J
Javl
Guest
Thanks for the encouragement Bill, I appreciate it. By the way, I’ve been sentenced to life too. ( The longest sentence in the world: “I do”. )
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
- Status
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
D
dj_dave
Guest
[SIGN]Also what is in a name. there is a reason why the Jews dont pronounce the name of GOD,
CONT.[/SIGN]
Omitting God’s name from the Bible involves a long-standing tradition of the Jews. Many of them hold that God’s name should never be pronounced. This belief is evidently based on a misapplication of a Bible law that states: “You must not take up the name of Jehovah your God in a worthless way, for Jehovah will not leave the one unpunished who takes up his name in a worthless way.”—Exodus 20:7.
**This law forbids the misuse of God’s name. But does it forbid the respectful use of his name? Not at all. **The writers of the Hebrew Bible (the “Old Testament”) were all faithful men who lived by the Law that God gave to the ancient Israelites. Yet, they made frequent use of God’s name. For instance, they included it in many psalms that were sung out loud by crowds of worshipers. Jehovah God even instructed his worshipers to call upon his name, and faithful ones obeyed. (Joel 2:32; Acts 2:21) Hence, Christians today do not hesitate to use God’s name respectfully, as Jesus surely did.—John 17:26.
In replacing God’s name with titles, Bible translators make a serious mistake. They make God seem remote and impersonal, whereas the Bible urges humans to cultivate “intimacy with Jehovah.” (Psalm 25:14) Think of an intimate friend of yours. How close would you really be if you never learned your friend’s name? Similarly, when people are kept in ignorance about God’s name, Jehovah, how can they become truly close to God? Furthermore, when people do not use God’s name, they also lack knowledge of its wonderful meaning. What does the divine name mean?
God himself explained the meaning of his name to his faithful servant Moses. When Moses asked about God’s name, Jehovah replied: “I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be.” (Exodus 3:14) Rotherham’s translation renders those words: “I Will Become whatsoever I please.” So Jehovah can become whatever is needed in order to fulfill his purposes.
Also, there is this: (Psalm 91:14) Because on me he has set his affection, I shall also provide him with escape. I shall protect him because he has come to know my name.
CONT.[/SIGN]
Omitting God’s name from the Bible involves a long-standing tradition of the Jews. Many of them hold that God’s name should never be pronounced. This belief is evidently based on a misapplication of a Bible law that states: “You must not take up the name of Jehovah your God in a worthless way, for Jehovah will not leave the one unpunished who takes up his name in a worthless way.”—Exodus 20:7.
**This law forbids the misuse of God’s name. But does it forbid the respectful use of his name? Not at all. **The writers of the Hebrew Bible (the “Old Testament”) were all faithful men who lived by the Law that God gave to the ancient Israelites. Yet, they made frequent use of God’s name. For instance, they included it in many psalms that were sung out loud by crowds of worshipers. Jehovah God even instructed his worshipers to call upon his name, and faithful ones obeyed. (Joel 2:32; Acts 2:21) Hence, Christians today do not hesitate to use God’s name respectfully, as Jesus surely did.—John 17:26.
In replacing God’s name with titles, Bible translators make a serious mistake. They make God seem remote and impersonal, whereas the Bible urges humans to cultivate “intimacy with Jehovah.” (Psalm 25:14) Think of an intimate friend of yours. How close would you really be if you never learned your friend’s name? Similarly, when people are kept in ignorance about God’s name, Jehovah, how can they become truly close to God? Furthermore, when people do not use God’s name, they also lack knowledge of its wonderful meaning. What does the divine name mean?
God himself explained the meaning of his name to his faithful servant Moses. When Moses asked about God’s name, Jehovah replied: “I shall prove to be what I shall prove to be.” (Exodus 3:14) Rotherham’s translation renders those words: “I Will Become whatsoever I please.” So Jehovah can become whatever is needed in order to fulfill his purposes.
Also, there is this: (Psalm 91:14) Because on me he has set his affection, I shall also provide him with escape. I shall protect him because he has come to know my name.
D
dj_dave
Guest
[SIGN][SIGN]JavlSorry, I skipped over this post.
I do not read into bible texts what is not there. I read and understand. Do you? As for one heavenly creature being preferred, might I ask since when has any of these heavenly creatures partaken of creation. I thought God alone created and that no one helped Him.( Isaiah 44:24 ). As for Proverbs 8:30-31, if you read the whole and not take a passage out of context, it is Wisdom that is spoken of in this proverb.[/SIGN]
The inspired description of wisdom found in the book of Proverbs reads: “Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. . . . Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, I was brought forth as with labor pains . . . When he prepared the heavens I was there; . . . then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, . . . and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men.”
This passage cannot be speaking merely about divine wisdom or wisdom in the abstract. Why not? Because the wisdom that is here described was “produced,” or created, as the beginning of Jehovah’s way. Jehovah God has always existed and has always been wise. (Psalm 90:1, 2) His wisdom had no beginning; it was neither created nor produced. It was not “brought forth as with labor pains.” Furthermore, this wisdom is said to speak and act, representing a person.—Proverbs 8:1.
