Jeremiah 16:21

[dadof10]

Hi dadof10

I will answer your last question here , after you answer my last question in my post.

Thanks

I'm not being difficult. I simply want clarification.

 

[dadof10]

This is the heart of the matter. Do you know Greek and Hebrew? Can you translate into English? Do you have access to the MS? If the answer to these (and many more) questions is "no" then you have to take the word of people who can say "yes" to these questions. Even if you use the Oxford Greek to English dictionary or any "secular" dictionary or lexicon, you are taking the TRANSLATORS word for the content because the content was translated by people. The "dictionary" you use didn't fall from the sky.

Do you agree or disagree with the above statement? I'll wait for your answer.

I know enough Greek to work my way through a dictionary. Yes. Go ahead and test me if you'd like. Give me a greek phrase, and I'll bet I can give you an accurate translation.

I'm sure you can, USING SOMEONE ELSE'S WORK. Someone whom you trust, namely the people from Oxford Press who TRANSLATED the words from Greek to English.

You're right, dictionaries are the product of fallible people to, and may not necessarily give a "perfect" definition. However, I've yet to see a dictionary fail to portray the general concept of a word. When in doubt... there are always other dictionaries, and plenty of commentary discussing specific wording that can be researched, weighed, and prayed over.

Commentary???? What about all the BIAS??? "Other dictionaries"? Is this an example of the logical fallacy "argumentum ad populum"?

Do you weigh the CREDENTIALS OF THE PEOPLE WHO WRITE THE COMMENTARIES AND OTHER DICTIONARIES? It would be prudent to do so. So, do their credentials matter? Does it help you make your decision as to the right definition? Hummm....

 

[jasoncran]

dad of 10 be advised that the jw do hate the rcc, i was one of the jw and most of the progranda is agianst the rcc.

 

[dadof10]

dad of 10 be advised that the jw do hate the rcc, i was one of the jw and most of the progranda is agianst the rcc.

I know. I've read the Watchtower and have a few JW friends. :ohwell

 

[jasoncran]

dad of 10 be advised that the jw do hate the rcc, i was one of the jw and most of the progranda is agianst the rcc.

I know. I've read the Watchtower and have a few JW friends. :ohwell

:crazy i can hardly read those things and the awake! as well.

 

[dadof10]

So what man do you follow dadof10 , and which man confirms that this man speaks the truth to you ?

I follow Jesus Christ. He founded a Church and promised to Guide Her to "all truth". He said the "gates of Hell" would not prevail against Her and that His Spirit would be with Her "until the end of the age". Jesus Himself "confirms" what His Church teaches.

 

[dadof10]

:crazy i can hardly read those things and the awake! as well.

I used to read them, make notes, and invite the JW's back. It was pretty fun.

 

[jasoncran]

i have no need for that, as i know their doctrine pretty well, but i am unable to defend the greek and the aramiac as well as some here.

for me reading the watchtower and awake is like looking at the old way and confusion and i want to avoid that.

 

[dadof10]

i have no need for that, as i know their doctrine pretty well, but i am unable to defend the greek and the aramiac as well as some here.

for me reading the watchtower and awake is like looking at the old way and confusion and i want to avoid that.

I have to do tons of research every time I debate Greek words and phrases. It takes me a lot of time and I really don't like doing it. It's tedious.

Those magazines are confusing...And filled with errors.

 

[jasoncran]

i know, the holy spirit shows me them when i do read them(watchtower and awake). i just cant quote them but i know them when the spirit tells me that they are in err.

 

[francisdesales]

dad of 10 be advised that the jw do hate the rcc, i was one of the jw and most of the progranda is agianst the rcc.

Which is evidence that they are not following the dictates of Christ. We know we are in the presence of a child of God when we see one who loves their "enemy". Even pagans love their "own". So when I hear "so and so" hates Catholics, I am saddened by the blindness of such attitudes that keep one from Christ.

Regards

 

[jasoncran]

dad of 10 be advised that the jw do hate the rcc, i was one of the jw and most of the progranda is agianst the rcc.

