Jehovah's Witnesses and Catholics.

[NickBatchelor]

Hi TheCone,

To imply, “I have existed” means “I have ALWAYS existed” is special pleading.

Here are some Bible translations on translating John 8:58 I’ve compiled, most of which are form TRINITARIAN translators, that convey the correct thought.

The Living New Testament: “The absolute truth is that I was in existence before Abraham was ever born.”

The 20th Century New Testament: “before Abraham existed I was.” Noyes, G.R. N.T. (1878)

Jesus said to them, truly, truly do I say to you, from before Abraham
was, I have been. Hanson, J.W. New Covenant (1884)

Jesus said to them, truly, truly, I say to you, I am before Abraham was
born. Kraeling, E.G. Four Gospels (1962)

With another amen-saying, Jesus declares to them that before
Abraham was, He (Jesus) is (hint of His preexistence) . Parker, P.G. Clarified N.T.

Jesus answered, before Abraham existed, I existed.Cotton Patch Version (1970)

To this Jesus replied, I existed before Abraham was born.
Ledyard, G.H. New Life Testament (1969)

Jesus said to them, for sure I tell you, before Abraham was born, I
was and sum and always will be. Dr. E.C. Dymond N.T. (1972)

Jesus answer, I tell you the truth. I already was before Abraham was
born. The New Testament, An American Translation Goodspeed:

“I tell you I existed before Abraham was born.” The Complete Bible, An American Translation Goodspeed: “I tell you I existed before Abraham was born.”

New Believers Bible, New Living Translation: “I existed before Abraham was even born.”

The New Testament, C. B. Williams: “I solemnly say to you, I existed before Abraham was born.”

The Book, New Testament: The absolute truth is that I was in existence before Abraham was ever born."

The Living Bible: “I was in existence before Abraham was ever born.”

Lattimore: “Truly, truly I tell you, I am from before Abraham was born.”
The New Testament, From the Peshitta Text,

Lamsa: “Before Abraham was born, I was.”

An American Translation, In The Language of Today, Beck: “I was before Abraham.”

New Testament Contemporary English Version: “I tell you.that even before Abraham was, I was, and I am.”

The Unvarnished New Testament: “Before Abraham was born, I have already been.”

The New Testament, Kleist & Lilly: “I am here-and I was before Abraham.”

The New Testament in the Language of the People, Williams: “I existed before Abraham was born.”

The New Testament, Noyes: “From before Abraham was, I have been.”

A Translation of the Four Gospels, Lewis: “Before Abraham was, I have been.”

Wakefield, G. N.T. (1795) Jesus said unto them: Verily verily I say unto you, before Abraham was born, I am He.

The Syriac New Testament, Murdock: “Before Abraham existed I was.”

The Curetonian Version of the Four Gospels, Burkitt& The Old Georgian Version of the Gospel of John, Blake & Briere “Before Abraham came to be, I was.”

The New Testament Or Rather the New Covenant, Sharpe: “I was before Abraham was born.”

The 20th Century New Testament 1904: “Before Abraham existed I was already what I am.”

The New Testament, Stage: “Before Abraham came to be, I was.”
International Bible Translators 1981

Jesus said to them, I am telling the truth: I was alive before Abraham
was born! The Coptic Version the New Testament in the Southern Dialect, Horner: “Before Abraham became, I, I am being.”

The Documents of the New Testament, Wade: “Before Abraham came into being, I have existed.” Noli, M.F.S. N.T. (1961)

Jesus answered them: Well, well, I tell you, I existed before Abraham
was born. The Concise Gospel and The acts, Christianson: “I existed even before Abraham was born.”

A Translators Handbook to the Gospel of John, Nida: “Before Abraham existed, I existed, or I have existed.”

The Simple English Bible: “I was alive before Abraham was born.”

The Original New Testament, Schonfield: “I tell you for a positive fact, I existed before Abraham was born.”

The Complete Gospels Annotated Scholars Version, Miller: “I existed before there was an Abraham.” Swann, G. N.T. (1947)

Jesus said to them, verily, verily I say unto you, I existed before Abraham was born. International English Version (2001)

Ok. It seems that in the last page or two, there have been posts made which create the false arguement stating every occurance of “EGO EIMI” always means “I AM” of Exodus. This is not true. Please stop trying to knock down a straw man that never existed in the first place.

John 8:58 EGO EIMI is translated as I AM not just because it says EGO EIMI, but because of the contextual reaction of the Jews.

