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.
Ah, I spoke too soon...
Cofty, ask yourself, why should I have to confine the issue in a way that suits your particlar materialistic conception of reality? For many people it's an issue that has historical and religious dimensions that are not easily or appropriately disentangled. Really, what is with you, that not only do you feel the need to dictate which topics are trivial, but also the manner and terms in which other people should carry on their so-called trivial conversations?
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.
In my opening post I respectfully allowed for the possibility that atheists would find the discussion trivial or uninteresting.
For atheists and others who do not regard the Bible as inspired, the question whether Jehovah's Witnesses are right about the original New Testament employing the divine name may be regarded as little more than historical curiosity.
Nevertheless, in a dozen or more posts, Cofty felt compelled to emphasise that the issue was really really trivial, to the point that now he is bored with explaining just how trivial it is. Well, with that (needlessly) clarified, maybe any of us left, who find the issue interesting and important, may be allowed to confine...
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.
The fact that you apparently believe an academic approach to historical religious questions is incompatible with a religious sensibility to the import of the issues involved only tells me about the poverty of your own intellectual horizon, it doesn't prove any inherent incompatibity between faith and scholarship itself, as you imagine.
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.
Do you really not know the difference between allowing something and being "unable to prevent" it? Or are you just pretending not to know the difference?
Is there any way of talking about the possibility of a concerned God which would not sound like Benny Hinn to you?
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.
You don't deny the facts so instead resort to name calling, as usual. Shame.
Please for one moment consider that, while it may seem perfectly obvious to you that you are correct, and have resolved the outstanding issues of reality, its scope and dimensions, there is a possibility, an oh so remote possibility, you may be wrong, as you have been before.
I am increasingly with Krauthammer on the atheist thing. Atheism seems the most implausible of all the theologies. Anyone who can, with a straight face, insist that all that exists came from nothing and no further explanation is appropriate or meaningful, should not lecture other people on "delusion".
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.
Well in Matt 4 Satan studiously avoids using the name whereas Jesus quotes three scriptures with Jehovah's name. (Especially significant in view of the evidence that the LXX in addition to the Hebrew used God's name in Jesus' day) Nowhere in scripture does Satan use Jehovah's name. Satan hates Jehovah's name.
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.
There's certainly scriptural support for the idea.
2 Thess 2:6-11 And now you know what is acting as a restraint, so that he will be revealed in his own due time. True, the mystery of this lawlessness is already at work, but only until the one who is right now acting as a restraint is out of the way... That is why God lets a deluding influence mislead them so that they may come to believe the lie
There's a difference between Jehovah doing something and allowing something to happen. (At least in JW theology there is a distinction between the two) Don't forget Satan hates the name and works against it. JWs already teach that true Christianity was submerged in Christendom for around 1800 years. The suppression of the name is a logical corollary.
Obviously I don't think Jehovah approves of all modern JWs have done just as he didn't approve every king or action of ancient Israel. Or that being a JW is necessary for survival.
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.
Thanks ILoveTTATT2 for your thoughtful responses.
I wonder if you've read my response to Laika on page 9 on the subject of corruption of the text. One response to a corrupt text is to say it can't be inspired. But another possible possible response is to say that God has restored it in his due time. I'm not making a strong argument for this view. What I'm saying is that it's a possible way of looking at the situation for those who maintain both the divine name and the inspiration of the text.
It is not mentioned often enough in the debate, that the earliest NT copies contain nomina sacra KS and so on, not Kyrios in full. Yet most apparently believe Kyrios stood in the original. So in fact, when you think about it, both JWs and their opponents agree that the earliest NT manuscripts don't match the originals when it comes to Kyrios/YHWH/Iao. Where they differ is in whether KS replaced Kyrios or replaced YHWH or Iao. Something definitely happened between the production of the autographs and the earliest extant copies of the NT in relation to scribal treatment of Kyrios and other nomina sacra. The question is what happened and why. I think explantion that the divine name was removed (as it was from the LXX) is the best explanation.
And you are certainly correct about some of the J Bibles equating Jesus and Jehovah. They were produced by Trinitarians so it should be no surprise. That opens a can of worms for the WT because of how they present the issue. It doesn't affect the likelihood of the divine name in the NT. I'm certainly not here to defend every dubious statement the WT has ever made on this subject (including the use of J references).
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.
i am pimo but attended the r.c yesterday for family pressure reasons.
a "sister" i've not seen for a while told me her husband is overjoyed because a man he called on recently in the field service suddenly told him he wanted to attend the r.c.
the unusual thing is, this man is a millionaire having built a property portfolio.
He and the WT share an interest in property.
