the herd of elephants in today's wt study.

by waton 10 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • waton

    for friends of "truth" about the wt theme: "What do we learn from Jesus' last words?" ,

    If you learned anything, even in the greatest distress you do not utter the sacred name. The article is full of "Jehovahs" but not once did Jesus himself actually use the term. and

    Why did Jesus say: " Eli, Eli, why have you abandoned me? " when he knew perfectly well this would happen?

    Jesus died of starvation, his brain starved of Oxygen, and at that stage, the mind plays tricks, aka near death experiences.

    so wt writers, follow Jesus' example stop substituting Jesus own choice of words " Father", "God" with the modern day version of the divine name.

    because-- of consequences, and

    You really depreciate, cheapen it. through overuse.

  • waton

    sorry, not a reply but a replay:

    Studying the wt was never a fun time for many here, but last sunday's opus was a gift from wt writers. a father"s day gift, for June 20th was that holiday here.

    The gift was, that the article showed, hidden by wt wordiness, that in his last words, jesus did not use the local name for the possible awesome creator, shaper of all, at all. Using the bible story:

    he "fulfilled the law". such as " you must not take the name of your god in vain" Jesus never did, which can not be said for wt and it's followers.

  • steve2

    Even in the so-called "Lord's prayer" (that JWs love to quote) Jesus says, "Our Father in heaven, let your name be sanctified..." - but he doesn't actually use his father's name.

  • waton

    7 hours ago
    Even in the so-called "Lord's prayer"

    s: and that was a command. so our prayers should go to the father, ever mindful of the immensity of his person, his might embodied in his name, but not use it. if at all sparingly.

    Even a life and death situation, that jesus faced, and was the setting for "the last words" watchtower cited above, did not justify or move Jesus, to invoke it. btw:

    at the midweek meeting was cited the text that says; " --nothing can separate us from the love of Christ,--" but it ended up in the cloud of misuse of the sacred term.

  • Drearyweather
    so our prayers should go to the father, ever mindful of the immensity of his person, his might embodied in his name, but not use it. if at all sparingly.

    How do you decide if you are overusing the divine name or underusing, or using it right?

  • waton
    How do you decide if you are overusing the divine name or underusing, or using it right?

    DW: I would leave that to a personal choice for all. but

    As the sanctity of the name is enshrined in the 10 commandments, lets compare it to the crown jewels. reserved for very special occasions, If replicas of them were used by every tom dick and harriette on every street corner, the importance, symbolism would be lost, depreciated, a condition the law mandated against imho.

    By never using the name, Jesus created an aura of awe that is the exact opposite of what occurs at wt occasion,

    A parallel in my mind is the immensity of the cosmos, the might of the energy locked up in the trillions of stars in the billions galaxies, that can never be expressed by a word like "creator" or "father." for

    that energy is not even created. simply put:

    If you exceed the frequency with which Jesus used the name, do you think you are better than him? will get a better hearing? inspire greater respect, proper awe?

  • smiddy3

    In the book "Aid To Bible Understanding " WT/JW acknowledge that Jehovah is not the correct pronunciation of the divine name ,however they settled on using it because it was the most commonly accepted use and the most popular pronunciation of the day .

    Or words to that effect.

    And is the name / pronunciation of that name the "Gospel Message" that was to be preached in all the inhabited earth ?

  • Bobcat

    On a different note regarding this particular WT Study:

    The material went on to describe Jesus handing over care of his mother to the apostle John. (Jn 19:26-27) To be fair, the WT is not alone in saying that it was John. But ...

    "The disciple [Jesus] loved" in Jn 19:26 is never identified with John in the entire 4th gospel. He is only ever identified by name with Lazarus. (Jn 11:1-3)

    Moreover, Jn 19:27 says that this disciple 'took Mary into his home that very hour.' What makes this interesting is that we are never told in the NT whether the apostle John has a home. And if he did, it would have been in Galilee which is several days walk from Jerusalem (especially with an aged parent in tow). On top of that, the gospel accounts seem to indicate that both John and Mary were in Jerusalem at least until Pentecost.

    On the other hand, Lazarus did have a home (and nearby, at that). He was also a faithful disciple of Jesus, just not a travelling companion like the apostles. And, he also had two faithful sisters who, based on the limited commentary in the gospel accounts, would have been more than happy to have helped take care of Mary.

    There is more that could be added to that. For example, Jesus predicted that the apostles would all abandon him during his execution. Peter is the only apostle who followed behind. But he also eventually abandoned him after denying him. So that would imply that the "disciple that [Jesus] loved" who was at the execution site was someone other than John.

    I have a few more details about this (such as how Acts 6:1-2 relates to this) posted here (and see included links) (Off site)

  • Bobcat

    I ran out of editing time on my post above, but Luke 24:49 & Acts 1:4-5, 12-14 place John (and Mary possibly) in Jerusalem (and its local surroundings) until Pentecost. Thus, he could not have taken Mary to his home "that very hour," even supposing he had a home. (Compare Mt 19:27)

  • Drearyweather

    Hi waton, thanks for the explanation.

    However, it is difficult for me to follow the thought. I am not sure if the sanctity of a name lessens by the mere frequency of its usage when it itself appears more than 6,800 times in the Hebrew text. In the Psalms alone it appears about 700 times. In fact, in the Hallel, which is sung by Jews, it appears 60 times.

    The Hallel even contains a verse, "Blessed is the one who comes in the name of Jehovah", which people sang when welcoming Jesus in Jerusalem. In fact, many verses in Psalms show the importance of knowing the name, trusting the name, and taking refuge in the name.

    The crown jewels are the private property of the queen which remains at her disposal, and she decided how to use it and we respect. The creator himself included the name about 6,800 times in the scriptures and has asked people to read it daily. Why would he do so, if he wanted no one to use it?

    All of this makes me skeptical of the opinion that Jesus never used the divine name.

    How he addressed the creator in his prayers differs from prayer to prayer. Sometimes, he used Abba, sometimes as Father, during his death he said My God. I don't feel this establishes any pattern for us, just shows his personal endearment with his creator. He never addressed Mary as 'Mother', rather he addressed her as 'Woman', and we don't establish any pattern from it either.

Share this