker Said and they make sure that everything they teach fits in with the entirety of the bible, not just parts of it.
Except of course those bits we have mentioned here, where God appeared as a man and spoke to Abraham, Sarah, Adam and Eve... and teaching that man can save himself, and teaching that Christ was Michael, and so on.
Nov 29, 2011 @ 09:31:07
Never may that be. So how do we understand what is written in your quote, because it is an accurate quote? To me it is simple. Since God is invisible and cannot be seen by man what was being seen on these occasions? I believe that it has to have been an angel, or in this case three, appearing on Jehovah's instructions. The fact that the writer thought it was Jehovah, and was never disabused of that thought only means that God was in no hurry to reveal it. After all, there have been many things in the bible which could not be understood at the time, but have since been revealed with the aid of Holy Spirit.