The book of Proverbs says that long ago wisdom was beside Jehovah, the Creator, as “a master worker.” That certainly applies to Jesus. Long before he came to earth, Jesus worked so closely with Jehovah that God’s Word says: “He is before** all other things **and by means of him all other things were made to exist.”—Colossians 1:17; Revelation 3:14.
web.archive.org/web/20031008013247/mysite.freeserve.com/newworldtranslation/colossians1.15.htm
**
jehovah.to/xlation/other.html#_ftnref10#_ftnref10**
Depicting the Son of God as wisdom is appropriate, since he was the One who revealed Jehovah’s wise purposes and decrees. During his prehuman existence, Jesus was God’s Word, or Spokesman. (John 1:1) **He is described as being “the power of God and the wisdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:24, 30) **What a beautiful description of the Son of God, whose fondness for mankind moved him to give his life as a ransom in their behalf!—John 3:16.
[SIGN]Also do you accept John 1:3, that Jesus is the Word?[/SIGN]
Jn 1:3 says in reference to Christ, “All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence”. How could Christ have been a created being if ALL things came into existence through him? SO YOU ARE SAYING: If Jesus was a created being, then according to Jn 1:3, Jesus would have had to create himself.
My Reply: No, because the Bible puts limitations on the word “ALL.”
2 Tim 1:15 “You are aware of the fact that ‘ALL’ who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes.”–New American Standard Bible
Here the word PAS (=All) obviously refers to ‘a great number’, because the words hOI EN Thi ASIAi do not really include ‘all’ the people in Asia, but the refer explicitly to Christians (non-Christians are already ‘turned away’ from God). Moreover, these words don’t even include ‘all’ of the Christians, because Onesiphuros (and perhaps others) remained loyal to God.
Acts 2:17 “And it shall be, in the last days saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh; And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy…”–Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible
Here, again, PAS (=All) is used in a more restricted sense. The Spirit will hardly be poured out upon “ALL flesh”, since this verse refers exclusively to Christians.
ALSO CLOSELY RELATED TO THIS THOUGHT NOTICE TOO: COL 1:20 Is anyone going to assert that “all things” there mean “all creation”? If so then is it through the Christ that God will reconcile Satan and the disobedient angels, whom are of “all creation”? Or do the faithful angels who are also part of “all creation” in need of “reconciliation”?
So, obviously, the “all things” (Greek PANTA) in verse 20 is restricted to those who are sinful and in need of reconcilliation. Hence, as the Christ was part of “all creation”(v.15) then “all creation” cannot be equivalent to the “all things”(v.16, 17 Greek PANTA) that were created through him and so the “all things” are contextually restricted to creation other than the “firstborn of all creation,” the prehuman Christ!
QUESTION: WOULD YOU THAT THE ALMIGHTY GOD IS “THE FIRSTBORN OF ALL CREATION”?
The context then would make the use of the word “other” certainly tenable and defensible in verses 16 and 17, if not absolutely necessary. The use of the word “other” by the NWT here cannot be deemed “interpolation” any more than the word “other” has been used at Acts 5:29 and other places. It is implied from the context. If something is implied then the translator has the right to include it explicitly in his translation. But this is where we have to go back the the NWT Translation Committee’s “frank admission” that the Trinitarian view of Colossians 1:15-17 influenced how they approached this passage. They wanted a translation that was not only “justifiable” linguistically,grammatically and contextually, but one which without any doubt or uncertainty make the passage say what it means-that the prehuman Christ was indeed a part of creation. That he was a creature- as the rest of the scriptures show.
I do not read into bible texts what is not there. I read and understand. Do you? As for one heavenly creature being preferred, might I ask since when has any of these heavenly creatures partaken of creation. I thought God alone created and that no one helped Him.( Isaiah 44:24 ). As for Proverbs 8:30-31, if you read the whole and not take a passage out of context, it is Wisdom that is spoken of in this proverb.[/SIGN]
The inspired description of wisdom found in the book of Proverbs reads: “Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. . . . Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, I was brought forth as with labor pains . . . When he prepared the heavens I was there; . . . then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, . . . and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men.”
This passage cannot be speaking merely about divine wisdom or wisdom in the abstract. Why not? Because the wisdom that is here described was “produced,” or created, as the beginning of Jehovah’s way. Jehovah God has always existed and has always been wise. (Psalm 90:1, 2) His wisdom had no beginning; it was neither created nor produced. It was not “brought forth as with labor pains.” Furthermore, this wisdom is said to speak and act, representing a person.—Proverbs 8:1.
The book of Proverbs says that long ago wisdom was beside Jehovah, the Creator, as “a master worker.” That certainly applies to Jesus. Long before he came to earth, Jesus worked so closely with Jehovah that God’s Word says: “He is before** all other things **and by means of him all other things were made to exist.”—Colossians 1:17; Revelation 3:14.
web.archive.org/web/20031008013247/mysite.freeserve.com/newworldtranslation/colossians1.15.htm
**
jehovah.to/xlation/other.html#_ftnref10#_ftnref10**
Depicting the Son of God as wisdom is appropriate, since he was the One who revealed Jehovah’s wise purposes and decrees. During his prehuman existence, Jesus was God’s Word, or Spokesman. (John 1:1) **He is described as being “the power of God and the wisdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:24, 30) **What a beautiful description of the Son of God, whose fondness for mankind moved him to give his life as a ransom in their behalf!—John 3:16.
