by Gill 13 Replies latest watchtower bible
I was thinking about that 'pesky little comma' that the JWs have in their NWT.
Because of that pesky little mark, JWs are able to twist and turn in the wind with their 'soul' doctrine.
Did Jesus say to the evildoer 'Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in paradise.'
Or did he say 'Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.'
What a difference a little speck can make on a page!
Has any scholar, I mean REAL scholar ever challenged the WTBTS on its 'comma.'?
Does Rob Bowman count? What about Mantey or Metzger?
Seriously, I think this is one of the things JWs may have a point about...
Slim
JWs might have a point here if anyone knew exactly what happens after death.
I don't believe that so far anyone does.
A saducceic, non after life belief structure to start with does not give someone the right to reinterpret ancient writings to suit themselves.
Sorry SBF, I don't know about these scholars but I will look it up and get back.
Any real schoolar? I'm not sure, but there are two easy points that I show them(Of course it does no good most of the time). The first is that the original writings did not use commas, so it is not "logicaly possable to insist on where one goes just because if fits your perconcieved ideas. The second is more simple, if we were talking to each other, be it face to face or hanging on a cross, why would I tell you that I am telling you something today, while I and telling you this. That makes about as much since as if he would have said "Truly I tell you next week, you will be with me in paradise."
I do enjoy your posts Gill! The way i see it, did Jesus say any of it? Ok assuming he did, what is this paradise? Whether he meant today or in the future, what is the paradise? If its with Jesus then is that Heaven? If it was earthly then how come he didnt utter a word of it till this dying moment? I've really got to the point that how do we know who did what so many years ago and whether its even true?
CS 101
Hi Gill,
I will try and switch into helpful mode:
Rob Bowman is an Evangelical who is more scholarly than most critics of JWs, yet still more of an apologist than scholar per se. He has written an interesting article on Luke 23:43 in the NWT. I can't find it, but here is a discussion with him:
http://www.forananswer.org/Mars_Jw/Bowman.GK.lu23_43.htm
Mantey was indeed an eminent scholar, and famous critic of the Witnesses, among other things on Luke 23:43:
http://www.macgregorministries.org/jehovahs_witnesses/dr_mantey_lt.html
Metzger, I think, edited the Syriac version the Witnesses often appeal to and I think he has also spoken out against the Witness interpretation of this verse, as he has on other matters:
http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/cri/cri-jrnl/crj0055a.txt
Metzger is of course one of the most respected Bible scholars alive.
I was not commenting on whether JWs are right about life after death, by the way. Only making a comment about how they may be right in their historical/theological interpretation of the text in its context...
Slim
There are also a few articles in the critical literature (aside from the many commentaries that weigh in on the subject):
Grelot, Pierre. 1967. "Aujourd'hui tu seras avec moi dans le paradis, Luc 23:43." Revue biblique 74, 194-214.
Hong, Joseph. 1995. "Understanding and Translating 'Today' in Luke 23.43." Bible Translator 46:4, 408-417.
Kellermann, Ulrich. 1996. "Elia als Seelenführer der Verstorbenen oder Elia-Typologie in Lk 23,43 'Heute wirst du mit mir im Paradies sein' ". Biblische Notizen 83, 35-53.
I agree with the general consensus that parses the sentence as "Truly I say to you, Today you will be with me in Paradise". This has the support of the overall syntactic pattern of the AMEN formula, the immediate context in which sémeron "today" (= the present) is the counterpoint of the future-oriented mnésthéti "remember" (= after a lapse of time) and the indefinite hotan "whenever" (i.e. not "whenever" but "today") in v. 42, the broader NT context in which "being with the Lord" after death refers to an immediate dwelling with Christ in heaven (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:1-9, Philippians 1:21-24; compare 1 Thessalonians 4:17), and the overall eschatology of the intermediate state in Jewish-Christian literature and in Luke itself, which construes the pre-resurrected faithful dead in heaven or a state of blessedness with the patriarchs (cf. Luke 16:19-31, Wisdom 3:1-4, Apocalypse of Moses 37:5, 4 Maccabees 13:13-17, Testament of Abraham 20:14, Josephus, Bellum Judaicum, 3.374, Revelation 6:9, etc.), and which locates "Paradise" in heaven (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:1-9, 2 Enoch 8:1-3, 3 Baruch 4:6-8), see Apocalypse of Moses 37:5 for both concepts: "Lift him up into Paradise and into third heaven, and leave him there until that fearful day of my reckoning [i.e. when the resurrection for judgment occurs], which I will make in the world". In light of apocalyptic resurrection eschatology, the thief assumed that he would remain in Sheol/Hades until the resurrection for judgment (cf. Luke 16), whereas Jesus assures him that on account of his faith he will actually join him in the intermediate state in heavenly Paradise. In other words, Jesus enjoys a post-mortem intermediate state similar to that in Josephus or Revelation, but experiences bodily resurrection shortly thereafter, after which he ascends bodily to his glory. Compare Luke 23:46 in which Jesus commits his spirit into the hands of his Father and Gospel of Peter 5:19 in which he is "taken up" immediately from the cross, to then be resurrected shortly afterward (10:39-42). There appears to be no descensus ad inferos tradition in Luke; the references to Hades in Acts 2:26-31 are explicitly oriented to the body and its decay which was pre-empted by the resurrection, tho such a visit in the spirit is not ruled out if it is construed as related to the resurrection of the body.
Gill
The real problem for the witnesses, with this verse, is not punctuation. It's how does this evildoer get a promise of paradise, not ever having done any field service or works of any kind? This man was a public disgrace.
And not only that but what gets me is that Jehovah the biggest toughest meanest truest God of all Gods, the UBA Heavyweight Champion God of the whole UNIVERSE, can't manage to make sure the freakin' comma gets put in the right place in the one and only freakin' book that he ever wrote!
Maybe if he spent less time smiting Arabs and commtting genocide (being Heavyweight Champion is no picnic after all), and more time checking his freakin' punctuation, we could all be in a better situation today!
Hey YHWH - click "Check Grammar" next time hey?? It's right up there in the Tools menu.
Pope
Just check a concordance. Even the one for the NWT. In every other case where Jesus says "Truly, truly I say to you...", the comma is next. Only for the verse in question does the NWT not have the comma after "you". So who's playing "move the dot"; the WBTS, or mainstream Christianity?
