by The Searcher 16 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • The Searcher
    The Searcher

    Any fellow active Witnesses lurking? - Meditate on these publications, and then draw your own conclusions.

    Which page should we rip out - the All Scripture Inspired page, or the Insight Book page?

    One is clearly a lie! Come to think of it, we'd better include Luke 1:3 in every Bible, 'cos it might be wrong too!

    I've got a sneaky suspicion that the Insight Book might be wrong, but hey, that's just me having a stab in the dark!

    sip.187par.1BibleBookNumber42—Luke THE Gospel of Luke was written by a man with a keen mind and a kind heart, and this fine blend of qualities, with the guidance of God’s spirit, has resulted in an account that is both accurate and full of warmth and feeling. In the opening verses, he says, "I resolved also, because I have traced all things from the start with accuracy, to write them in logical order to you." His detailed, meticulous presentation fully bears out this claim.—Luke 1:3.

    We can be truly grateful to Jehovah for inspiring Luke, "the beloved physician," to write this accurate, upbuilding, and encouraging account, pointing as it does to salvation through the Kingdom by Jesus Christ, "the saving means of God."

    it-2 p. 130 Judas

    A comparison of Matthew 26:20-29 with John 13:21-30 indicates that he departed before Jesus instituted the celebration of the Lord’s Evening Meal. Luke’s presentation of this incident evidently is not in strict chronological order.......

  • pixel

    Excellent point.

  • 00DAD

    Ok, so if you begin with the premise that the Bible is really God's word, then you are forced to go through elaborate mental gymnastics to try to explain what any reasonable person can clearly see are blatant inconsistencies and contradictions.

    It just is.

  • Billy the Ex-Bethelite
    Billy the Ex-Bethelite

    And there's also the fact that Luke makes no mention of the resurrection of Lazarus and many other accounts only recorded by John in his account written decades later. So the claim that Luke was detailed, accurate, and inspired, has to be questioned. Or else John was making up a bunch of stuff that the other gospel writers had never heard of... like the resurrection of Lazarus.

  • leaving_quietly

    This one's a sticky one for me, too. The jury's still out. However, as has been mentioned on this board before: chronological order is not the same as logical order (Luke 1:3 says "logical order"). WT might be right. Scholars don't agree on this one, either. 00DAD said it best: mental gymnastics.

  • Pterist

    You are correct, Luke is definitely NOT in chronological order. However, he did have a theology order. Check out this understanding from open Yale university -

    Sorry but my iPad does not allow me to create a hyperlink, so copy and paste if interested.


  • Aussie Oz
    Aussie Oz

    I note the watchtower society's favorite word at play...

    evidently. meaning, it is evident that we have a problem here but choose to ignore the facts and substitute our own reality.


  • Pterist

    Here is Part of the course on Luke and Acts as mentioned above from Yale. The above link has a video of the lecture, worth while watching...

    Anyways here you go:

    Notice: is Luke concerned about when the event in Nazareth actually historically happened? No, he's even--you can tell he's even getting it out of his source from one spot and consciously transferring it to another spot, which tells us one thing, is that to him it's not that important chronologically when this story actually happened. What's important to him is using the story to emphasize the theological message that he wants to emphasize. Now let's look at another place where Luke does this. You have to turn to Acts for this though, look at Acts 11. Any questions about that before I go on? No questions? I love good docile students, always happy with everything I say.


  • Larsinger58

    I don't get it. I don't see where the contradiction is. However, scholarship about details trnasmitted to us in koine Greek is quite low. So low, we have to presume of this tis is divine darkness imposed on the world for what the gospels tell us, perhaps so that when Christ returns, he can be glorified by having the light to shine on the details of truth so that the gospels then are vindicated.

    But first, just let me make this statement about Jewish history vs. outsiders, the gentiles. The historical policy for both the OT and NT is intentionally designed to be deceptive to outsiders. That's why you have these complex, parallel accounts. In the OT, for instance, there were many co-rulershis but it is complicated trying to establish a clear timeline of events. That is intentional. Even Jesus said he spoke in parables so that his own followers would understand one thing but those looking on from the outside would look in vain, not understanding the true detail.