[SIGN]Also do you accept John 1:3, that Jesus is the Word?[/SIGN]
Jn 1:3 says in reference to Christ, “All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence”. How could Christ have been a created being if ALL things came into existence through him? SO YOU ARE SAYING: If Jesus was a created being, then according to Jn 1:3, Jesus would have had to create himself.
My Reply: No, because the Bible puts limitations on the word “ALL.”
2 Tim 1:15 “You are aware of the fact that ‘ALL’ who are in Asia turned away from me, among whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes.”–New American Standard Bible
Here the word PAS (=All) obviously refers to ‘a great number’, because the words hOI EN Thi ASIAi do not really include ‘all’ the people in Asia, but the refer explicitly to Christians (non-Christians are already ‘turned away’ from God). Moreover, these words don’t even include ‘all’ of the Christians, because Onesiphuros (and perhaps others) remained loyal to God.
Acts 2:17 “And it shall be, in the last days saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh; And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy…”–Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible
Here, again, PAS (=All) is used in a more restricted sense. The Spirit will hardly be poured out upon “ALL flesh”, since this verse refers exclusively to Christians.
ALSO CLOSELY RELATED TO THIS THOUGHT NOTICE TOO: COL 1:20 Is anyone going to assert that “all things” there mean “all creation”? If so then is it through the Christ that God will reconcile Satan and the disobedient angels, whom are of “all creation”? Or do the faithful angels who are also part of “all creation” in need of “reconciliation”?
So, obviously, the “all things” (Greek PANTA) in verse 20 is restricted to those who are sinful and in need of reconcilliation. Hence, as the Christ was part of “all creation”(v.15) then “all creation” cannot be equivalent to the “all things”(v.16, 17 Greek PANTA) that were created through him and so the “all things” are contextually restricted to creation other than the “firstborn of all creation,” the prehuman Christ!
QUESTION: WOULD YOU THAT THE ALMIGHTY GOD IS “THE FIRSTBORN OF ALL CREATION”?
The context then would make the use of the word “other” certainly tenable and defensible in verses 16 and 17, if not absolutely necessary. The use of the word “other” by the NWT here cannot be deemed “interpolation” any more than the word “other” has been used at Acts 5:29 and other places. It is implied from the context. If something is implied then the translator has the right to include it explicitly in his translation. But this is where we have to go back the the NWT Translation Committee’s “frank admission” that the Trinitarian view of Colossians 1:15-17 influenced how they approached this passage. They wanted a translation that was not only “justifiable” linguistically,grammatically and contextually, but one which without any doubt or uncertainty make the passage say what it means-that the prehuman Christ was indeed a part of creation. That he was a creature- as the rest of the scriptures show.
J
Javl
Guest
djdave: thanks for your answer. Please read my post #415. I erred in my answer to you and I apologize for doing what I have accused you of doing. Again I apologize. May we start over again?
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
PAX DOMINI
Shalom Aleichem
A
adelore
Guest
djdave,
.
**Did you miss them saying Gods name Yahweh in Mass or in CC Class? **I’ve heard it a lot. By the way it’s also in the Catholic Bibles I read growing up, really, it’s in there.
.
**Did you miss them saying Gods name Yahweh in Mass or in CC Class? **I’ve heard it a lot. By the way it’s also in the Catholic Bibles I read growing up, really, it’s in there.
A
adelore
Guest
Another thought just popped into my mind.
If Jesus is not God, as JWs believe, and Jesus is only a type of god, then JWs would be Wrong in Worshiping Jesus, which they say they don’t, because only God is to be worshiped.
Yet JWs contradict themselves because they do have a “Communion” once a year, which they “lable” the “memorial supper.” JWs also believe that the only ones who can Partake of this memorial supper are the ones who are in the 144,000 that are going to Heaven, the rest will live on earth in a paridise.
So why have the Memorial Supper. ? If Jesus is Not God? Then this memorial supper would be wrong to partake in…after all it is part of the worship service…and if JWs should only Worship God, then this would be wrong.
So you see there are a lot of things that JWs do, that contradict what they say about Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit Not all being One and the same. For if they are not all one and the same, then JWs shouldn’t haven’t any kind of worship service towards Jesus. For according to your own religion…no one other than God should be worshiped. And yet every year you are doing that at your Memorial Supper. Think about that Deeply dj dave.
JWs say and preach one thing, then turn right around and worship Jesus.
If Jesus is not God, as JWs believe, and Jesus is only a type of god, then JWs would be Wrong in Worshiping Jesus, which they say they don’t, because only God is to be worshiped.
Yet JWs contradict themselves because they do have a “Communion” once a year, which they “lable” the “memorial supper.” JWs also believe that the only ones who can Partake of this memorial supper are the ones who are in the 144,000 that are going to Heaven, the rest will live on earth in a paridise.
