Results 1 - 16 of 16
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Tara1 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Question for Jehovah's Witness friend | John 14:28 | Tara1 | 124161 | ||
Hello Ray, When there is a choice of alternatives, as when punctuation becomes vital, what the Bible itself says must be permitted to direct. (When the Bible was first written, there was no such thing as punctuation.) I know I’m not telling you anything here, just letting you know I agree with you. And the same principle holds true in beginning names with capital letters; it is up to the translator as to what use he makes of these. Thus, if like you, believe the holy spirit to be the third person of a Trinity will, of course, capitalize “Holy Spirit,” as at Acts 1:8, which reads (NEB): “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you.” But notice Ray, in the actual account when Jesus’ words were fulfilled, what do we read? “This will happen in the last days: I will pour out upon everyone a portion of my spirit.” (Acts 2:17, NEB) Where is the capital letter? It is not there! Why not? Because God could not pour out a portion of a coequal God; “spirit,” as used here, clearly could not refer to a person. Since this text relates to the very thing Jesus foretold at Acts 1:8, it must follow that he did not have a person in mind when he spoke of his apostles as receiving holy spirit, and so in Acts 1:8 it should not have been capitalized either. All of this is in harmony with the words of John the Baptist that, while he baptized with water, the coming One “will baptize you with holy spirit.” (Mark 1:8) One cannot be baptizing with another person but one can baptize others with water or with an active force, which is what God’s holy spirit is. So, as translators we must let the rest of God’s Word direct when there is a choice between renderings. Just thought I would write something on capitalization. Now to answer your question. :-) And you Ray wrote: We on this forum do not make Jesus greater than the Father. We have only said that Jesus humbled Himself and came to earth in the likeness of men, yet being God. Ray, “yet being God”. By capitalizing theos we understand “Almighty God Jehovah”. The Bible teaches that Jesus is indeed theos but only the Father is Almighty theos, thus being the true theos. Without question Jesus is to be loved, and honored (worshipped if you will) as the Son of the Almighty theos. He willingly left his heavenly position in the spirit realm became a mere man and died on behalf of mankind as a redemptive offer that was accepted by the Almighty theos. John 3:16 Just think about it, if the Almighty theos himself came to the earth and was to “prove that he could stay loyal to his Almighty theos”, what do we have? An illogical scenario. You Ray, ask me: In comparing Luke 14:7-24 and Matthew 22:1-22, who is "giving" the wedding feast? In the Kingdom Hall of heaven who will fill that wedding hall? What will be required of the guests? Well, “the master” providing the meal represents Almighty Jehovah theos; “the slave” extending the invitation, Mighty theos Jesus Christ; and the “grand evening meal,” the opportunities to be in line for the Kingdom of the heavens. What will be required of the guests? First, they have to be invited. Those first to receive the invitation to come in line for the Kingdom were, above all others, the Jewish religious leaders of Jesus’ day. However, they rejected the invitation. Thus, beginning particularly at Pentecost 33 C.E., a second invitation was extended to the despised and lowly ones of the Jewish nation. But not enough responded to fill the 144,000 places in God’s heavenly Kingdom. So in 36 C.E., three and a half years later, the third and final invitation was extended to uncircumcised non-Jews, and the gathering of such ones has continued into our day. Tara |
||||||
2 | Five words: see also 1 Cor 14:2 | Rom 8:16 | Tara1 | 114426 | ||
Hi Ray, I have a question for you. You quote Romans 8:16 using a translation that translates outos (itself) as "himself" instead. My King James and the New American Bible, Darby, etc, clearly translate outos as what outos truly should be translated "itself". My question though is; were the King James translators dishonest in transmitting the Word of God? Or were the translators of the translation you used dishonest by using "himself". Fact is, someone was dishonest (perhaps the scribes who merely copied the Greek to Greek) and was trying to promote what wasn't original since we have two opposing lines of thought. Is the Holy Spirit a person and so someone chose to make it appear so by changing outos (itself) to himself? If you are sincerely looking for accuracy then, this is serious study, as this verse originally has absolutely no personification indicators attached. Tara1 |