    But this is incredibly bad. You have all these Bible seminaries and scholars and some of the most fundamental details are missed! Case in point, the presumed contradiction relating to Mary Magdalene's appearance at the tomb. In one account Mary Magdalene arrives after 3 a.m. while it is still dark. She is alone. She sees Jesus in a different body but then recognizes him. She is told to run tell the others that he has risen and she does. Then a little later, while it is starting to get light, Mary Magdalene along with "the Other Mary" comes to the tomb. They see the angels there and are told Jesus had risen. They came just to look at the tomb. They don't have any spices or anything. Then on the road they run into Jesus and kiss him and embrace him. They are told to go tell the disciples Christ had risen. They do. Then right at sunrise, Jesus' family, including yet another "Mary", Jesus' mother, along with Mary Magdalene arrive at the tomb. These are his family members who bring spices with them. They find the angels still at the tomb, but no Jesus. They are told to go tell the others about this, but they are too freaked out about all this and they don't. Now. Do you realize that not a single NT Bible scholar, nor the WTS realizes that the gospel accounts are covering the deteails separately of three different women named Mary Magdalene, who come to the tomb at three different times and with different people! What we should get out of this is how incredibly common the name "Mary" is in this culture, much like "Mary" is very common name in the Latin countries! Since these women came from Galilee and were part of the women taken care of Jesus, that they were cousins or related in some other way. At any rate, because of the way these events are presented in the gospels and our cultural bias for names, it is presumed there is just one woman named Mary Magdalene, when in fact, there are three. Now excuse my "French" but if you really look at the details and consider the nature of how the history is presented, an idiot should be able to tell these are three different women! But instead, all this smart people figure the gospels are in conflict. They think something is wrong with the gospels. And so they miss this. ALL OF THEM DO! The lesson learned here is that the gospels are books of specific detail, but with references that are similar but not exact, which confuses the casual reader.

    This is even more clear when you look at the reference of what Jesus told Peter about denying him. In one gospel Jesus tells Peter that he will deny him three times before even a cock crows. Then in another, he says he will deny him before a cock crows twice. Now all these scholars see a contradiction here, but in fact, this is a detailed reference that is designed to be combined together. That is, the outside reader will presume there is a minor contradiction here. But the insider, knowing the detail of gospel and holy spirit, will combine the two references and thus understand that what Jesus told Peter first was that he would deny him three times before a cock crowed once, and then after that, Peter would deny him another three times before a cock crowed twice. When we look closely at the details gospels, we see that precisely taking place. Peter denied him up to three times before he ws spotted as one of his followers and then tried to quickly leave. That included once when he first arrived. After being noticed, he starts to leave and then a cock crows once and he recalls that Christ told him he would have denied him three times. But this is a huge courtyard full of people and there is a gate house you have to go through to get outside. As Peter was going through the crowd, though, trying to get outside, a young girl was following him and accusing him in front of the various groups Peter was passing by to get out of the courtyard and through the gate house to the outside. But as he was moving past these groups with this girl on his tail, he was continually denying he knew Christ, so that by the time he finally gets outside, he has denied Christ another three times, at which time he hears a cock crow a second time! So Jesus told him he would deny him three times before a cock crowed that night. Peter must have protested this idea and then Jesus told him further, in fact, that he would deny him another three times before a cock crowed a second time. We all know how often a cock crows once it starts. It's not a long time. So from the time a cock crowed first until the time Peter was able to move through the crowd, it was the short period of time from the first cock crow to the second. But during that very short time, Peter ends up denying Christ another three times. So there is nothing wrong with the gospels! Where is the SCHOLARSHIP fo understand this? It's missing.