So why have the Memorial Supper. ? If Jesus is Not God? Then this memorial supper would be wrong to partake in…after all it is part of the worship service…and if JWs should only Worship God, then this would be wrong.
So you see there are a lot of things that JWs do, that contradict what they say about Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit Not all being One and the same. For if they are not all one and the same, then JWs shouldn’t haven’t any kind of worship service towards Jesus. For according to your own religion…no one other than God should be worshiped. And yet every year you are doing that at your Memorial Supper. Think about that Deeply dj dave.
JWs say and preach one thing, then turn right around and worship Jesus.
B
Bob4BVM
Guest
Yes, I have often wondered about this as well. The JWs who come here are always mentioning Jesus, as much or more than Jehovah… why ?
They seem confused about Him and who He is, but always mention Him.
B
Bob4BVM
Guest
There you go again Dave, why are you all about fitting everything into what the WT says ?
ALSO, You make some pretty serious assumptions above about what I believe, but I will let you finish before I respond to them.
How do you know what name or how I respond to God ?
WHAT Inspired word was given to the boys in Brooklyn that makes them so sure they have the ONE, UNIQUELY PROPER name of God ?
Brings to mind a verse in a song by Bruce Cockburn, you should listen to it:
“Like the nine billion names of God
Don’t bring you any closer
To anyone you can simply set eyes on…”
Yes there ARE differences between us, but you are still not seeeing them.
D
dj_dave
Guest
[SIGN];Another thought just popped into my mind.
If Jesus is not God, as JWs believe, and Jesus is only a type of god, then JWs would be Wrong in Worshiping Jesus, which they say they don’t, because only God is to be worshiped.
Yet JWs contradict themselves because they do have a “Communion” once a year, which they “lable” the “memorial supper.” JWs also believe that the only ones who can Partake of this memorial supper are the ones who are in the 144,000 that are going to Heaven, the rest will live on earth in a paridise.
So why have the Memorial Supper. ? If Jesus is Not God? Then this memorial supper would be wrong to partake in…after all it is part of the worship service…and if JWs should only Worship God, then this would be wrong.
So you see there are a lot of things that JWs do, that contradict what they say about Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit Not all being One and the same. For if they are not all one and the same, then JWs shouldn’t haven’t any kind of worship service towards Jesus. For according to your own religion…no one other than God should be worshiped. And yet every year you are doing that at your Memorial Supper. Think about that Deeply dj dave.
JWs say and preach one thing, then turn right around and worship Jesus.[/SIGN]
I’m glad that you brought this up though, so that I can inform you as to how we really view this matter. According to Luke and Paul, when instituting the Memorial of his death Jesus said: “Keep doing this in remembrance of me.” (Lu 22:19; 1Co 11:24) From this it is our understanding that Jesus meant that his followers should celebrate the Lord’s Evening Meal (Last Supper) annually, not more often. The Passover, observed in remembrance of God’s deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage in 1513 B.C.E., was commemorated only once a year, on the anniversary date of Nisan 14. The Memorial, also an anniversary, would appropriately be held only on Nisan 14.
Paul quoted Jesus as saying regarding the cup, “Keep doing this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me,” and added: “For as often as you eat this loaf and drink this cup, you keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he arrives.” (1Co 11:25, 26) “Often” can refer to something done only once a year, especially when done for many years. (Heb 9:25, 26) Nisan 14 was the day on which Christ gave his literal body as a sacrifice on the torture stake and poured out his lifeblood for forgiveness of sins. Hence, **THAT **was the day of “the death of the Lord” and, consequently, the date to commemorate his death thereafter.
The participants in this meal would be “absent from the Lord” and would celebrate the Lord’s Evening Meal “often” before their death in faithfulness. Then, following their resurrection to heavenly life, they would be together with Christ and would no longer need a remembrancer of him. Regarding the duration of this observance, “until he arrives,” the apostle Paul we believe adelore, had reference to Christ’s coming again and receiving them into heaven by a resurrection during the time of his presence. This understanding of the matter is clarified by Jesus’ words to the 11 apostles later that evening: “If I go my way and prepare a place for you, I am coming again and will receive you to myself, that where I am you also may be.”—Joh 14:3, 4; compare 2Co 5:1-3, 6-9.
Jesus informed the disciples that the wine he had drunk (at this Passover preceding the Memorial) was the last of the product of the vine that he would drink “until that day when I drink it new with you in the kingdom of my Father.” (Mt 26:29) WE believe he would not be drinking literal wine in heaven, he obviously had reference to what wine sometimes symbolized in the Scriptures, namely, joy. Being together in the Kingdom was what they looked forward to with highest anticipation. (Ro 8:23; 2Co 5:2) King David wrote, in song, of Jehovah’s provision of “wine that makes the heart of mortal man rejoice,” and his son Solomon said: “Wine itself makes life rejoice.”—Ps 104:15; Ec 10:19.
In ancient Israel a man could provide a communion meal. He would bring an animal to the sanctuary, where it was slaughtered. A portion of the animal offered went on the altar for “a restful odor to Jehovah.” A portion went to the officiating priest, another portion to the priestly sons of Aaron, and the offerer and his household shared in the meal. (Le 3:1-16; 7:28-36) One who was ‘unclean’ as defined by the Law was forbidden to eat a communion sacrifice on pain of being “cut off from his people.”—Le 7:20, 21.