||||||
3 | out of context? | 1 Cor 5:6 | Tara1 | 114229 | ||
The principle of the illustration tells us "no", it's true in other matters as well. That is the nice thing about "Bible principles". And "yes", the principle very well can apply to movies. That's the point of it all. Just "a little" or just "one scene" can ruin the whole show. :-) |
||||||
4 | Does one bad apple spoil the bunch? | 1 Cor 5:6 | Tara1 | 114042 | ||
Hi Moby Dick, The Bible illustration found at 1 Cor 5:6 that a little leaven or yeast of badness will spoil the whole loaf or congregation is a true one and fits your "worldly saying" just as one bad apple in a basket, if not removed, will spoil all the apples in the basket. This requires that the congregation of God be kept clean from moral and spiritual uncleaness. Following are some more Biblical examples of where bad individuals brought congregational responsibility or accountability threatening punishment upon the entire group when the guilty ones were not removed at once. Leviticus 20:1-5; Numbers 16:19-35; Deuteronomy 21:1-9; Joshua 7:1, 11-26. Tara1 |
||||||
5 | where does the donkey speak? | Num 22:26 | Tara1 | 113571 | ||
Hi, Numbers 22:26-31. |
||||||
6 | language Jesus speak | NT general Archive 1 | Tara1 | 113552 | ||
HI, Good question and one that I have studied in depth in times past. But quess what, there's considerable difference of opinion among scholars. Concerning languages used in Palestine when Jesus Christ was on earth, Professor G. Ernest Wright states: “Various languages were undoubtedly to be heard on the streets of the major cities. Greek and Aramaic were evidently the common tongues, and most of the urban peoples could probably understand both even in such ‘modern’ or ‘western’ cities as Caesarea and Samaria where Greek was the more common. Roman soldiers and officials might be heard conversing in Latin, while orthodox Jews may well have spoken a late variety of Hebrew with one another, a language that we know to have been neither classical Hebrew nor Aramaic, despite its similarities to both.” Commenting further, on the language spoken by Jesus Christ, Professor Wright says: “The language spoken by Jesus has been much debated. We have no certain way of knowing whether he could speak Greek or Latin, but in his teaching ministry he regularly used either Aramaic or the highly Aramaized popular Hebrew. When Paul addressed the mob in the Temple, it is said that he spoke Hebrew (Acts 21:40). Scholars generally have taken this to mean Aramaic, but it is quite possible that a popular Hebrew was then the common tongue among the Jews.”—Biblical Archaeology, 1963, p. 243. It is possible that Jesus and his early disciples, such as the apostle Peter, at least at times spoke Galilean Aramaic, Peter being told on the night Christ was taken into custody: “Certainly you also are one of them, for, in fact, your dialect gives you away.” (Mt 26:73) This may have been said because the apostle was using Galilean Aramaic at the time, though that is not certain, or he may have been speaking a Galilean Hebrew that differed dialectally from that employed in Jerusalem or elsewhere in Judea. Earlier, when Jesus came to Nazareth in Galilee and entered the synagogue there, he read from the prophecy of Isaiah, evidently as written in Hebrew, and then said: “Today this scripture that you just heard is fulfilled.” Nothing is said about Jesus’ translating this passage into Aramaic. So it is likely that persons present on that occasion could readily understand Biblical Hebrew. (Lu 4:16-21) It may also be noted that Acts 6:1, referring to a time shortly after Pentecost 33 C.E., mentions Greek-speaking Jews and Hebrew-speaking Jews in Jerusalem. Professor Harris Birkeland (The Language of Jesus, Oslo, 1954, pp. 10, 11) points out that Aramaic’s being the written language of Palestine when Jesus was on earth does not necessarily mean that it was spoken by the masses. Also, the fact that the Elephantine Papyri belonging to a Jewish colony in Egypt were written in Aramaic does not prove that it was the chief or common tongue in their homeland, for Aramaic was then an international literary language. Of course, the Christian Greek Scriptures contain a number of Aramaisms, Jesus using some Aramaic words, for instance. However, as Birkeland argues, perhaps Jesus ordinarily spoke the popular Hebrew, while occasionally using Aramaic expressions. While it may not be provable, as Birkeland contends, that the common people were illiterate as far as Aramaic was concerned, it does seem that when Luke, an educated physician, records that Paul spoke to the Jews ‘in Hebrew’ and when the apostle said the voice from heaven spoke to him ‘in Hebrew,’ a form of Hebrew was actually meant (though perhaps not the ancient Hebrew) and not Aramaic.