    So that brings us to this issue of Judas. You have a lot of ignorant scholars out there who don't understand about Jewish complex history and detail trying to figure out what is going on and often because of their lack of confidence in the gospels, presume there is some kind of an error going on. When I read these accounts, however, I don't see any conflict. I'm looking at the nature of the historical references which duplicates the story and finds similar but not identical events that must be combined, not put in contradiction. So there is no conflict in the gospels here. What is missed is that Jesus at one point implied Judas would betray him, noting that he and Judas would be dipping into the bowl at the same time. That is Jesus implied Judas because both were dippling in the bowl at the same time. At that point, Judas makes that remark about "Is it I?" Then Jesus said, "You yourself said so." But they continued to eat. So then later on, just before Judas actually left, Jesus again says someone would betray him. This was after the new covenant was set up, by the way, so Judas indeed was included in that covenant with the 12, which is a problem for the WTS, but that's another dysfunctional story entirely. But getting back to the details, this time, Jesus says the person who will betray me is the one I'm going to give the morsel to. Note that slight little difference in the reference. The first time it was simply Judas dipping into the bowel at the same time Jesus did. This next time, Judas is not dibbing in the bowl with Jesus, but Jesus dips into the bowl and gives a morsel to Judas. So by this time, the meal was probably basically over. This time, Judas leaves the group.

    This is likely the case as well, because John gives specific times for many events, which are not understood by scholars and translators. Thus John tells us that Judas left "de nox" (but night). It is translated as: "It was night", but really, "but night" is a reference to the night watch, which is from 9 p.m. to midnight and when "but" is used just before a watch or absolute division of the day, it means "just before." So John is not simply telling us it was dark at the time Judas left, which could have been any time during the night! Why would he bother telling us something that was so obvious. No. Instead, John is telling us Judas left just before 9 p.m.! (John 13:30)

    So let's get real here. Jesus appears to eat the passover meal after sundown. Some Jewish traditional references note that the meal doesn't actually officially begin until after nightfall, so we'll factor that in. Even so, nightfall around Springtime would be by 7 p.m. Judas doesn't leave until just before 9 p.m. So likely those eating had finished eating by 9 p.m. This helps us understand the two different events in relation to Judas. That is, early on when everyone was eating is when Jesus and Judas were both dipping into the bowl together and the meal was continuing. But by 8:30 going on 9 p.m., everybody was basically finished eating, requiring Jesus to dip into the bowl and then give that morsel to Judas. See how that works?

    So the confusion comes from not realizing the gospel curves being thrown here, like with the three Mary Magdalenes or Peter's six denials! So what we have here is the WTS contradicting scriptures, in this case Luke, because of their own obssessive but incorrect interpretation of the new covenant, thinking in no way would Jesus conclude the covenant with Judas knowing he would betray him and thus presuming this was done after Judas left. But that is not the case.

    My gut reaction is that these scholars and the WTS are just a bunch of stupid, ignorant people defaming the gospels. But perhaps these are people who are just not paying attention. But its the entire scholarship of Christendom. You know? Even now they can't figure out that Jesus could not have died the same day he was arrested. It is right there in scripture that the Israelites left on the 15th, shortly after they ate passover that same night. Now why can't the WTS understand that about the time Jesus was being arrested would hae been the same time that same night years earlier when the Israelites were leaving Egypt and thus the date was the 15th? So this idea that Jesus died on the 14th is contradictory to the obvious, right? So the WTS doesn'[t know WTF they are doing! But neither do all those seminaries and scholars commenting on the gospels. But as I noted, this is traditional, confusing Jewish history, designed to fool and stumple outsider readers but give details to those who understand how specific these details are. The added understanding thus is not stated but read between the lines once you pay attention to detail. Of course, Jesus dies on Thursday, Nisan 20th, which any idiot can figure out since the Bible says he was in the tomb for "three nights." If the third night was Saturday night, then what choice is there but that Jesus dies on a Thursday? There is no choice.