The Lord’s Evening Meal is likewise a communion meal, because there is a sharing together. Jehovah God is involved as the Author of the arrangement, Jesus Christ is the ransom sacrifice, and his spiritual brothers eat the emblems as joint participants. Their eating at “the table of Jehovah” would signify that they are at peace with Jehovah. (1Co 10:21) In fact, communion offerings were sometimes called “peace offerings.”—Le 3:1, ftn.
THERE IS NO “WORSHIP” OF JESUS HERE…
Partakers of the meal, in eating the bread and drinking the wine, acknowledge that they are sharers together in Christ, in complete unity. The apostle Paul says: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of the Christ? The loaf which we break, is it not a sharing in the body of the Christ? Because there is one loaf, we, although many, are one body, for we are all partaking of that one loaf.”—1Co 10:16, 17.
What about Partakers verses other attenders at this observance?
Cont.
If Jesus is not God, as JWs believe, and Jesus is only a type of god, then JWs would be Wrong in Worshiping Jesus, which they say they don’t, because only God is to be worshiped.
Yet JWs contradict themselves because they do have a “Communion” once a year, which they “lable” the “memorial supper.” JWs also believe that the only ones who can Partake of this memorial supper are the ones who are in the 144,000 that are going to Heaven, the rest will live on earth in a paridise.
So why have the Memorial Supper. ? If Jesus is Not God? Then this memorial supper would be wrong to partake in…after all it is part of the worship service…and if JWs should only Worship God, then this would be wrong.
So you see there are a lot of things that JWs do, that contradict what they say about Jesus, God and the Holy Spirit Not all being One and the same. For if they are not all one and the same, then JWs shouldn’t haven’t any kind of worship service towards Jesus. For according to your own religion…no one other than God should be worshiped. And yet every year you are doing that at your Memorial Supper. Think about that Deeply dj dave.
JWs say and preach one thing, then turn right around and worship Jesus.[/SIGN]
I’m glad that you brought this up though, so that I can inform you as to how we really view this matter. According to Luke and Paul, when instituting the Memorial of his death Jesus said: “Keep doing this in remembrance of me.” (Lu 22:19; 1Co 11:24) From this it is our understanding that Jesus meant that his followers should celebrate the Lord’s Evening Meal (Last Supper) annually, not more often. The Passover, observed in remembrance of God’s deliverance of Israel from Egyptian bondage in 1513 B.C.E., was commemorated only once a year, on the anniversary date of Nisan 14. The Memorial, also an anniversary, would appropriately be held only on Nisan 14.
Paul quoted Jesus as saying regarding the cup, “Keep doing this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me,” and added: “For as often as you eat this loaf and drink this cup, you keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he arrives.” (1Co 11:25, 26) “Often” can refer to something done only once a year, especially when done for many years. (Heb 9:25, 26) Nisan 14 was the day on which Christ gave his literal body as a sacrifice on the torture stake and poured out his lifeblood for forgiveness of sins. Hence, **THAT **was the day of “the death of the Lord” and, consequently, the date to commemorate his death thereafter.
The participants in this meal would be “absent from the Lord” and would celebrate the Lord’s Evening Meal “often” before their death in faithfulness. Then, following their resurrection to heavenly life, they would be together with Christ and would no longer need a remembrancer of him. Regarding the duration of this observance, “until he arrives,” the apostle Paul we believe adelore, had reference to Christ’s coming again and receiving them into heaven by a resurrection during the time of his presence. This understanding of the matter is clarified by Jesus’ words to the 11 apostles later that evening: “If I go my way and prepare a place for you, I am coming again and will receive you to myself, that where I am you also may be.”—Joh 14:3, 4; compare 2Co 5:1-3, 6-9.
Jesus informed the disciples that the wine he had drunk (at this Passover preceding the Memorial) was the last of the product of the vine that he would drink “until that day when I drink it new with you in the kingdom of my Father.” (Mt 26:29) WE believe he would not be drinking literal wine in heaven, he obviously had reference to what wine sometimes symbolized in the Scriptures, namely, joy. Being together in the Kingdom was what they looked forward to with highest anticipation. (Ro 8:23; 2Co 5:2) King David wrote, in song, of Jehovah’s provision of “wine that makes the heart of mortal man rejoice,” and his son Solomon said: “Wine itself makes life rejoice.”—Ps 104:15; Ec 10:19.
In ancient Israel a man could provide a communion meal. He would bring an animal to the sanctuary, where it was slaughtered. A portion of the animal offered went on the altar for “a restful odor to Jehovah.” A portion went to the officiating priest, another portion to the priestly sons of Aaron, and the offerer and his household shared in the meal. (Le 3:1-16; 7:28-36) One who was ‘unclean’ as defined by the Law was forbidden to eat a communion sacrifice on pain of being “cut off from his people.”—Le 7:20, 21.