Which is evidence that they are not following the dictates of Christ. We know we are in the presence of a child of God when we see one who loves their "enemy". Even pagans love their "own". So when I hear "so and so" hates Catholics, I am saddened by the blindness of such attitudes that keep one from Christ.

Regards

let me clarify something they see the rcc and all who are in christendom as the equivently of the lost and in that zeal they mean well to pull the "lost" out of the lies that we teach, they dont hate the persons per se but the doctrines yes!

 

[francisdesales]

Which is evidence that they are not following the dictates of Christ. We know we are in the presence of a child of God when we see one who loves their "enemy". Even pagans love their "own". So when I hear "so and so" hates Catholics, I am saddened by the blindness of such attitudes that keep one from Christ.

Regards

let me clarify something they see the rcc and all who are in christendom as the equivently of the lost and in that zeal they mean well to pull the "lost" out of the lies that we teach, they dont hate the persons per se but the doctrines yes!

OK, thanks for the explanation.

 

[Mysteryman]

So what man do you follow dadof10 , and which man confirms that this man speaks the truth to you ?

I follow Jesus Christ. He founded a Church and promised to Guide Her to "all truth". He said the "gates of Hell" would not prevail against Her and that His Spirit would be with Her "until the end of the age". Jesus Himself "confirms" what His Church teaches.

Hi dadof10

Okay, thanks for your reply. But that still leaves a question unaswered. How do you follow Jesus Christ ? I understand rcc beliefs fairly well. So I would appreciate an answer of how do you follow Jesus Christ ?

Jesus promised us the comforter, and that the comforter would come in his name, and teach us all things and remind us of the things that he spoke. This comforter is called a couple of things. One, is Christ in us. The other is called, the Spirit of his Son in our hearts. Another is called, the Spirit of truth. This is where truth comes from. Men of God speak the truth, but it is confirmed by the Spirit of truth that is within us. The reason God sent Apostles, Prophets, Evangilists, and Teachers and Pastors, is so that the body of Christ would not be blown about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and their cunning craftyness , whereby they lie in wait to deceive. Without the Spirit of truth, how else can one tell if someone is speaking the truth ?

 

[Mohrb]

Is it your claim, that EVERY scholar that rejects the NWT is biased?

Do you realize what you are implying? That it is ILLOGICAL to use the work of experts in the field that you are arguing. Does this sound right to you?

That's an exaggeration. But, as I said, this tangent is going on for too long in this thread. I'd be glad to discuss it with you more in another thread, but I'm not responding to the "fallacy" tangent in this thread any more.

"That doesn't mean we should approve of praying to saints and forgiveness of sin can be purchased via material gifts to the catholic church."

The Catholic Church doesn't teach this. Another cheap-shot.

Do the research. "Patron saints" are prayed to quite often in some areas. Ever hear a catholic saying a "Hail Mary?" True, the normal use of such prayers is to pray for the saints to pray for you. Interesting experiment... go to google and type in "Prayer to saint" ... don't hit enter... see what pops up on the auto-complete menu. You'll have a list of prayers to various saints. For example, if you click on the "prayer to saint christopher" you'll get a number of sites quoting the most common pre-written prayer including the phrase "St. Christopher, holy patron of travellers, protect me and lead me safely to my destiny." You can look around for many common prayers to various humans (historically real or not) being treated as demigods. Of course, a catholic will rebutt that it's not the intent... that saints are used for intercessory prayers... yet many (such as the one referenced above) beseech the saints themselves for protection and guidance.

As for paying for forgiveness.... research the phrase "Indulgence."

Them's the facts.

You do not speak Greek or Hebrew, correct? You do not have access to the manuscripts, correct?
You are "examining the differences and carefully weighing the evidence" with SOMEONE ELSE'S WORK. You HAVE to trust your SOURCES, correct?