    So,when you combine the intentional complexity of historical detail that follows the Jewish tradition of the OT and the gospels of giving parallel accounts that vary in detail, along with so many scholars not paying attention or refusing to consider Jewish tradition and other factors, then you have a lot of people thinking the gospels are contradictory, when in reality, they are not. The "contradictions" are often due to the incompetence or inexpertise of the scholars and translators, not the gospels themselves.

    In this case, after the meal began and while everyone was eating, Jesus fingers Judas when they both dip into the bowl together. The meal continues and the new covenant is instituted with the 12. After the meal winds down, shortly before 9 p.m. it is time for Judas to leave and get done what he needs to do to betray Jesus. So Jesus mentions again that someone would betray him and when asked, he says it is the person to whom he would give a morsel to and he gives that to Judas and then tells Judas to go and get done what he needs to do, thus giving Judas an easy out. You could also say that Jesus is keeping the schedule going so that things could be fulfilled. In fact, a lot of things happen around the "third hour", which is 9 p.m. or at noon or at the 11th hour, which is 3 p.m. So John is telling us Judas left the meal just before 9 p.m. So we know Judas had from 9 p.m. up until shortly after midnight to get the betrayal set up.

    Jesus was arrested on the 15th early Saturday morning. He would be seen at the Sanhedrin right after sunrise. He would appear before Pilate the first time "but early" (John 18:28), meaning just before the early evening watch, which is from noon to 3 p.m., thus just before noon. A special passover meal was being held that afternoon and so the Jews did not want to enter the palace. The trial dragged on until Pilate discovered that Jesus was from Galilee and since Herod was in town, he sent Jesus to Herod. This could have been late that afternoon. Herod was not expecting Jesus and he would not have to return him until the day one of the prisoners would be released to the people, which was Wednesday morning. That is when Herod and Pilate became pals. Jesus trial (John 19:14) was around noon on "but preparation for passover" (de paraskeue), meaning just before preparation for the second passover high-sabbath of Nisan 21st (the 7th day of UFC). Jesus trial probably lasted into the early afternoon and after sundown, he was led out to Golgatha. One of the day workers coming from the field, which is also a clue this was after sunset, Joseph of Cyrene, was hired to help Jesus. Then Jesus was impaled at the "third hour", clearly 9 p.m. that night in some kind of a formal ceremony since Pilate was there. So it might be significant looking at the account later that Jesus dismissed Judas right at 9 p.m. on Friday night and Jesus is impaled at 9 p.m. that Wednesday night, five days later. Then 15 hours later, at noon, it gets dark for 3 hours from noon to 3 p.m. at which time Jesus dies. It is now Thursday, Nisan 20th, the day of preparation for the high-sabbath of passover, nisan 21st. Jesus is placed into the tomb before sunset that Thursday afternoon and is in the tomb the following three nights: Thursday night, Friday night and Saturday night. Jesus rises "but early" (de proi) (Mark 16:9), meaning just before the early morning watch, which is from 3 a.m. to sunrise. The first Mary Magdalene comes to the tomb "early" and thus during the early morning watch (3 am-sunrise) while it is still dark. This was now Sunday. Jesus appears over the next 40 days in various bodies then ascends to heaven. Then three days later in the upper room (rather than 10 days later) holy spirit arrives at Pentecost.

    In conclusion, whether due to ignorance or divine blindness or a combination of both, the gospels get a bad reputation for having contradictions, but really there are none.

    Of course, the next question is why is it that I know so much? Well, obviously, since I'm not that smart (actually, I am rather smart, but just saying...), understanding of scripture is granted by holy spirit to those whom God chooses. As the scriptures indicate, sometimes darkness and blindness is imposed on some so that God can give the light to others. Thus understanding is due to God's choosing and not the smartness or scholarship in the world. So we won't waste the point on how God is showing who has holy spirit and who doesn't. I do. But there is a reason why I do. Even so, some of this is confusion is due to ignorance, stupidity and negligence.

  • Pterist

    Lars **** I don't see where the contradiction is*****

    The issue.... Is the gospel of Luke in chronological order as the author seems to imply ?

    The answer is NO !

Share this