The Lord’s Evening Meal is likewise a communion meal, because there is a sharing together. Jehovah God is involved as the Author of the arrangement, Jesus Christ is the ransom sacrifice, and his spiritual brothers eat the emblems as joint participants. Their eating at “the table of Jehovah” would signify that they are at peace with Jehovah. (1Co 10:21) In fact, communion offerings were sometimes called “peace offerings.”—Le 3:1, ftn.
THERE IS NO “WORSHIP” OF JESUS HERE…
Partakers of the meal, in eating the bread and drinking the wine, acknowledge that they are sharers together in Christ, in complete unity. The apostle Paul says: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a sharing in the blood of the Christ? The loaf which we break, is it not a sharing in the body of the Christ? Because there is one loaf, we, although many, are one body, for we are all partaking of that one loaf.”—1Co 10:16, 17.
What about Partakers verses other attenders at this observance?
Cont.
D
dj_dave
Guest
[SIGN]What about Partakers verses other attenders at this observance?
Cont.[/SIGN]
Jesus had gathered his 12 apostles, saying to them: “I have greatly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer.” (Lu 22:15) During the Lord’s Evening Meal that followed, Jesus passed the bread and the wine to the 11 remaining apostles, telling them to eat and drink. (Lu 22:19, 20) Afterward he spoke to them as “the ones that have stuck with me in my trials,” an indication that Judas had been dismissed.—Lu 22:28.
There is no evidence that Jesus himself ate the bread thus offered or drank out of the cup during this Memorial meal. The body and blood he gave was in their behalf and for validating the new covenant, through which their sins were removed. (Jer 31:31-34; Heb 8:10-12; 12:24) Jesus had no sins. (Heb 7:26) He mediates the new covenant between Jehovah God and those chosen as Christ’s associates. (Heb 9:15) Besides the apostles present at that meal, there were to be others making up the spiritual “Israel of God,” a “little flock,” who would eventually be kings and priests with Christ. (Ga 6:16; Lu 12:32; Re 1:5, 6; 5:9, 10) All of Christ’s spiritual brothers on earth, therefore, would be partakers in this meal each time it is celebrated. They are shown to be “certain firstfruits of his creatures” (Jas 1:18), bought from mankind as “firstfruits to God and to the Lamb,” and are revealed in John’s vision to number 144,000.—Re 14:1-5.
Now, observers not partaking. The Lord Jesus Christ revealed that, at his “presence” (not “coming” by the way, web.archive.org/web/20031212052239/mysite.freeserve.com/newworldtranslation/parousia.htm Matt 24:3) there would be persons who would do good to his spiritual brothers, visiting them in time of need and giving them assistance. (Mt 25:31-46) Would these, who might attend the celebration of the Lord’s Evening Meal, qualify as partakers of the emblems? The Scriptures say that God will provide, through his holy spirit, evidence and assurance to those qualified to partake of the emblems as “heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ,” that they are God’s sons. The apostle Paul writes: “The spirit itself bears witness with our spirit that we are God’s children.” He goes on to explain that there are others who benefit from God’s arrangement for these sons: “For the eager expectation of the creation is waiting for the revealing of the sons of God.” (Ro 8:14-21)
Since the joint heirs with Christ are to ‘rule as kings and priests over the earth,’ ( BTW, do you believe this or do catholics believe it means something else?) the Kingdom will benefit those living under it. (Re 5:10; 20:4, 6; 21:3, 4) Those benefiting would naturally be interested in the Kingdom and its development.
Such persons therefore would attend and observe the celebration of the Lord’s Evening Meal, but not being joint heirs with Christ and spiritual sons of God, they would not partake of the emblems as joint participants in the death of Christ, with hope of resurrection to a heavenly life with him.—Ro 6:3-5. I am not going to get into Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation…that is a whole new thread.
I know you disagree with our viewpoint of this whole subject–but, I wanted you to know how we feel about it since you brought it up. I have many other posts to address, I will get to everyone’s posts… within the next week or so. Some like jlhargus’ are taking a while to research. I also want to address some of your earlier comments too. Back later.
Cont.[/SIGN]
Jesus had gathered his 12 apostles, saying to them: “I have greatly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer.” (Lu 22:15) During the Lord’s Evening Meal that followed, Jesus passed the bread and the wine to the 11 remaining apostles, telling them to eat and drink. (Lu 22:19, 20) Afterward he spoke to them as “the ones that have stuck with me in my trials,” an indication that Judas had been dismissed.—Lu 22:28.
There is no evidence that Jesus himself ate the bread thus offered or drank out of the cup during this Memorial meal. The body and blood he gave was in their behalf and for validating the new covenant, through which their sins were removed. (Jer 31:31-34; Heb 8:10-12; 12:24) Jesus had no sins. (Heb 7:26) He mediates the new covenant between Jehovah God and those chosen as Christ’s associates. (Heb 9:15) Besides the apostles present at that meal, there were to be others making up the spiritual “Israel of God,” a “little flock,” who would eventually be kings and priests with Christ. (Ga 6:16; Lu 12:32; Re 1:5, 6; 5:9, 10) All of Christ’s spiritual brothers on earth, therefore, would be partakers in this meal each time it is celebrated. They are shown to be “certain firstfruits of his creatures” (Jas 1:18), bought from mankind as “firstfruits to God and to the Lamb,” and are revealed in John’s vision to number 144,000.—Re 14:1-5.
