The Gentiles Times Reconsidered--Again but this Time By Using the Bible

by thirdwitness 1380 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  thirdwitness

  So AlanF is downing the NWT for translating the word parousia (which literally means presence) as presence. Something that other Bibles do when they want to. Other Bibles decide whether to translate it as presence or coming based on what they believe the context is saying or based on their theology.

  Young's Literal Translation on the other hand agrees with the NWT at 1 john 2:28: may not be ashamed before him, in his presence;

  Of course Young's Translation is a literal translation and therefore literally translates the word thus allowing the reader to understand that there is a difference between parousia and words translated as coming. The NWT by consistently rendering parousia as presence allows the reader to do the same, to see the difference in the word for presence and the word for coming.

  If the NWT had used liberties and translated it as coming AlanF would have claimed that we translate words to fit whatever we are trying to convey. Did you ever think that maybe JWs beliefs are based on the fact that parousia or presence was really the word used in the Bible rather than coming up with a doctrine and then trying to translate the Bible to fit that doctrine. In other words our doctrine came forth because of what the Bible said about parousia first not that our doctrine came forth first and then we tried to mold the word parousia around our beliefs.

  For example the King James Version at Matt 24 reads:

  24:36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, F135 but My Father only.

  24:37 But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming (parousia) of the Son of Man be.

  24:38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,

  24:39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming (parousia) of the Son of Man be.

  24:40 Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left.

  24:41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left.

  24:42 Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour F136 your Lord is coming (Erchomai not parousia).

  24:43 But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come (Erchomai not parousia). , he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into.

  24:44 Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming (Erchomai not parousia). at an hour you do not expect. It is a little bit misleading wouldn't you say. And obscures the true meaning. It gives the impression that the same word is used for coming in all instances when that is clearly not the case. The NWT is not trying to deceive the reader but is literally translating parousia for all to see the difference in parousia and erchomai. How do you explain the use of two different words? Why not just use Erchomai not parousia in every place if the writer is merely wanting to convey the meaning of erchomai (coming)? And how do you explain the eating drinking marry and carrying on of everyday life during the 'coming' of the Lord when destruction is taking place? And do you really understand the teachings of JWs concerning the parousia? For some reason, unexplainable to me, you want to argue about what sources say as to the definition of parousia when most all support what JWs teach about parousia. Your quoting of sources explaining what parousia is leads me to believe that you have no idea what JWs teach about parousia. Because parousia does involve an arrival or coming and thereafter an extended visit of the king or presence of the king. This is what JWs believe. Your quoting of the many sources only bolsters our position for the parousia of Christ. Understand that parousia means an arrival and presence of the king not just his arrival or coming. Parousia, as the sources AlanF and I have both quoted from have shown, means more than just his arrival or coming. This presence or parousia last until the end of the system of things at Armageddon. Tell us, what will be the sign of your parousia and the conclusion of the system of things? Thereafter Jesus told of many events that would take place to recognize that he had arrived as king and was present and he also told of the end of the system of things at the great tribulation and armageddon. He answered their question quite clearly how to recognize that he had arrived and was present. It would be like the days of Noah, not total chaos, but people living their everyday lives not taking any note that Jesus was present and that he was gathering people to his organization who would preach the good news. 2 Peter 3:3 For YOU know this first, that in the last days there will come ridiculers with their ridicule, proceeding according to their own desires 4 and saying: “Where is this promised parousia of his? Why, from the day our forefathers fell asleep [in death], all things are continuing exactly as from creation’s beginning.”

  It is during the last days which also corresponds with Jesus' parousia that this would be fulfilled. During the parousia people would be saying, 'where is this promised parousia?' You probably don't realize it but you, AlanF, and your friends have had a part in fulfilling this prophecy. And for this we thank you.
• 

  Death to the Pixies

  Nah, he was saying that Rolf (like YECreationists) was getting credentials for his WT theology, so I chided.
• 

  thirdwitness

  
  Alan:Taken right from WTS publications, of course.

  : W.E. Vine, M.A., was known in his day (1873-1949) as a classical scholar, a skilled expositor, and an acute theologian. Recognized as one of the world's foremost Greek scholars, his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, first published in 1939, now available in Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, represents the fruit of his lifetime labors and is an unsurpassed classic in its field.
  
  
  : W.E. Vine says: parousia does not signify merely a coming, it includes or suggests the presence which follows the arrival

  Me: Nope, I didn't get those quotes from the WT publications. Perhaps they are in there but thats not where I got them from. At any rate, AlanF would have us believe that Vine had an agenda when he tells us what parousia means. Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black. Who do we believe Vine or the sources AlanF quotes? I chose both since they both basically are saying the same things.

  Parousia is the vist from the king. This involves his arrival or coming and thereafter his continued presence. Seems to me all the scholars are pretty much in agreement. So whats the problem?
• 

  stevenyc

  Thirdwitness,

  Could you clarify the societies position on this?

  Matt 24: 46 Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so.