Need more evidence? Doubltess, there are mountains of it through the Early Church Fathers, who, as the Watchtower clearly states, are “of interest”.

Are you concerned because the translation is not grammatically correct? Here is the solution:

Not “Before Abraham was born, I have been”

But “Before Abraham was born, I have **always **been.”

 

[NickBatchelor]

Hi The Cone,

No, Jesus already said we should!

John 14:1 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)

Let not your heart be troubled. You believe in God, believe ALSO in me.

This does not make me think Jesus thought he was God himself.

They are in similar contextual contrasts, my friend. Once the historical context is made known, the message becomes quite clear. From John 17:3 Haydock commentary:

This is life everlasting; that is, the way to life everlasting, that they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent[2]. The Arians, from these words, pretended that the Father only is the true God. St. Augustine and divers others answer, that the sense and construction is, that they may know thee, and also Jesus Christ thy Son, whom thou hast sent to be the only true God. We may also expound them with St. John Chrysostom and others, so that the Father is here called the only true God, not to exclude the Son, and the Holy Ghost, who are the same one true God with the Father; but only to exclude the false gods of the Gentiles. Let the Socinians take notice, that (1 John v. 20.) the Son of God, Jesus Christ, is expressly called the true God, even with the Greek article, upon which they commonly lay so much stress. (Witham) — Life everlasting. Both the life of glory in heaven, and of grace here, consisteth in the knowledge of God; the former in perfect vision, the latter in faith working by charity. For knowledge of God, without keeping his commandments, is not true knowledge, but unprofitable knowledge. (1 John xi.)

What if you were walking down the street and some random guy comes up to you and said the only way to everlasting life is to believe in The only true God AND ME? Would it not be fair to say he was putting himself on the same level as God?

 

[NickBatchelor]

Hi T-More,

You have it backwards. Many left because they were disgusted thinking Jesus meant literally what he clearly meant figuratively. They misinterpreted Jesus words and misunderstood him.

Do you honestly believe that the bread and the wine actually literally transforms into the flesh and blood of Jesus?

We both agree that Jesus himself instituted “the Lord’s evening meal,” or Memorial of his death. (1 Corinthians 11:20, 24) However, did he set up a mysterious rite in which his followers would actually eat his body and drink his blood?

Granted, some Bible translations render Jesus’ words this way: “Take and eat; this is my body,” and, “Drink all of you, because this is my blood.” (Matthew 26:26-28, The New Jerusalem Bible) It is also true that the Greek word “estin,” a form of the Greek verb “to be,” essentially means “is.” But the same verb can also mean “signify.” Interestingly, in many versions of the Bible, this verb is frequently translated “mean” or “stand for.” It is the context that determines the most precise rendering. For instance, at Matthew 12:7, “estin” is rendered “means” in many Bible translations: “If you had known what this means [Greek, estin]: I want mercy and not sacrifice, you would not have condemned the blameless.” (Catholic Douay Version)

Even if your personal Bible has the expression “This is my body,” you need not be confused. Jesus often used similar language. When he said, “I am the door” and, “I am the true vine,” no one understood that he was a literal door or a literal vine. (John 10:7; 15:1) And when, according to The New Jerusalem Bible, he went on to pass a cup of wine to his disciples and said: “This cup is the new covenant,” no one thought the cup literally was the new covenant. (Luke 22:20) Likewise, when he said the bread ‘was’ his body, we have to understand that the bread ‘meant,’ or symbolized, his body.

At any rate, Jesus could not have meant that his followers were literally to eat his flesh and drink his blood. Why not? After the Flood of Noah’s day, when God gave man permission to eat the flesh of animals, he directly forbade man to consume blood. (Genesis 9:3, 4) This command was repeated in the Mosaic Law, which Jesus obeyed fully. (Deuteronomy 12:23; 1 Peter 2:22) And the apostles were inspired by holy spirit to renew the command against consuming blood, making that law binding upon all Christians. (Acts 15:20, 29) Would Jesus institute an observance that would require his followers to violate a sacred decree of Almighty God? Impossible!

Clearly, then, Jesus used the bread and wine as symbols. The unleavened bread meant, or represented, his sinless body that would be sacrificed. The red wine signified his blood that would be poured out “in behalf of many for forgiveness of sins.” (Matthew 26:28)

Doesn’t “is” mean “is”? Remember my friend, Christ instituted this one year earlier in John6 (New World Translation, emphasis mine)

52 Therefore the Jews began contending with one another, saying: “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53 Accordingly Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to YOU, Unless YOU eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, YOU have no life in yourselves. 54 He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I shall resurrect him at the last day; 55 for my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in union with me, and I in union with him.