No one has access to the -original- script of each book written... we only have access to ancient copies. And yes, I have access (as does anyone with the internet) to copies of these manuscripts. The "training wheels" version is easily accessible here:

http://www.scripture4all.org

Interlinears like these will accurately show the wording in greek (some interlinears even show the greek word in roman characters to make it even easier for a novice to translate). These interlinears will have their translator's chosen "best word" for each greek/hebrew word above or below the original word itself, and then in a separate column, it'll have the verse interpreted into english sentence structure. Yes, it takes trust to assume that the greek words are trustworthy. However, beyond that is entirely verifiable and falsifiable. One is free to see the word "pneuma"... and even though the interlinear may say either "breath" or "wind" or "spirit" depending on the context... using a lexicon or greek>english dictionary will allow you to understand the entire context of the individual word. Thus, when "pneuma" is translated as "ghost" in the interpretation column, you have the right to question this interpretation knowing that there are multiple possibilities for the translation of the word "pneuma"... and that "ghost" isn't necessarily the ONLY possibility even if SOME experts chose this.

If the Oxford Greek Dictionary varies from Strong's, which one do you choose and how do you make this decision? Do you look at their CREDENTIALS? Maybe to actually take an expert's credentials into account is another logical fallacy.

If two disagree with each other, I compare how they disagree. Does one simply "include a possible translation" that the other doesn't include? In which case, good. If one has a contrary definition to the other... I can't think of a single example of this happening. However, if it did... I would do more research from other sources, look into the etymology of the word, understand it's history, consider the context, and pray about it.

Words aren't that difficult to understand.

[quote:me856e2l]When Jesus himself calls his Father "you, the only true God" (John 17:3)... I take it on Jesus' authority that he's right. (Both verses should read the same in any translation of the bible you can find).

And when Thomas calls Jesus "My Lord and My God" and Jesus says "Blessed are you because you have seen and BELIEVE..." I take Him at His word. [/quote:me856e2l]
If you believe a human to be a more reliable source than Jesus himself... how do you call Jesus "God?"

Again... have you read the source you insisted was "The reliable source?" What does your Thayer's Lexicon say about the verse?

You can't ignore one verse in favor of another. They are both correct. It's up to us to figure out the meaning. Lucky we have an infallible teaching authority to help, huh?

Indeed. So, may we compare the two verses? If we stipulate that one is not "wrong" and they do not contradict each other, how is it that both are true at once?

My explanation (as well as Thayer's if you read his notes) is that Jesus stated that the Father is "The -only True God" ... indicating that his father -alone- is almighty. While, Thomas did say "My god" he did not necessarily mean that Jesus was the almighty, but a divine, heavenly being. Similar to how John 1:1 states that the word was WITH "Ton theon" (specifically another being due to the accusative usage of the term, further specifically "almighty God" rather than simply another heavenly being who could be called "theos")... and the word WAS "theos" (as an anarthrous nominative predicate... i.e. qualitatively "godlike" or a divine, heavenly being... without actually being "God" himself).

Thomas, being a good jew, likely understood the significance of Isaiah 9:6, and referred to Jesus as "El Gibbor" ("Mighty god" yes. But not "El Shiddai" meaning "almighty God") (Which may also be the best way to interpret John 1:1).

This allows Jesus to be El Gibbor, yet still allow Jesus to truthfully call his Father the ONLY El Shiddai (the only True, almighty God).

That's my understanding... and Thayer's understanding (the expert you pointed out)... and the understanding of many monotheist experts. How do you interpret the two verses to both be true? How can Jesus call his father the ONLY true God... yet Jesus also be God?

The two verses could be in harmony with trinitarianism if Jesus had said "this means eternal life, their taking in knowledge of you, the true God, and Jesus Christ, also the true God." ... but he didn't. He specified that the Father was the -only- true God, and that Jesus Christ immediately contrasted himself as simply the "one sent forth."

 

[Mohrb]

dad of 10 be advised that the jw do hate the rcc, i was one of the jw and most of the progranda is agianst the rcc.

I wouldn't call it a "hate" of the church... but Catholicism is simply the church that makes the wildest claims, while claiming to directly speak for God. The concept that the pope's word could overrule the bible... sorry, but yea... it rubs me the wrong way. Yes, WBTS is made of imperfect humans too, who have made their share of mistakes... but for every mistake one could point out in the WBTS, the catholic church has made the same mistake 100 fold.