Now, observers not partaking. The Lord Jesus Christ revealed that, at his “presence” (not “coming” by the way, web.archive.org/web/20031212052239/mysite.freeserve.com/newworldtranslation/parousia.htm Matt 24:3) there would be persons who would do good to his spiritual brothers, visiting them in time of need and giving them assistance. (Mt 25:31-46) Would these, who might attend the celebration of the Lord’s Evening Meal, qualify as partakers of the emblems? The Scriptures say that God will provide, through his holy spirit, evidence and assurance to those qualified to partake of the emblems as “heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ,” that they are God’s sons. The apostle Paul writes: “The spirit itself bears witness with our spirit that we are God’s children.” He goes on to explain that there are others who benefit from God’s arrangement for these sons: “For the eager expectation of the creation is waiting for the revealing of the sons of God.” (Ro 8:14-21)
Since the joint heirs with Christ are to ‘rule as kings and priests over the earth,’ ( BTW, do you believe this or do catholics believe it means something else?) the Kingdom will benefit those living under it. (Re 5:10; 20:4, 6; 21:3, 4) Those benefiting would naturally be interested in the Kingdom and its development.
Such persons therefore would attend and observe the celebration of the Lord’s Evening Meal, but not being joint heirs with Christ and spiritual sons of God, they would not partake of the emblems as joint participants in the death of Christ, with hope of resurrection to a heavenly life with him.—Ro 6:3-5. I am not going to get into Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation…that is a whole new thread.
I know you disagree with our viewpoint of this whole subject–but, I wanted you to know how we feel about it since you brought it up. I have many other posts to address, I will get to everyone’s posts… within the next week or so. Some like jlhargus’ are taking a while to research. I also want to address some of your earlier comments too. Back later.
B
Bob4BVM
Guest
Ah Dave,
Please do not suppose to instruct Catholics on the practice and meaning of Holy Eucharist. !
I am sorry that you missed it all those years you were Catholic, if you had opened your eyes and heart to It, you’d most certainly still be Catholic.
What would you say if I told you that I KNEW the reality of Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist ?
A
adelore
Guest
dj dave,
I noticed you Skipped some scripture concerning the last Supper.
Matthew 26: 26
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” 27 Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.
Now based on Jesus own words, this doesn’t mean a “memorial” only and when he says “Often” it doesn’t mean only once a year.
Webster’s Dictionary:
Often: adv. many times; frequently.
Many: adj more, most 1. constituting or forming a large number. 2. a large number 3. many persons or things.
Frequently:
John 14:8-11
8 Philip said to him, “Master, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us.” 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever **has seen me has seen the **Father. How can you say, "Show us the Father? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own. The Father who dwells in me is doing his works. 11 **Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, **or else, believe because of the works themselves.
Now I know dj dave that you’re going to explain away what Jesus said, there’s no doubt in my mind that you indeed will. Just know that I am praying for you and all JW’s who do not know the truth.
I noticed you Skipped some scripture concerning the last Supper.
Matthew 26: 26
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” 27 Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.
Now based on Jesus own words, this doesn’t mean a “memorial” only and when he says “Often” it doesn’t mean only once a year.
Webster’s Dictionary:
Often: adv. many times; frequently.
Many: adj more, most 1. constituting or forming a large number. 2. a large number 3. many persons or things.
Frequently:
- happening at short intervals.
- constant, habitual, or regular.
- to visit often or habitually.
John 14:8-11
8 Philip said to him, “Master, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us.” 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever **has seen me has seen the **Father. How can you say, "Show us the Father? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own. The Father who dwells in me is doing his works. 11 **Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, **or else, believe because of the works themselves.
Now I know dj dave that you’re going to explain away what Jesus said, there’s no doubt in my mind that you indeed will. Just know that I am praying for you and all JW’s who do not know the truth.
A
adelore
Guest
dj dave,
Like I said I will keep Praying for you and all JW’s.
Satan likes to play with peoples minds and he likes to keep them from seeing or knowing the Full Truth. JWs refuse to see the Truth, no matter how many times someone trys to show them. Tis sad, that JWs are afraid to “seek and find” as the “Truth will set you free.”
dj dave, I truely wish you well and I pray that the Holy Spirit will cause you to Question, the Watch Tower.
Just a quick question: Since you’ve been an adult, have you ever studied the Catholic Catechism of the Catholic Church?
Like I said I will keep Praying for you and all JW’s.
Satan likes to play with peoples minds and he likes to keep them from seeing or knowing the Full Truth. JWs refuse to see the Truth, no matter how many times someone trys to show them. Tis sad, that JWs are afraid to “seek and find” as the “Truth will set you free.”
dj dave, I truely wish you well and I pray that the Holy Spirit will cause you to Question, the Watch Tower.
Just a quick question: Since you’ve been an adult, have you ever studied the Catholic Catechism of the Catholic Church?
