Posts by slimboyfat

43

New Announcement At The 2017 - DF'd People To Sit At The Back Of The Hall

by pale.emperor in

has anyone else heard this?

a poster on another thread said it's a new rule brought in at this years convention.. last year they were told to shun even non df people and now this?

a religion cant force someone where to plonk their ass surely?.

slimboyfat

Note this video from around 6.50:

https://tv.jw.org/#en/mediaitems/pub-jwbcov_201605_3_VIDEO

This video was played again at the KH two weeks ago, so may explain recent discussion of the topic.

332

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

by slimboyfat in

jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.

but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .

i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.

lemonjuice the evidence strongly indicates that the LXX in the first century contained various forms of the divine name. Yet by the third century (and subsequently) all Christian copies that survive use substitutes.

So the divine name did totally disappear from the LXX over a relatively short period of time. The question is not whether such a transition from use of the name to a substitute is possible. It happened. The question is whether the same happened with the NT text, which was transmitted by the same people who replaced the divine name with substitutes in the LXX in the same period

jwfacfs I found it interesting when you said you wouldn't like me on a jury. Then you later complained that I had relied on "argument from authority". Since you invoke legal context I'd like to point out that in a courtroom they have place for "argument from authority". They call it expert witness testimony. And I think it's perfectly legitimate to point out that a number of scholars support JWs on the divine name in the NT, in addition to describing the sorts of evidence they adduce in favour of the proposition. And can I ask: what do think stood in the original NT autographs in place of the divine name?

332

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

by slimboyfat in

jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.

but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .

i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.

slimboyfat

Laika you are quite correct, and this is an issue I have given some consideration. As far as I am aware the WT has never directly addressed the tension between the competing claims of accuracy and corruption in the NT text that you mention (and I have looked for it). I can only say my own thoughts along these lines.

I find it interesting that a major supporter of the Tetragram in the original NT, David Trobisch, has a very liberal view of the textual history of the NT. He argues that the current NT is the result of heavy revision in the second century, including the suggestion that whole sections, or even entire books, of the NT were added at a late stage by editors to provide unity to the collection. Interestingly, while he believes the divine name stood in the original NT documents, he argues that the second century edition of the NT is what scholarly translation should aspire to reproduce. Thus he suggests introducing a form of notation in English to imitate the nomina sacra rather than restoring the divine name to the text. A very interesting set of propositions when you think about it. His book is fascinating and deserves to be read in full. His argument for the divine name in the NT is only a small part of much broader argument for the production of the NT as a unified collection in the second century. But in order to accept his argument, as you point out, you need to accept that the text of the NT was altered in significant ways during the first century of its transmission. Personally I find his argument persuasive on historical, empirical and logical grounds. But it does pose problems for those who take a conservative position on the faithful transmission of the NT text.

From a faith point of view, I can only say that I don't think it's impossible to hold a liberal view of the text, while also regarding it as inspired, and that God's name is very important. How can all those hang together? Well the fact is that the Bible has been corrupted in significant ways at various times. Those who argue that the Alexandrian text is close to the original need to admit that the Byzantine text, which dominated the Christian textual tradition in many places for many centuries, was regarded as the word of God even though it involved significant corruption.

This is a fact of history you need to contend with as a believer whether you are liberal, conservative or in between. Why did God allow an inferior form of the text to dominate for so long, before allowing the purer original to surface and reassert itself in the last two centuries?

You could pose similar questions with regard to the divine name. And if you are a believer it is not difficult to discern Jehovah's hand in the surfacing of crucial evidence for the divine name in the last days and it's restoration to the NT text. To be clear this is not an argument I have heard JWs make, but I find it easy to imagine it's the sort of argument a believer could make in these circumstances. And with some force since the discovery of key evidence and the unfolding of God's name in the last days does appear providential.

332

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

by slimboyfat in

jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.

but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .

i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.

slimboyfat

never a jw, all your post tells me is that you've never read anything much about the topic. You could start here:

https://www.amazon.com/First-Bible-Church-Septuagint-Testament/dp/0567273202/

And then read Trobisch in favour of the divine name in the NT which includes discussion of the importance of the LXX for early Christians.

https://www.amazon.com/First-New-Testament-David-Trobisch/dp/0199897972/

It is no doubt true that a majority of NT scholars reject the divine name in the NT but the number of scholars who have actually discussed the topic in any detail is very limited. Have you got a list? To have a range of scholars such as Howard, Trobisch, Gaston and Shaw arguing in that direction is significant.

332

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

by slimboyfat in

jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.

but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .

i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.

slimboyfat

The evidence of the Tetragrammaton being used in the Septuagint is unconvincing. What I mean by that is that it does not appear that this was the norm in the first century. It seems likely that a few wealthy individuals who had a fixation for the divine name may have paid to have specialty copies containing the Tetragrammaton in Hebrew letters.

