The JW rough equivalent term is "drifting out of the truth".
slimboyfat
JoinedPosts by slimboyfat
-
8
Do the dubs know apostate language like fade, etc....
by Iamallcool inthe inactive sister used the word "faded" today and i am wondering if she has been on this site or not?
.
-
-
-
15
Jehovah's Witnesses Crime Against Grammar
by Simon inso this is really starting to grate on me the more i think about it because it's just wrong grammatically.. one of my friends always refers to me used to being "a jehovah witness" which used to grate whenever she said it but now it seems more correct.. think about it this way: bruce springsteen has fans.
they are fans of bruce springsteen or, bruce springsteen's fans.
but each of them isn't a bruce springsteen's fan.
-
-
slimboyfat
Hovis biscuit, where I grew up.
-
583
What is the purpose of life?
by slimboyfat inwhile reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.
because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".
i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.
-
-
slimboyfat
This thread is back.
I am gong to an event on the 13th of December about how God might have directed evolution. This might help work out the meaning of it all. If so I'll report back what I find.
-
86
Free Speech - Jordan Peterson Debate Live 9:30 EST Saturday
by cofty inprofessor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?
) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.
in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.
-
-
slimboyfat
I think the key part of the argument was was Jordan Peterson said he didn't care what people called him and that it wouldn't bother him if people referred to him habitually as she and her. I just don't find that believeable. Imagine all his colleagues and students and acquaintances referred to him as a woman no matter what he said to try convince them to stop. Of course most men would find that uncomfortable bullying or worse. It would be enough to drive some people crazy. So why did he lie about that? I guess it's because he has to pretend that would be okay in order to be consistent in his position. But if you have to lie in order to make your position appear reasonable then something has gone wrong.
-
86
Free Speech - Jordan Peterson Debate Live 9:30 EST Saturday
by cofty inprofessor jordan peterson of the university of toronto will be streaming a live debate on his youtube channel on the topic of free speech and "bill c-16".. if you haven't heard (where have you been?
) peterson has been making waves by opposing the demands of pc "social justice warriors" at the u of t to use their chosen gender neutral pronouns.
in his judgement proposed "bill-c16" will make his non-compliance illegal - an egregious threat to free speech.. professor peterson is an intelligent and thoughtful academic who has found himself at the focus of attacks from the neo-marxists that are dominating the conversation at elite universities.
-
-
slimboyfat
"Jacques Derrida was the most dangerous person who lived in the twentieth century".
Ha! At least he recognises Derrida's importance, I suppose, which is more than some. Truly we live in a Derridean epoch.
One could say, what is really happening is that we are waking up from the platonic slumber western civilisation has been inhabiting for the last nearly two thousand years or so. Which you might think anti-Christians would welcome, discarding the reality/appearance distinction, the ideal, and the world beyond this world.
-
12
Excellent use of language in comments on this site compared with WT publications
by Deltawave ini think it's great.
when i read posts on here i have to use a dictionary because of the high level of intellectual words yet, when i read a wtbts publication, i have to ignore all the bad grammar and punctuation!
.
-
-
slimboyfat
This truly is a happifying report, vivacious and efficacious, and in no way vexatious.
-
43
Why Is YHWH Used Regularly In OT and NEVER in NT?
by minimus inand if the name jehovah is that important why is it that jesus christ never use that name in a record of scriptures?.
-
-
slimboyfat
I agree with lots of what you say. Just now and again you throw in a comment like "there are no Christian copies of the LXX" which throws me. And certainly there are Greek versions of the OT that are not LXX. Any book of textual criticism makes this clear.
In particular I agree we shouldn't lose sight of the big picture and the main issue of whether JWs have misrepresented the history and significance of the divine name.
I only intended to interject two main points in the discussion with my initial post:
1) I think there is something unique about the Tetragrammaton compared to the other names used of God in the Hebrew Bible. You say unique is not the right word, that it is holy. Okay then it is holy. Whichever word we use there was something special about it, I would suggest.
2) the earliest fragments of the LXX that survive and preserve parts of the text with the divine name use various forms of the divine name. None of the earliest fragments use KYRIOS. The earliest copies that use KYRIOS (or in fact the nomina sacra form KS) are from the second century CE.
You might say that, these facts notwithstanding, JWs are still wrong in various ways about the divine name. It's a discussion we could have. Personally I think there is a much stronger claim for the divine name in the original NT than many allow for. But since we can't even agree on the basic facts such as the two I made initially, and repeated above, there's not much point moving on to the wider discussion.