—Ac 22:2; 26:14. Lending further support to the use of a form of Hebrew in Palestine when Jesus Christ was on earth are early indications that the apostle Matthew first wrote his Gospel account in Hebrew. For instance, Eusebius (of the third and fourth centuries C.E.) said that “the evangelist Matthew delivered his Gospel in the Hebrew tongue.” (Patrologia Graeca, Vol. XXII, col. 941) And Jerome (of the fourth and fifth centuries C.E.) stated in his work De viris inlustribus (Concerning Illustrious Men), chapter III: “Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed. . . . Moreover, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus so diligently collected.” (Translation from the Latin text edited by E. C. Richardson and published in the series “Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur,” Leipzig, 1896, Vol. 14, pp. 8, 9.) So, Jesus Christ as a man on earth could well have used a form of Hebrew and a dialect of Aramaic. Tara1 |
||||||
7 | Jesus great teacher? | John 8:28 | Tara1 | 113550 | ||
Hello Cryst, Good question and I would like to respond by saying first that Jesus was taught by his Father. Referring to God in this capacity as his instructor, Jesus said: “When once you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will know that I am he, and that I do nothing of my own initiative; but just as the Father taught me I speak these things.” (John 8:28) Also, he truly had empathy and love for mankind. He was a perfect man and knew what he was teaching, so he was the greatest Teacher who ever lived. Tara1 |
||||||
8 | can you break down "it is finshed" | John 19:30 | Tara1 | 113457 | ||
Hello Mss Z, My understanding of the verse of John 19:30 tells us that not only had Jesus proved his own integrity but he had succeeded in laying the basis for the salvation of mankind—and more important, the vindication of his God's sovereignty! I understand that that is in fact the theme of the Bible. Jehovah God's allowing mankind to suffer demonstrates man's inability to govern himself, the issue of which Satan instigated with Eve when he told her that if she ate of the fruit that she would become like God, knowing good and bad. In other words, deciding on her own what was "right" and what was "wrong". Satan’s rebellion raised the issue of the rightness of God’s sovereignty over all His creatures, of Jehovah’s right to require their full obedience. Jesus proved Satan a lier and we too can show that God has the right to tell us what's right and wrong and demonstrate that we support his sovereignty by obeying him. Tara1 |
||||||
9 | Who is Greater Jesus Christ or the Fathe | John 14:28 | Tara1 | 112802 | ||
Hi Johnny, Great post. Of course the Father is greater than the Son. He gave (which in itself tells us he is greater) his Son "things", such as authority, kingship, judging power, but that in no way then make him (Jesus) greater than him. Wow what nonsence! It's like talking to a wall, to some on this forum. All through the Scriptures there a comparision between "God" and Jesus. Jesus' God. etc. Tara1 |
||||||
10 | Tara1, Where are angels called gods? | John 3:16 | Tara1 | 112036 | ||
Hello Searcher, Psalm 8:5 footnote of the NIV p. 748 reads, "God. The Hebrew can be translated "God" or "angels." The KJV translated elohim as "angels". The NIV translated elohim as "God". Both your commentaries and Lexicons acknowledge that elohim is used in the Bible as a title referring to angels, Almighty God, men, false gods or idols, Jesus Christ and Satan the devil. Strongs #433 definitions is:Definition (plural) rulers, judges divine ones angels gods (plural intensive - singular meaning) god, goddess godlike one works or special possessions of God the (true) God God Tara1 |
||||||
11 | Who is Jesus' God? | John 3:16 | Tara1 | 111932 | ||
In short, Jesus' God is Jehovah God. I love both Jehovah and Jesus and feel the Bible clearly tells be to do that. Tara1 |
||||||
12 | Why is YHWH found in the New Testament? | Matthew | Tara1 | 110230 | ||
Originally written to Kalos as a response. Dear Kalos, Justme wrote "well written"! This piece of the watchman.org site may have been well written but certainly is not accurate. Here is a list of the misleading inaccuracies: 1). "Watchtower Bible" is not the accurate name of the "New World Translation" nor of the "Watchtower Bible and Tract Society's" name. 2). Jehovah was not inserted but restored in the proper places. 3) It also states; Of course, it is appropriate for a translator to choose to use the divine name JEHOVAH or YAHWEH in the Old Testament where the Tetragrammator YHWH actually appears in the Hebrew text. However, the Watchtower has gone beyond this by inserting the name JEHOVAH in the New Testament, where it does not appear in Greek manuscripts. One need only examine the oldest Hebrew manuscripts of Matthew (originally written in Hebrew) and notice the Divine Name some 26 times. 