... example: people freak out about how a former president of the WBTS (Russell) has a tombstone ripe with freemason symbolism. ... Yet it was the RCC that directly formed the Knights Templar, which branched into freemasonry.

Some people point to propaganda web sites which claim that there have been 23,000 allegations in the 100 year+ history of JWs of child abuse against JWs, claiming that JWs are some safe haven for abusers. Yet, there are currently 7.3 million+ current active JW ministers. This would mean 1 allegation for every 317 JW ministers.

Meanwhile, in the same period of time, between a current population of about 400,000 catholic priests, there have been 109,694 priests in the last 50 years reported by dioceses. This number also tabulated by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) reports a total of 94,607 priests in the last 40 years... that'd be about 1 in 4 catholic priests... and this doesn't take into account the possibility of single priests having multiple allegations.

... now, of course, I'm sure not all of these are valid. I'm just saying... catholicism isn't the most innocent denomination out there. But... mud slinging contests never accomplish anything useful. ... but if you want to reduce the conversation to a comparison of who's made the most mistakes, I'm sure I can keep up.

... I'd prefer to get back to discussing doctrine and logic though, if you don't mind. (if it makes you feel better, some of the more extreme Pentacostal churches kinda freak me out as well.)

 

[Mohrb]

I have to do tons of research every time I debate Greek words and phrases. It takes me a lot of time and I really don't like doing it. It's tedious.

... but that's the funnest part!

Those magazines are confusing...And filled with errors.

And you have lousy posture and horrible penmanship! See how useful unsubstantiated insults are?

Which is evidence that they are not following the dictates of Christ. We know we are in the presence of a child of God when we see one who loves their "enemy". Even pagans love their "own". So when I hear "so and so" hates Catholics, I am saddened by the blindness of such attitudes that keep one from Christ.

No one ever said JWs hate catholic -people-. As individuals, catholics are loved just like everyone else. It's the misguidance we don't think highly of. ... don't get me wrong, the catholic church as an organization HAS done plenty of good things as well. But doctrinally and historically it definitely has it's share of nasty bits.

let me clarify something they see the rcc and all who are in christendom as the equivently of the lost and in that zeal they mean well to pull the "lost" out of the lies that we teach, they dont hate the persons per se but the doctrines yes!

Exactly.

 

[francisdesales]

I wouldn't call it a "hate" of the church...

Jason has already explained the "love the people, dislike the organization".

but Catholicism is simply the church that makes the wildest claims

Yes, it is a "wild claim" that Jesus instituted an organization that we now call the Catholic Church. It is also a "wild claim" that a man rose from the dead...

it appears that the two claims have some correlation. People who become Catholic believe the "wild claims" by rational thought. There is plentiful evidence for both.

The concept that the pope's word could overrule the bible... sorry, but yea... it rubs me the wrong way.

It would me, too, if it were true...

I've never heard of that concept in Catholicism. Maybe you are unaware of Vatican 2 and the limits that Church places on the Pope's "word"?

Yes, WBTS is made of imperfect humans too, who have made their share of mistakes... but for every mistake one could point out in the WBTS, the catholic church has made the same mistake 100 fold.

Because it has been around 20 times longer and is over 100 times larger... remember, religious organizations are made up of men and women who are in dire need of forgiveness from God for sins committed.

.. example: people freak out about how a former president of the WBTS (Russell) has a tombstone ripe with freemason symbolism. ... Yet it was the RCC that directly formed the Knights Templar, which branched into freemasonry.

???

I think you need to consider you are wrong on the connection between Freemasons and the Knights Templar, formed as a military order that performed works of charity in protecting pilgrims and provided combat expertise during the Crusades. The Masons began in the 18th century, not withstanding their silly unsupported myths. One has to go to speculative myths to come up with a connection between the Knights and the Freemasons. Some of them include origins with Moses... :gah

The Catholic Church has written encylicals that specifically state that Freemasonry and Catholicism are not compatible, esp. in the Mason's vague idea of God. Thus, it is quite a stretch to claim that a strongly Catholic society, the Knights (who were not only a military order) had any connection to the incredibly watered down version of "God" in the Mason movement. Masons were much more influenced by Deism and the Age of Enlightenment.

