Something is lost in translation here. There’s a disconnect between the ownership of agency and the efficacy of agency. “to direct” is an infinitive, which is a noun, in the same way that ‘way’/path is a noun. What this English translation literally says, if Brooklyn would stay out of it for a second, is that ‘man does not have ownership/possession over the verbal noun which means the directing of his own steps.’ Literally, these two sentences have nothing to do with making a judgement as to man’s pability to direct his own steps. And since Jeremiah’s statement is already premised on belief in a more powerful being, he could, for the sake of argument, be telling Jehovah in perfect irony that he acknowledges God’s right to tell man that man does not own man’s governance, without actually believing that man is incapable of governance.
Mankind doesn't have the ability to govern himself, true or false?
by JH 13 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
tetrapod.sapien
mankind doesn't have the ability to do a lot of things. it doesn't mean that there is a god, and that he's here to help george bush.
-
FlyingHighNow
mankind doesn't have the ability to do a lot of things. it doesn't mean that there is a god, and that he's here to help george bush.
I whole heartedly agree. And ain't it kind of obvious that no god could be helping him?
-
Elsewhere
Jeremiah 10:23 I well know, O Jehovah, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step.
Does this mean that the WTS and "Elder Arrangement" will be dissolved?