I respect your faith and your experience and obvious knowledge of the subject.
-
43
Why Is YHWH Used Regularly In OT and NEVER in NT?
by minimus inand if the name jehovah is that important why is it that jesus christ never use that name in a record of scriptures?.
-
-
slimboyfat
From this I gathered you were saying that the PR 458 is the fragment “that leaves spaces...from the third century, probably Christian.” My mistake if I didn’t understand you, but the only copy of the Septuagint “that leaves spaces” for YHWH is PR 458. PR 458 contains only portions of Deuteronomy, not Genesis, and originates from about 200 years before the birth of Christ.
I was talking about PBerlin 17213 which is a copy of the LXX from the third century CE that leaves spaces where the divine name should appear. There is not agreement among scholars whether this is a fragment of a Jewish or Christian manuscript.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_Berlin_17213
As far as I know this is the only copy of the LXX that deliberately leaves spaces where the divine name should stand. (And here Tov disputes this example, arguing the space is just a break in the text) I think there are examples of blank spaces instead of the Tetragrammaton in Hebrew of the DSS, but not in the LXX.
-
43
Why Is YHWH Used Regularly In OT and NEVER in NT?
by minimus inand if the name jehovah is that important why is it that jesus christ never use that name in a record of scriptures?.
-
-
slimboyfat
You write that “the earliest copies of the LXX used various forms of YHWH” though you nowagree that the earliest example in the Rylands fragment does not.
What I am saying (as the scholars have said, and the photograph shows) is that PRylands 458 does not contain either YHWH or KYRIOS because the manuscript is not extant in that part of the text where the divine name appears.
Jewish fragments of the LXX can be divided into three groups with respect to the divine name:
1) fragments of the LXX that do not preserve parts of the text with the divine name.
2) fragments of the LXX that do preserve examples of the divine name in various forms.
3) fragments of the LXX that preserve KYRIOS in place of the divine name.
There are many fragments that fall into category 1) and PRylands 458 is one of those. There are around 7 fragments that fall into category 2) including the famous Fouad 266, the Minor Prophets scroll(s) and others. There are no fragments that fall into category 3) because there are no Jewish copies of the LXX that substitute KYRIOS for the divine name.
I don't know what more to say about your claim that Christian copies of the LXX don't exist. It's not how scholars present the data, including Jewish scholars such as Emanuel Tov and Robert Kraft. For example Robert Kraft's whole website is based on the notion of comparing Jewish and Christian scribal practices in their copies of the LXX. If you were correct that there are no Christian copies of the LXX then his whole project would not make sense. Or the many textbooks that discuss Christian copies of the LXX.
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rak//earlylxx/jewishpap.html#jewishmss
It is true that Jews translated and circulated the LXX. But the text as it comes down to us was preserved through Christian scribes. The modern text of the LXX and translations of it are based on the Christian copies of the fourth century and later. There are no complete Jewish copies of the LXX extant. There are only fragments, such as PRylands 458 and others we have been discussing.
-
43
Why Is YHWH Used Regularly In OT and NEVER in NT?
by minimus inand if the name jehovah is that important why is it that jesus christ never use that name in a record of scriptures?.
-
-
slimboyfat
There are no Christian copies of the Septuagint.
What is codex Sainiticus then, and the many many other Christian copies of the LXX? This is so demonstrably false, maybe you mistyped or meant to say something else?
Christians did not produce the LXX, and the earliest copies predate the first century CE.
This is what I am saying. And none of those pre-Christian copies use KYRIOS. All of them use forms of the divine name.
Papyrus Rylands 458 contains only verses from Deuteronomy, and contrary to your claim, it covers verses in which the Divine Name is supposed to occur, namely...
Deuteronomy 28:17-19 and 27:15 and 28:2.I did not say the verses did not contain the divine name. I said there are lacunae in the manuscript where the divine name or a substitute would appear. You can see this in the picture posted above, or read it in comments from scholars such as Howard, Pietersma, Tov and others.
Your claims that this is a product of the Christian era and covers no verse where the Divine Name should appear are quite incorrect.
I have nowhere said PRylands 458 is Christian. It is from the second century BCE so it cannot be Christian.
Please post any reference anywhere that says PRylands 458 has dots or spaces in place of the divine name.