I've been challenged by a JW apologist and need some answers please.

I_love_Jeff

The apologists states: "Give at least one example in the bible where the word PROTOTOKOS (firstborn) does not carry the meaning of "a beginning of existence. Or present any occurrence of the genitive phrase "firstborn of ..." which does not include the subject as part of the group."

Hi aggressive questions present the logical fallacy of false dilemma. I gave the answers to the first part of the question but for somereason it was not good enough for him.

1) Special status, i.e., the supremacy in rank, associated with a firstborn. Id. Besides Luke 2:27, there are seven other usages of prototokos in the New Testament: Romans 8:29; Colossians 1:15, 18; Hebrews 1:6, 11:28, 12:23; and Revelation 1:5. None of these usages in conjunction with Christ make reference to His physical birth. The Septuagint (the Old Testament written in Greek) also uses prototokos in reference to the supremacy in rank as in Psalm 89:27 [NASB95], which reads, "I also shall make him My firstborn, The highest of the kings of the earth."

More answers would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!!

Honesty

You can't fix stupid. It is futile to even attempt to.

Tylinbrando

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/185308/11/Examining-Scripture-to-see-if-Jesus-was-and-is-God

J. Hofer

so you are discussing the real meaning of ancient greek words? may i ask what you want to accomplish?

moshe

Trying to teach a JW monkey a new trick is a waste of time-

EndofMysteries

Ps 89:27 which you pointed out is the answer.

Perhaps it would be more prudent to tell us what the actual argument is about, what is the end result of the debate?

Black Sheep

He will believe what the WT teaches in spite of evidence to the contrary because they are God's channel. Even if they are wrong, they will be corrected by Jehovah when Jehovah deems it neccessary.

The answer is to question him on a subject that directly undermines their claim to be Jehovah's channel and then don't fall for distractions. He should be the one doing the research to provide the answers ... not you.

Ding

In Genesis 41:51, Manasseh is Joseph's firstborn.

In Jeremiah 31:9, after Manasseh's apostasy, Ephraim became preeminent and is therefore called Joseph's firstborn.

If the apologist wants it in Greek, check the Septuagint (Greek version of the OT)... prototokos or its genitive form.

In Exodus 4:22, Jehovah says to tell Pharaoh that Israel is his firstborn (prototokos or its genitive form in the Septuagint).

But Esau was born before Jacob (Israel). See Genesis 25:25-26.

He forfeited his "firstborn" (preeminent) status when he sold his birthright to Jacob.

BTW, the WT refers to the Septuagint frequently, so if it should happen that the apologist doesn't know what the Septuagint is, he or she should stop challenging anyone on Greek.

steve2

Of all the points this apologist could debate, he's chosen that?! What a total waste of time and energy - and for what?

This endeavour sounds like "juvenile debate time at elementary doctrinal school". That issue alone comes pretty close to arguing about the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.

sabastious

The apologists states: "Give at least one example in the bible where the word PROTOTOKOS (firstborn) does not carry the meaning of "a beginning of existence. Or present any occurrence of the genitive phrase "firstborn of ..." which does not include the subject as part of the group."

Just invoke the Bart Ehrman argument. Every single instance of the word "PROTOTOKOS" from the sacred historcal record is subject to error and discrepancy. Then kindly direct him to the scripture that speaks about arguing over words and how much value that has (they'd probably argue over the words of that Scripture). Remember they believe the Bible is the Word of God not Jesus. That's why they use a mistranslation of John 1:1. They set up their own word arguments, it's messed up!

-Sab

I've been challenged by a JW apologist and need some answers please.

Share this