4) The Kingdom Interlinear has the New Translation in the right hand colomn and does contain the Divine Name. The interlinear portion is the work of Westcott and Hort and used manuscripts that had changed the Divine Name from Jehovah to Lord. Jesus used either the LXX or Hebrew texts and both contained the Divine Name thousands of times! What a shame that several translations today have done the dishonour of changing what the original Bible had! Just read for yourself Matthew 4:10 Jesus' own words where he calls his Father by his name Jehovah and also even calls him God. He quotes Deut. 10:20 which used the Divine name Jehovah, so he likewise used Jehovah, otherwise he would have misquoted Deut 10:20 |
||||||
13 | Is Jesus YHWH? | OT general | Tara1 | 107241 | ||
Hi Mommapbs, Who is Jesus? you ask. Is He YHWH. According to Ps. 83 :18 YHWH is the most high over all the earth. That YHWH is Almighty God's personal name. His Son is Jesus Christ, second in all the universe. This has been the understanding of true Christians for over two thousand years. And before Jesus' time here on earth the faithfull Hebrews knew that YHWH would send a Messiah to the earth. This Messiah would be our Savior and Lord of his Kingdom, sent by his Father YHWH. Does the Bible tell us these truths? Yes it does and I'll be glad to show you, if you don't already believe these basic Bible truths. Tara1 |
||||||
14 | source references | OT general | Tara1 | 107134 | ||
Hi Edie, I almost didn’t respond to your reply. My reply is motivated not by the fact that you are new to the forum nor that you believe in the trinity doctrine for sure but I notice that you have in your personal profile expressions as follows that pricked my curiosity. Jehovah-Jireh. “Jehovah Will See to [It]; Jehovah Will Provide.” Jehovah-Shalom’s. Jehovah’s peace. Jehovah- Rapha. “Jehovah Heals.” Jehovah-Shammah. “Jehovah is there.” Jehovah-Rohi. “Jehovah Shepherds.” Jehovah-Nissi. “Jehovah Is My Signal Pole,” by deriving nis·si´ from nes, “signal pole”; LXX, “Jehovah Is My Refuge,” by deriving nis·si´ from nus, “to flee for refuge”; Vg, “Jehovah Is My Exaltation,” by deriving nis·si´ from na·sas´, “to hoist; to lift up.” One that is convinced to depth of my soul that Jehovah-Jireh made the provision for our redemption through Jesus Christ’s sacrifice. One that enjoys Jehovah-Shalom’s peace that passes understanding. One that is grateful for the healing that Jehovah-Rapha provided. One that experiences joy because He changed my appetites. One that is confident that Jehovah-Shammah will always be there. I am still a work in progress. He is not done with me yet. I am confident that He shepherds me always; Jehovah-Rohi tends to me as a sheep needing care. Jehovah –Nissi is my banner. Yes, Jehovah is my banner or refuge, too and He is the One I turn to for guidance comfort, and peace. Jesus’ example enables us to better understand his personal qualities such as love, compassion tolerance and peace. It’s unusual to find one that appreciates God’s name. The follow cite is interesting though long but has numerous scholarly observations that tells me that the yhwh was in the original New Testament. Hope you print it out and prayerfully consider what it has because "The unadulterated Bible is what God gave us" not the "changed versions". http://www.jehovah.to/exegesis/ntstudies/tetragram.htm Tara1 |
||||||
15 | Greek-Hebrew New Testment use Yahweh? | OT general | Tara1 | 106478 | ||
Hi Eddie, The answer is yes. Hebrew manuscripts contain YHWH but Greek manuscripts of the New Testement no longer exist that have what must have been the original. So a study of evidence (both Biblical and secular) provides for us that it was changed except in Revelation 19:1 (praise Jehovah)where the shortened form is still there. The original Hebrew text of the Holy Scriptures used numerous terms for God, such as Almighty, Creator, Father, and Lord. Yet, the instances in which he is referred to by his personal name far outnumber all of the other terms combined. Clearly, it is God’s will that we use his name. Consider the following list of terms as they appear in the Hebrew Scriptures. Jehovah-- 6,973 times; God-- 2,605 times; Almighty-- 48 times; Lord-- 40 times; Maker-- 25 times; Creator --7 times; Father-- 7 times; Ancient of Days-- 3 times; and Grand Instructor -- 2 times. In the New Testament the name of Almighty God Jehovah or YHWH appeared at least 237 times. http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/jhvh.htm provides a compressive list of Bible translations (around 200 New Testament translations) that uses the Divine Name YHWH. It is true that many modern translations do not use God’s name. They have chosen to follow the “custom” of the Catholic priest Jerome of 405 C. E. who translated the Latin Vulgate and substituted the word “Lord” for YHVH. His practice followed the practice or custom of Judaism who during the first and second centuries C. E. had a superstition regarding the Divine Name as too sacred to pronounce. Tara1 |
