The most successful teaching of Jehovah's Witnesses and an amazing new book on the divine name

by slimboyfat 326 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • jwfacts
    jwfacts

    You misrepresent Howard, because he presents it as a hypothesis, whereas you say he "obviously" believed it. I already addressed this comment of yours. Your use of obviously is as hollow as Watchtower's use of clearly when they make a comment that has no support.

    Would almighty God have allowed this group of Christians to champion his name at this crucial time if they did not enjoy his blessing and support?

    The reason this can never be a big issue with JWs is because of the "elephant in the room." If using the name Jehovah is a requirement of salvation, Jehovah would not have allowed it to be removed. At the very least, in "this crucial time" of the last days, he would have allowed some NT fragments to be found with the Divine name. If over a century after the last days started there has not been a single fragment discovered, and nothing more than a handful of lone scholars hypothesising about this theory, it cannot be of any importance to Jehovah at all.

  • Diogenesister
    Diogenesister

    Another Slimboyfat troll post. This breathless posturing - " the last days" the groundbreaking Watchtower - oh please.

    IAW was used by one break off sect of Jews near the first century.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat
    IAW was used by one break off sect of Jews near the first century

    Where is your evidence for this? Frank Shaw's book demonstrates that the name IAW was widely used including sources as diverse as the LXX fragment of Leviticus, Greco-Roman authors, Christian onomastica, Jewish authors, and passages of the NT text itself including Rev 1:8, not to mention the mystical contexts in which the name was later used. Rather than sectarian or parochial this tends to indicate widespread common usage.

    jwfacts I appreciate you believe the evidence is not strong enough. JWs and a number of non-JW scholars feel otherwise (including Trobisch who you don't interact with). The book of Acts talks about Jehovah calling out a people from the nations for his name. If these are the last days, and the LXX discoveries, combined with onomastica and other evidence, has brought new attention to Jehovah's name, if a person is inclined to see God's hand in history, it is not difficult to see it here.

  • jwfacts
    jwfacts
    jwfacts I appreciate you believe the evidence is not strong enough. JWs and a number of non-JW scholars feel otherwise

    A number of scholars do, a number don't. I prefer the don't position, but if more solid evidence came to light I would have no problem updating my position. Either way, it would have zero relevance to what I think about Watchtower teachings.

    JWs ... feel otherwise

    99.9% of JWs don't feel otherwise, because they don't have an opinion. As a JW, I had no idea that Watchtower had added the word Jehovah to the NT, and I have never known any other JWs that were aware of this either. They assume it appears in the discovered NT manuscripts, in the same way that it appears in the OT manuscripts.

    JWs are not evidence based, they are faith based, and that faith rests solely in what the GB state. That is why I would like to know why you think this topic is important. Evidence of the divine name in the NT is no more important than evidence of Jerusalem's fall in 607. JWs believe it regardless of any evidence.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Well that's odd, since JW publications have discussed the absence of the divine name in NT manuscripts, the evidence that it was in the originals, and the basis for its restoration in the NWT. All any JW need do is read the NWT appendix, among other publications.

    I think it's important because it's one of the strong lines of evidence JWs can point to for having the truth. If Acts 15 is correct that God has a named people, then it's difficult to see who qualifies better than JWs. Especially since other Christians don't even recognise the importance of the name even in the context of a text such as Acts which is explicitly about the name. Another strong line of evidence is the fact JWs refuse to kill each other, which one would have thought would be a basic requirement for a Christian community, but which distinguishes JWs from most (notice I didn't say all, don't misquote me) Christians,

  • jwfacts
    jwfacts
    All any JW need do is read the NWT appendix, among other publications.

    The Watchtower presentation is very difficult to follow, because they make it appear like the J manuscripts are original writings. Only the most astute JW would see through the obfuscation.

    The people for God's name at Acts 15 are Christians. The chapter is about Jesus. It seems you never got past the Watchtower Arian understanding of the NT. You are starting to sound like a JW apologist.

  • Ruby456
    Ruby456

    Slim what do you make of the fact that the divine Tetragrammaton predates Moses as his mother,s name derives from it according to one dictionary. in fact many other ancient and modern divine names for the almighty consist of four letters - Deus, Allah (in Arabic), Deus. I wonder if this is connected to the origins of speech breath control pitch and whatever and each seems to be vocalised on the outbreath. This I think would have a calming effect. edit: cognitive abilities work best then. think of the ancestors hunting on the Savannah ...mind boggling isn't it.

    jwfacts Arianism was very very strong before it was eradicated and it had more Jewish overtones than the later trinity. Most evidence to support Arianism would also have been destroyed.

  • venus
    venus

    JWs using Jehovah's name is no glory to them, rather it has backfired on them: "When the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word is not fulfilled or does not come true, then Jehovah did not speak that word. The prophet spoke it presumptuously. You should not fear him." (Deuteronomy 18:22)

    If JWs have not made any changes in their teachings, then their using God's name would have added glory to them.

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Pretty candid discussion in their main publication on the topic The Divine Name that will Endure Forever:

    The position of God's name is unshakeable in the Hebrew Scriptures... With the Christian Greek Scriptures, the "New Testament", the situation is different... no ancient Greek manuscript that we possess today of the books of Matthew to Revelation contains God's name in full. (Page 23)

    da-ip.getmyip.com:8080/PDF/Old%20Publications/1984,%202006%20-%20The%20Divine%20Name%20That%20Will%20Endure%20Forever%20-%20brochure.pdf

    Acts 15 quotes from the OT and refers to Jehovah. Even the name Jesus itself is a reference to salvation from Jehovah and the early Christians were aware the meaning of Jesus' name. (See Matthew 1:21 for example) Frank Shaw demonstrates that the name was very much current in early Christianity.

  • Ruby456
    Ruby456

    yes but what about that it may have predated Moses?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit