Posts by Disillusioned JW

263

What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?

by Vanderhoven7 in

it seems to me scripturally speaking, that jehovah's witnesses are emphasizing the wrong name.. it should be jesus, not jehovah.

who is the way, the truth and the life?

(john 14:6).

Disillusioned JW

Vanderhoven7, I added more content to my prior post before I refreshed the web page and saw your most recent post (about 8 minutes before I made the un-revised version of this post) in this topic thread. Please read my revised post. I agrees with some of what you said in your post.

I am aware that Hebrews 1:10-12 quotes Psalms 102:25-27; I note (written by me) in one of my 1984 NWT Bibles saying such.

Thankfully as a result of me now being an atheist I no longer believe I have to believe in some kind of supernatural god. I am now free to disbelieve in all god concepts, without any fear of possibly being wrong. I thus don't have to believe in polytheism, henotheism, trinity, binity, pure monotheism, angels, demons, or even deism. All of those god (and god-like) concepts (other than deism) are strange to me, and as a result of my research (which led me to atheism) all of them (except perhaps deism) are proven false to well beyond a reasonable doubt. I also think there is a good scientifically based case against deism, but that case is not as strong as the case against the other mentioned god (and god-like) concepts.

As to the concept of pantheism, that god concept is unclear, for what does it mean for one to say that the universe (or multiverse, if such exists) is god/God? Is the universe, as a whole, in some sense conscious? If not, how it can it be thought of god/God - even though it created us and even though we are a part of it?

263

What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?

by Vanderhoven7 in

it seems to me scripturally speaking, that jehovah's witnesses are emphasizing the wrong name.. it should be jesus, not jehovah.

who is the way, the truth and the life?

(john 14:6).

Disillusioned JW

Vanderhoven7 I wasn't aware of Zechariah 3:2 (1977 NASB) saying 'And the LORD [Jehovah] said to Satan, "The LORD [Jehovah] rebuke you Satan! ....".' The 1984 NWT in that verse says 'Then [the angel of] Jehovah said to Satan: "Jehovah rebuke you ...".' I can see how you and could see Zechariah 3:2 saying that it speaks of two persons named Jehovah in light of what verse. But until I see more evidence for that view, II think the NWT's use of "[the angel of]" is likely correct in that verse, in light of what verse 1 says. I think another possible way of interpreting the verse could be that Jehovah God the Father is saying that he himself rebuked Satan. In other words I think that a translation expressing the meaning of verse could possibly be accurately worded as follows. 'And Jehovah said to Satan, I Jehovah rebuke you Satan! ...".'

Another thing to keep in mind is that the Greek Septuagint likely says "Iesous" ["Jesus"] in verse one in place of "Joshua" since the name Iesous/Jesus (though not referring to Christ) is the Greek transliteration of the name Joshua. Interestingly the NT says that Jesus Christ is a high priest.

That verse can be understood as an individual (not named Jehovah) acting on behalf of Jehovah, and as result the credit is given to Jehovah. That view is like how human rulers are often said to have taken various actions, when literally it were persons under their authority who literal took the actions, acting in behalf of the rulers.

The words in Hebrews 1:8 which say "Your throne, O God" ["God is your throne" in the 1984 NWT) are a quote of part of Psalms 45:6. I have done research about that I have concluded that the translation of "God is your throne" of part of Psalms 45:6 is a plausible one, referring to a person (the Messiah/Christ) receiving his kingly authority from God the Father. But I can also see the plausibility of the idea of the Messiah being referred to as God.

The passages you mentioned from Psalms in reference to Hebrews chapter 1, as well as what Paul said in Romans (about Jesus is Lord (Jehovah)), and some other verses caused me (during the latter part of the time of me being an independent Christian) to conclude there is some support for the binity doctrine, for part of the NT saying that Jesus is in some sense Jehovah and can thus be called "Jehovah", and that it is OK for a Christian to pray to Jesus and to worship Jesus. As a result, as once or twice I prayed to Jehovah before I became a convinced atheistic naturalist.

263

What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?

by Vanderhoven7 in

it seems to me scripturally speaking, that jehovah's witnesses are emphasizing the wrong name.. it should be jesus, not jehovah.

who is the way, the truth and the life?

(john 14:6).

Disillusioned JW

Riley, are you a trinitarian, or are you saying the Bible has problems? Or is neither the case? I notice you said "The Jehovah said to Jehovah", but no Bible verse says that. Psalms 110: 1 (translated from the Hebrew) says "YHWH (Jehovah) says to my Lord ...". and that corresponding phrase translated from the Greek Septuagint (and from the NT quote of that verse) says "Kryrios (Lord [meaning YHWH/Jehovah]) said to my lord ...". There is nothing in those verses to indicate that both individuals in those verses are named YHWH/Jehovah.

263

What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?

by Vanderhoven7 in

it seems to me scripturally speaking, that jehovah's witnesses are emphasizing the wrong name.. it should be jesus, not jehovah.

who is the way, the truth and the life?

(john 14:6).

Disillusioned JW

Perhaps a bigger factor, than the exclusion of the name YHWH in ancient copies of the NT, in why I started to have doubts about Jehovah's existence when I was a Christian, was the exclusion of the name from nearly all copies of the Septuagint and the widespread exclusion of the name in other translations of the OT, and the loss of knowing the correct pronunciation of the name.

263

What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?

by Vanderhoven7 in

it seems to me scripturally speaking, that jehovah's witnesses are emphasizing the wrong name.. it should be jesus, not jehovah.

who is the way, the truth and the life?

(john 14:6).

Disillusioned JW

Thanks. I had forgotten about that site. About the time I made my post I found https://wtarchive.wordpress.com/ and another site.

263

What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?

by Vanderhoven7 in

it seems to me scripturally speaking, that jehovah's witnesses are emphasizing the wrong name.. it should be jesus, not jehovah.

who is the way, the truth and the life?

(john 14:6).

Disillusioned JW

Vanderhoven7, do you have a digital source for 'Let God Be True', 1952 edition? if so, what is your digital source for it?

263

What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?

by Vanderhoven7 in

it seems to me scripturally speaking, that jehovah's witnesses are emphasizing the wrong name.. it should be jesus, not jehovah.

who is the way, the truth and the life?

(john 14:6).

Disillusioned JW

Jehovah's Witnesses, and like-minded ones, please consider the following.

Hypothetically speaking, if Jesus Christ exists, then the following is true.

Since the governing body of the Jehovah's Witnesses (by their own admission) does not pray to Jesus Christ or in any other way talk to Jesus Christ, then the governing body is shunning Jesus. They do not seek for Jesus Christ to fellowship with them prior their death - despite knowing what the NT teaches. As a result, if they they continue to be that way until their death, then they will never be co-rulers with Jesus in heaven (or on the Earth during the 1,000 years). In support of that consider the following.

Matthew 16:24 claims that Jesus spoke of those who want to come after Jesus (that is, come to Jesus). Is the governing body seeking to come to Jesus? Do they attempt to have a personal relationship with Jesus now? Do they ever talk to Jesus Christ?

John 10:27-28 (1984 NWT) claims Jesus said the following. " 27 My sheep listen to my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. 28 And I give them everlasting life, and they will by no means ever be destroyed, and no one will snatch them out of my hand." Do any of the members of the governing body follow Jesus in that full sense, of having a personal relationship with Jesus? If not, is it unlikely they will obtain everlasting life?

Revelation 3:20-21 (1984 NWT) claims that Jesus (in what is claimed to be a vision to John) said the following. "20 Look! I am standing at the door and knocking. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come into his [house] and take the evening meal with him and he with me. 21 To the one that conquers I will grant to sit down with me on my throne, even as I conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne." Does the governing body figurative open their door to Jesus and fellowship with Jesus? If not, according to Revelation 3:20-21 will they be barred from ruling with Jesus Christ?

263

What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?

by Vanderhoven7 in

it seems to me scripturally speaking, that jehovah's witnesses are emphasizing the wrong name.. it should be jesus, not jehovah.

who is the way, the truth and the life?

(john 14:6).

Disillusioned JW

Vanderhoven7, after you made your most recent post in this topic thread I added one more paragraph to my prior post.

Regarding your question, I don't think God had any role (whether active or passive) in his full name being completely excluded from all ancient manuscripts of the NT. That is because I am now an atheist and a scientific naturalist and thus I believe/think with a high degree of certainty that God does not exist. The fact that his full name is completely excluded from all ancient manuscripts of the NT is one thing which contributed to me (when I was a Christian) to doubt his existence (since the OT claims God emphasized his name of YHWH so incredibly much), and which contributed to me eventually becoming a positive/strong atheist. By "positive/strong atheist" I mean an atheist who is extremely certain that no God or god exists.

I view the OT, the NT, and the Apocrypha as entirely works authored by humans and consisting entirely of human ideas, of which a great many of the ideas are erroneous. [Ever since I stopped believing in the existence of Jehovah God (namely since the year 2010 or so) I stopped believing the OT is God's word and I stopped believing that the NT is God's word. I never believed the Apocrypha is God's word, though while I was an independent Christian I came to view the Apocrypha as providing insight into the emergence of Christian ideas, and of its possible influence upon the writing of parts of the NT.] But in a prior post (within the past few days in this topic thread) I mentioned that I currently think the full name of YHWH was probably originally in the NT. In the post I also say I think humans in the 2nd century CE began writing the word "Kyrios" in substitution of the name "YHWH" in the NT, and I mentioned what I think might have been reasons for doing so.

263

What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?

by Vanderhoven7 in

it seems to me scripturally speaking, that jehovah's witnesses are emphasizing the wrong name.. it should be jesus, not jehovah.

who is the way, the truth and the life?

(john 14:6).

Disillusioned JW

Vanderhoven7's question (to Wonderment) of "Why do you think God made sure His full name did not appear once in the NT ..." is very presumptuous (though perhaps it was not intended to be such). I say that because it incorporates the presumption (or claim) that "God made sure His full name did not appear once in the" ancient manuscripts of the NT despite the fact it has not been proven God did such. [It is false/inaccurate to say it is not in any copy of the NT, since the name is in the NWT copies of the NT and in copies of other translations made after the year 1800, and in many earlier translations of the NT made after the year 1500, as documented by the WT. This observation allows another question to be asked. Namely the following. If God both exists and was opposed to his full name appearing even once in the NT, then why did he avoid preventing his name from appearing in the NT of the NWT, in the Emphatic Diaglott, and in many non-WT translations of the NT into Hebrew and other non-English languages? Some of those translations were made for the purpose of converting people who worshiped a god/God or gods (that is, what the people considered to be such) other than Jesus and Jehovah/YHWH.]

Even if YHWH God exists we do NOT know God made sure His full name did not appear once in any ancient manuscript of the NT. What we do know is that, if hypothetically God exists, then God allowed/permitted His full name to not appear once in the known extant ancient copies of the NT. In other words, even if God exists, God may have been passive instead of active in regards to his His full name not appearing once in the known extant copies of the NT. Even if the full name never appeared in any ancient manuscript (whether a copy or an original) of any book of the the NT, that does not mean God made sure that was the case.

Vanderhoven7, a better question to ask to someone who is convinced that God exists and who is convinced that God's full name was never in any ancient manuscript of the NT, is the following. "Why do you think God allowed (or avoided preventing) his full name to be completely excluded from all ancient manuscripts of the NT?"

Vanderhoven7, I agree that compared to what the NT often says about Jesus (including about the importance of the Jesus Christ in the personal lives of Christians), Jesus is all but marginalized by the religion which is called "Jehovah's Witnesses". That is because the religion teaches that modern-day JW are to avoid worshiping Jesus and are to even avoid praying to Jesus. As a result, even if Jesus exists, faithful Jehovah's Witnesses (even ones who consider themselves part the anointed ones, even the governing body) can NOT have a personal relationship with Jesus (unless the relationship is one-sided, with Jesus contacting a JW, but not a JW also contacting Jesus or communicating to Jesus). In contrast the WT encourages JWs to have a personal relationship with Jehovah God. The WT's JW religion is a more Judaic leaning version of Christianity than the vast majority of the types of modern-day Christianity.

Vanderhoven7, regarding your comment of the name in which people would be baptized, you left out Matthew 28:19. That verse says baptizing is to be done "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit". Note the order of the 'names' and that such might indicate an implied degree of priority.

263

What Name Does the New Testament Emphasize - Jehovah or Jesus?

by Vanderhoven7 in

it seems to me scripturally speaking, that jehovah's witnesses are emphasizing the wrong name.. it should be jesus, not jehovah.

who is the way, the truth and the life?

(john 14:6).

Disillusioned JW

On second thought maybe some first century CE Christians believed that Jesus Christ existed as a divine being in heaven who never became born as a human. Perhaps they also thought he in some sense he could truly be called YHWH, perhaps stemming from a belief that he had literally been begotten from the YHWH God the Father.

Perhaps some first century CE Christians thought Jesus Christ (or a divine being who was someone like a Son of Man) came down from heaven and entered into the body of an existing human (perhaps one named Jesus or one named Yeshua son of Joseph) and later exited the body of that human, and went back to heaven.

There were likely multiple types of Christians in the 1st century CE besides the kinds mentioned in the NT. Archaeologists have found scrolls from prior to the 1st century CE, penned by some messianic minded Jews, which contained some Christian teachings within them. Therefore, some form of Christianity might even have existed in the 1st century BCE.

slimboyfat, I am pleasantly surprised to read that you think that some OT verses (including Hosea 11:1 and in Psalm 110) had an original meaning than what Christians later interpreted them to mean. I also think your idea of that "... it’s not so much that Christians tend to deny the original meaning of a text, but that they add another meaning on top" is interesting. Your ideas about the matter of ruling among enemies is also interesting. Thanks for sharing your thoughts with me.