Where is your evidence for these assertions?

To be clear, the divine name occurs in every single pre-Christian copy of the LXX containing passages with the divine name. Not a single copy from this period has yet been discovered which replaces the divine name with Lord. That is the weight of evidence you are arguing against when making such bald assertions.

So it is interesting that you dismiss all the early textual LXX evidence as irrelevant in favour of a novel theory (did you come up with this? I don't remember reading it anywhere in the scholarly literature) about "a few"(!) wealthy Jews with a "fixation" sponsoring texts using the divine name. What incredible nonsense. Where do you get these ideas? Please cite your sources.

Do you know better than leading LXX scholars such as Kahle, Tov and Skehan who have argued (unsurprisingly in view of the overwhelming evidence) that the early LXX used forms of the divine name rather Lord? And if only JW style "superstition" could lead one to support the divine name in NT, apart from George Howard, how do you account for the work of Trobisch and Gaston who also support the divine name in the original NT?

You argue like someone who has read the rhetoric of evangelical polemics such as Lundquisf or Doug Harris, but not read any of the scholarly discussion of the issue.

jwfacts can you please tell me how you think the divine name was represented in the original NT writings?

332

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

by slimboyfat in

jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.

but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .

i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.

slimboyfat

no evidence of the divine name being in the New Testament.

Oh for crying out loud. Just because you don't accept the evidence doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There is plenty of evidence including how the LXX of the same period treated the divine name, statements in the NT about the divine name, the actual physical presence of the divine name in Revelation 19, allusion to it in Revelation 14, variants involving Kyrios, Jewish references to gospels with the divine name, plus a number of scholars who support the divine name in the NT. Apart from all that evidence, and much more, you're completely right, there's "no evidence".

332

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

by slimboyfat in

jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.

but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .

i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.

slimboyfat

Well I'm convinced! Get me back to the Kingdom Hall...

I've long suspected that you're a bit too easily easily convinced or swayed in general, but nevertheless welcome to the fold! I won't look a gifthorse in the mouth.

332

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

by slimboyfat in

jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.

but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .

i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.

slimboyfat

jwfacts George Howard stood by his argument presented in 1977 as is demonstrated by his article on the divine name in Anchor Bible dictionary in 1992. Plus you've not mentioned Trobisch who argues for the divine name in the NT in more definite terms, or Gaston who agrees with Howard, or Shaw who argues for the persistence of the divine name.

It should be "obvious" that a scholar who argues for a position agrees with the position he is arguing for. The only weird thing is that it even seems necessary to point it out.

332

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

by slimboyfat in

jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.

but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .

i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.

slimboyfat

Cofty there is no meaningful distinction between "moniker" and reputation or name. The two are bound together in the NT and Jewish writings of the period. When anyone talked about the name of God they naturally thought of the distinctive Jewish name for the almighty. Even the Jews who avoided using the name did so precisely out of reverence, not because it had been forgotten or superseded, or lost in a general haze of reputational "naminess", as Reachout style pseudoscholarship would have us believe.

When Jesus is said to have made God's name known it indicated both that Jesus magnified God and his reputation, and pointed to the distinct Jewish name for God. The two are inseparable and complementary.

Otherwise what's the alternative? That Jesus, a first century Jew, intended to make God's name known precisely by neglecting the distinctive Jewish name for God? It doesn't even make sense outside Reachout and evangelical type rhetoric.

And the imagery of Revelation 14:1 clearly demonstrates that when NT authors talk about God's name they have the Tetragrammaton in mind,

332

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

by slimboyfat in

jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.

but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .

i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.

slimboyfat

jwfawcts much has been made of the fact George Howard presented his idea as a "theory". It's true he wasn't dogmatic, he didn't need to be. He wasn't a JW and his faith didn't depend on it. But did he believe he was correct about the divine name in the NT? Well obviously he did or else why make the argument and assemble all the evidence to make his case? Plus his later work continued the theme as he attempted to demonstrate that an early form of the book of Matthew in Hebrew used the divine name.

Additinally David Trobisch and Lloyd Gaston are more definite about the NT containing the divine name than George Howard was. Plus the work of Frank Shaw is suggestive as regards the divine name in early Christianity.

There is a lot of evidence for the divine name in the NT, including scribal practice in the period, statements about the divine name in the NT, continued Jewish use of IAW and other forms, the nomina sacra in early Christian manuscripts, the high number of variants involving Kyrios, Jewish statements about the divine name in gospels, removal of the divine name from the later LXX and so on.

You should acknowledge that there is a lot of evidence for the divine name in the NT, even if you personally don't find the evidence compelling. The unthinking mantra "there is no evidence" is false and empty evangelical apologetic rhetoric.