  I understand that you believe the anointed Jehovahs Witnesses represent the faithful slave, but who is the Master, and at which point is his 'arriving' referring too (at the presence or at the tribulation)?

  steve
• 

  AuldSoul

  thirdwitness: And how do you explain the eating drinking marry and carrying on of everyday life during the 'coming' of the Lord when destruction is taking place?

  Please tell me you aren't really that thick...

  Do you really believe that the days before Noah entered into the ark is being compared to the presence of the son of man? Or is it, rather, the arrival of the flood, or at least the entering into the ark, that is being compared to the presence of the son of man?

  Which? In this chapter of Matthew, parousia and erchomai are used interchangably. The Watchtower Society tries to create a distinction between synonyms that the language doesn't allow for.

  In verse 39, we find: "And knew not until the flood came (gr. elthen, indicative aorist active 3rd person singular of erchomai), and took them all away; so shall also the coming (gr. parousia) of the Son of man be."

  Now, what does the context indicate? That the presence would be a sudden, swift, unexpected event that would occur, or that the presence would be a span of time extending now some 92 years? Which?

  You play with language as though it was Play-Doh™. Or you get the trait from your leaders. Either way, it is disgustingly sophistic.

  AuldSoul

  AuldSoul
• 

  AuldSoul

  stevenyc,

  Give him a harder one! Everyone knows that happened in 1918/19 when the faithful and discreet slave was appointed, some 20 years before they even knew they were the faithful and discreet slave. That was near the beginning of Christ's parousia, silly.

  Oh! The verse says it would be at the erchomai? Oh dear. That may prove troublesome to the WTS theology after all. I take it back, excellent question.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  thirdwitness

  I would just like to thank AlanF for his work in providing these source for supporting JWs view as to what parousia means. Allow me to highlight in red the parts that support our belief.

  One definition of parousia is the "arrival or visit of a king."

  The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised (Harold K. Moulton, Zondervan Publishing House, 1978) indicates on p. 311 that parousia is related to pareimi, which has various meanings including to be beside, to be present, to be come (p. 307). For parousia it gives the meanings presence, a coming, arrival, advent, and gives Matt. 24:3, 27, 37, 39 as examples of the latter three.

  Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon (2nd edition, 1979) says that parousia has the meanings “coming, advent as the first stage in presence” (p. 629) and gives several references to ancient Greek literature. It gives Matt. 24:3 as an example of this use “in a special, technical sense.” It says further: “The use of parousia as a technical term has developed in two directions. On the one hand the word served as a cult expression for the coming of a hidden divinity, who makes his presence felt by a revelation of his power, or whose presence is celebrated in the cult… On the other hand, parousia became the official term for a visit of a person of high rank, especially of kings and emperors visiting a province… These two technical expressions can approach each other closely in meaning, can shade off into one another, or even coincide.”

  Liddell & Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon (p. 1343) gives “Advent” as the meaning in each instance in Matthew.

  Expository Dictionary of Bible Words (Lawrence O. Richards, Zondervan Publishing House, 1985, p. 65) says of parousia that “the word means ‘presence’ or ‘coming’ and emphasizes both the idea of ‘being there’ and the idea of ‘having come.’ . . . Parousia is found four times in the Olivet Discourse (Mt 24:3,27,37,39). The context makes it clear that Jesus’ initial appearing is intended, for the disciples asked how they would recognize the sign of his coming. Jesus explains that he will appear suddenly (v. 27), unexpectedly (v. 37), and with devastating impact on those who do not believe (v. 39). Yet the emphasis in the total passage (Mt 24–25) is not on the meaning of the second coming but on the fact that, until Jesus does come, we are to watch, committing ourselves to serve our absent Lord (cf. the four illustrations in Mt 24:42–25:46).”

  Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon (p. 490) gives Matt. 24:3 as an example of the meaning “the presence of one coming, hence the coming, arrival, advent.”
• 

  AuldSoul

  thirdwitness: ...it includes or suggests the presence which follows the arrival...

  Obviously, that would be the only connotation added to the usage of parousia. But that does not remove the necessity of "arrival". And it still does not convey a lengthy "presence" of 92 years (or 132 years, if you still believe Jesus arrived in 1874, like the Bible Students taught). It also is not a presence in the sense of simply existing in proximity, it is an active presence.

  Jesus didn't say his parousia would be like the days before the flood. He said his parousia would be like the arrival of the flood.

  AuldSoul
• 

  AuldSoul

  thirdwitness,

  Are you really suggesting that "arrival or visit" convey the connotation of a 92 year "stay"? If someone lived with you for 92 years would you ever think to express the relationship as a "visit"? You are stretching the point, aren't you?
• 

  thirdwitness

  Oh and let not forget this fellow:

  W.E. Vine, M.A., was known in his day (1873-1949) as a classical scholar, a skilled expositor, and an acute theologian. Recognized as one of the world's foremost Greek scholars, his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, first published in 1939, now available in Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, represents the fruit of his lifetime labors and is an unsurpassed classic in its field.
  
  Who said: W.E. Vine says: parousia does not signify merely a coming, it includes or suggests the presence which follows the arrival
  Oh but according to the all knowing AlanF he does not qualify because he had an agenda and is not a 'modern' scholar.