||||||
16 | The great flood of the Bible and. . . | Bible general Archive 2 | Tara1 | 99174 | ||
Hi Papyrus, Very interesting. Going back in history possibly some 4,000 years, we encounter the famous Akkadian myth called the Epic of Gilgamesh. Our knowledge of this is based mainly on a cuneiform text that came from the library of Ashurbanipal, who reigned 668-627 B.C.E., in ancient Nineveh. It is the story of the exploits of Gilgamesh, described as being two-thirds god and one-third man, or a demigod. One version of the epic states: “In Uruk he built walls, a great rampart, and the temple of blessed Eanna for the god of the firmament Anu, and for Ishtar the goddess of love . . . , our lady of love and war.” However, Gilgamesh was not exactly a pleasant creature to have around. The inhabitants of Uruk complained to the gods: “His lust leaves no virgin to her lover, neither the warrior’s daughter nor the wife of the noble.” What action did the gods take in response to the people’s protest? The goddess Aruru created Enkidu to be the human rival of Gilgamesh. However, instead of being enemies, they became close friends. In the course of the epic, Enkidu died. Shattered, Gilgamesh cried: “When I die, shall I not be like Enkidu? Woe has entered my belly. Fearing death, I roam over the steppe.” He wanted the secret of immortality and set out to find Utnapishtim, the deluge survivor who had been given immortality with the gods. Gilgamesh eventually finds Utnapishtim, who tells him the story of the flood. As found in Epic tablet XI, known as the Flood Tablet, Utnapishtim recounts instructions given to him concerning the flood: “Tear down (this) house, build a ship! Give up possessions, seek thou life. . . . Aboard the ship take thou the seed of all living things.” Does this not sound somewhat similar to the Bible’s reference to Noah and the Flood? But Utnapishtim cannot bestow immortality upon Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh, disappointed, returns home to Uruk. The account concludes with his death. The overall message of the epic is the sadness and frustration of death and the hereafter. Those ancient people did not find the God of truth and hope. However, the epic’s link to the Bible’s simple account of the pre-Flood era is quite evident. Even earlier than the account in the Epic of Gilgamesh is the Sumerian myth that presents “Ziusudra, the counterpart of the biblical Noah, who is described as a pious, a god-fearing king, constantly on the lookout for divine revelations in dreams or incantations.” (Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament) According to the same source, this myth “offers the closest and most striking parallel to biblical material as yet uncovered in Sumerian literature.” The Babylonian and Assyrian civilizations, which came later, were influenced by the Sumerian. The book China—A History in Art tells us that one of the ancient rulers of China was Yü, “the conqueror of the Great Flood. Yü channeled flood waters into rivers and seas to resettle his people.” Mythology expert Joseph Campbell wrote about the Chinese “Period of the Great Ten,” saying: “To this important age, which terminates in a Deluge, ten emperors were assigned in the early Chou-time mythology. Hence, it appears that what we are viewing here may be a local transformation of the series of the old Sumerian king list.” Campbell then cited other items from Chinese legends that appeared to “reinforce the argument for a Mesopotamian source.” That takes us back to the same basic source of many myths. However, the story of the Flood also appears in the Americas, for example, in Mexico during the period of the Aztecs in the 15th and 16th centuries C.E. Aztec mythology spoke of four previous ages, during the first of which the earth was inhabited by giants. (That is another reminder of the Nephilim, the giants referred to in the Bible at Genesis 6:4.) It included a primeval flood legend in which “the waters above merge with those below, obliterating the horizons and making of everything a timeless cosmic ocean.” The god controlling rain and water was Tlaloc. However, his rain was not obtained cheaply but was given “in exchange for the blood of sacrificed victims whose flowing tears would simulate and so stimulate the flow of rain.” (Mythology—An Illustrated Encyclopedia) Another legend states that the fourth era was ruled by Chalchiuhtlicue, the water-goddess, whose universe perished by a flood. Men were saved by becoming fish! Yours Tara1 |
||||||