Some people point to propaganda web sites which claim that there have been 23,000 allegations in the 100 year+ history of JWs of child abuse against JWs, claiming that JWs are some safe haven for abusers. Yet, there are currently 7.3 million+ current active JW ministers. This would mean 1 allegation for every 317 JW ministers.

I am well aware of "propaganda". This is not an example of it.

One allegation per 317 ministers is well within the average of alleged abuses among ministers in various "Christian" denominations. I have seen reports of some Protestant ministrial abuse as high as 10% (although that seems high to me) and have seen Catholic priests ranging near 1-2%, while the general public is well within these numbers, even higher, as in some school teachers and scout masters. Considering that JW's are part of the population, I would not be too offended by these numbers, they may even be low...

.. now, of course, I'm sure not all of these are valid. I'm just saying... catholicism isn't the most innocent denomination out there. But... mud slinging contests never accomplish anything useful. ... but if you want to reduce the conversation to a comparison of who's made the most mistakes, I'm sure I can keep up.

Agreed, nor have I started one, so I am not sure why you are addressing it. I am fully aware that humans are unreliable and fail to live up to the standards of the religion they proclaim to be part of, to begin with myself.

... I'd prefer to get back to discussing doctrine and logic though, if you don't mind. (if it makes you feel better, some of the more extreme Pentacostal churches kinda freak me out as well.)

Yes, well, thanks for the joy-ride... ;)

 

[dadof10]

Okay, thanks for your reply. But that still leaves a question unaswered. How do you follow Jesus Christ ? I understand rcc beliefs fairly well. So I would appreciate an answer of how do you follow Jesus Christ ?

Jesus promised us the comforter, and that the comforter would come in his name, and teach us all things and remind us of the things that he spoke. This comforter is called a couple of things. One, is Christ in us. The other is called, the Spirit of his Son in our hearts. Another is called, the Spirit of truth. This is where truth comes from. Men of God speak the truth, but it is confirmed by the Spirit of truth that is within us. The reason God sent Apostles, Prophets, Evangilists, and Teachers and Pastors, is so that the body of Christ would not be blown about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and their cunning craftyness , whereby they lie in wait to deceive. Without the Spirit of truth, how else can one tell if someone is speaking the truth ?

Hi MM,

We are talking by each other, so I think it might be helpful to give you some quick instruction on the Catholic view of the role the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit speaks through the teaching authority of the Catholic Church (Magisterium) for PUBLIC revelation, that is, Teaching that is binding on the faithful. Doctrine. If I want to know if salvation comes through faith alone, the Church has the answer and the REASON WHY. Please note, we do not just follow blindly. We are encouraged to ask questions, which are ALL answered.

The Holy Spirit speaks to people privately, but this is not binding on anyone but the recipient. If I pray for guidance on a particular issue, I am confident that the Holy Spirit will give me an answer. I may not like it, but He will answer me, none the less. This, however, is only for me personally.

The Church teaches that, if we receive any private revelation, it must be tested against revealed Truth. If we "receive from the spirit" that, for example, salvation is by faith alone, we must "test the Spirit" (as scripture says to do) by the proper authority, the Church Christ founded, since this is a doctrinal issue.

This is the way the Spirit works. If He is, indeed, the Spirit of Truth, He cannot teach error. If the "Spirit" tells you that we are saved by "faith alone", and another believer that we are not, how are we to decide which "Spirit" is right?

 

[jasoncran]

i am well aware of the what the jw thinks of charmastism.

i was mainly adress the comments of dadof10 to you about the rcc. and i clarified that.

the programming by the jw is rather hard to forget, the more you bring it up the more i recall. this time i aint a buying it as i have been set free.

interesting thing on the freemasonry as i wanted to ask you about that. francis.