Nick, why would the people that Christ just fed with the miracle of the loaves and fishes leave after hearing this? If it was metaphorical, why did Christ not tell them to come back and say, “wait, you misunderstand me.”?

There was someone else who did not believe this teaching, Nick. He began to plot against Christ shortly after this.

Is the WTBS’s memorial an invention? Did early Christians pass around a plate and glass and refuse the bread and wine like most JW’s today?

 

[NickBatchelor]

Hi Bill Pick,

I do not rely on one Bible translation. Actually, Jehovah’s Witnesses are encouraged to study others. I have many Bible translations since I collect Bibles and use them in my studies. Our Bible-base publications we publish encourage others to study other Bible versions and translations. Here is one quote published, “We have always both recognized and encouraged the use of a variety of Bible translations … Jehovah’s witnesses use whatever Bibles are available in the local languages. Whether it be the clear, modern-language New World Translation or another, we encourage all to use the lamp of God’s Word to light life’s roadway.” (Psalm 119:105)

For you to bag on the NWT as being in a class of the worst translation ever is just pure bias. Can you produce an independent evaluation? I can. Have you ever read the book, “The Truth in Translation-Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament” by Greek Professor Jason Beduhn? I have. How did it do under close scrutiny? What were the results?

You do know that the JW have the most corrupt bible in the world,this is a fact

 

[NickBatchelor]

Hi Jlhargus,

Is that suppose to be some kind of put down. We are not encouraged to do our own research huh? Keep telling yourself that. My father is Penteocostal and the majority of my family are not Jehovah’s Witnesses. I have done research and continue to do so. I read and study books of all different faiths as well.

Funny, about that word, “apostate” I am not able to even use this word on this forum or I will get a “ding” against me. Hmmm.

JL: I have never heard of Geisler so I looked him up on line. He is an Evangelical apologist born 1932. I would say you have never heard nor read anything he has ever written. Unless you did so before you were a JW, which I doubt. I would bet you never heard of him before the WT told you he was a great authority. JW’s are not permitted to read apostate writtings. So the WT uses him and tells you he is such a great authority on scripture. Well the following link is a debate on the bodily resurrection of Jesus. Guess who is defending the bodily resurrection.

Maybe you should get his book on cults and maybe the WT should change it’s teaching to line up with this leading apologist in the world throughout the 20th century, AND a LEADING AUTHORITY on the Bible. You should verify all WT quotes for yourself, you might really lean something. Oh , I forgot, you can’t do your own research. The WT does ALL the research and tells you what they want you to hear.

infidels.org/library/modern/farrell_till/geisler-till/

 

[NickBatchelor]

Hi T-More,

Why be this way? This is the first time checking in and I have already spent a couple of hours trying to get back to some comments and now I run into this???

Sorry but I do not live on this forum trying to debunk Catholics. I am just now reading your comments because I was exceptionally busy this weekend and planned on writing yesterday. I found out a friend of mine had a serious situation and emergency come up and he needed my help all day and into the evening. I said from the beginning I would check in periodically and do my best to give a response. What more do you want? Your belittling comments are also unnecessary.

It appears that PRMerger was correct and Nick headed for the door in this discussion. I really wished he had stayed so he could’ve learned something here, if he hasn’t already. Generally speaking, JW’s tend to think they know a thing or two about the bible and suddenly realize when they come into a forum like this that there are Catholics here who know more than they do about scripture and certainly know more than them about history. This should not come as a surprise, as they run across Catholics in the door to door ministry who do not know their faith as they should, and JW’s themselves know nothing about their own religions history. I will pray for Nick.

 

[NickBatchelor]

Hi Nicea,

Can I start off by asking does your God have a God?

I didn’t really get your remark sorry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickBatchelor
Mackbrislawn,

The question is to what extent do JW’s believe? Is Jesus The Almighty or a lesser god? Which one is it?

Seems to be a bit of contradiction to your opening statement. And the fact you do not believe does not change an iota of anything abot God.

Of course why would they? Doctrines develop over time,not instantly. Precisely why Jesus promised to guide His Church with the Holy Spirit.

And what made you believe Christianity has taught God had another God?

Come again?

And this is were JW’s fail miserably to understand Jesus. JW’s theology barely skims the surface.

LOL! Another JW lie! Do you honestly want me to rebuke your statement with Scripture?

 

[Michael_Francis]

[SIGN1]Closed pending Mod review.[/SIGN1]