D
dj_dave
Guest
[SIGN]
adelore; noticed you Skipped some scripture concerning the last Supper. said:
D
dj_dave
Guest
[SIGN]=adelore; noticed you Skipped some scripture concerning the last Supper.
Matthew 26: 26
If you recall I stated…
I am not going to get into Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation…that is a whole new thread.
However the following does jump out at me.
Luke 22:19-20 (American Standard Version)
19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and gave to them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
20 And the cup in like manner after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood, even that which is poured out for you. [/SIGN]
Sorry, I got interrupted and ran out of time –
This cup is???
After disciples drank he said:
Matt 26:29 But I tell YOU, I will by no means drink henceforth any of this product of the vine until that day when I drink it new with YOU in the kingdom of my Father.” 30Finally, after singing praises, they went out to the Mount of Olives*.
We believe Jesus replaced the Passover with his Memorial.
I realize how sensitive this subject matter is. Again, If you recall I stated…
I am not going to get into Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation…that is a whole new thread. However, if you want me to explain further I would be happy to.
Matthew 26: 26
If you recall I stated…
I am not going to get into Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation…that is a whole new thread.
However the following does jump out at me.
Luke 22:19-20 (American Standard Version)
19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and gave to them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
20 And the cup in like manner after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood, even that which is poured out for you. [/SIGN]
Sorry, I got interrupted and ran out of time –
This cup is???
After disciples drank he said:
Matt 26:29 But I tell YOU, I will by no means drink henceforth any of this product of the vine until that day when I drink it new with YOU in the kingdom of my Father.” 30Finally, after singing praises, they went out to the Mount of Olives*.
We believe Jesus replaced the Passover with his Memorial.
I realize how sensitive this subject matter is. Again, If you recall I stated…
I am not going to get into Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation…that is a whole new thread. However, if you want me to explain further I would be happy to.
D
dj_dave
Guest
[SIGN]adelore;
John 14:8-11
8 Philip said to him, “Master, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us.” 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever **has seen me has seen the **Father. How can you say, "Show us the Father? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own. The Father who dwells in me is doing his works. 11 **Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, **or else, believe because of the works themselves.[/SIGN]
The key is found in the words, Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me,
In harmony with this, Jesus, responding to a question by Thomas, said: “If you men had known me, you would have known my Father also; from this moment on you know him and have seen him,” and, in answer to YOUR statement from Philip, Jesus added: “He that has seen me has seen the Father also.” (Joh 14:5-9) Again, Jesus’ following explanation shows that this was so because he faithfully represented his Father, spoke the Father’s words, and did the Father’s works. (Joh 14:10, 11; compare Joh 12:28, 44-49.) I(John 12:49) 49 because I have not spoken out of my own impulse, but the Father himself who sent me has given me a commandment as to what to tell and what to speak.
This was on this same occasion, the night of his death, that Jesus said to these very disciples: “The Father is greater than I am.”—Joh 14:28.
The disciples ‘seeing’ the Father in Jesus can also be understood in the light of other Scriptural examples. Jacob, for instance, said to Esau: “*I have seen your face as though seeing God’s face in that you received me with pleasure.” *He said this because Esau’s reaction had been in harmony with Jacob’s prayer to God. (Ge 33:9-11; 32:9-12) After God’s interrogation of Job out of a windstorm had clarified that man’s understanding, Job said: “*In hearsay I have heard about you, but now my own eye does see you.” *(Job 38:1; 42:5; see also Jg 13:21, 22.) The ‘*eyes of his heart’ *had been enlightened. (Compare Eph 1:18.)
That Jesus’ statement about seeing the Father was meant to be understood figuratively and not literally is evident from his own statement at John 6:45 as well as from the fact that John, long after Jesus’ death, wrote: “No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.Joh 1:18; 1Jo 4:12.
Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else, believe because of the works themselves. Compare:
17:21 (Darby Translation)
21that they may be all one, as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us, that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Gotta go…back later next week.
John 14:8-11
8 Philip said to him, “Master, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us.” 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever **has seen me has seen the **Father. How can you say, "Show us the Father? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own. The Father who dwells in me is doing his works. 11 **Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, **or else, believe because of the works themselves.[/SIGN]
The key is found in the words, Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me,
In harmony with this, Jesus, responding to a question by Thomas, said: “If you men had known me, you would have known my Father also; from this moment on you know him and have seen him,” and, in answer to YOUR statement from Philip, Jesus added: “He that has seen me has seen the Father also.” (Joh 14:5-9) Again, Jesus’ following explanation shows that this was so because he faithfully represented his Father, spoke the Father’s words, and did the Father’s works. (Joh 14:10, 11; compare Joh 12:28, 44-49.) I(John 12:49) 49 because I have not spoken out of my own impulse, but the Father himself who sent me has given me a commandment as to what to tell and what to speak.
This was on this same occasion, the night of his death, that Jesus said to these very disciples: “The Father is greater than I am.”—Joh 14:28.
The disciples ‘seeing’ the Father in Jesus can also be understood in the light of other Scriptural examples. Jacob, for instance, said to Esau: “*I have seen your face as though seeing God’s face in that you received me with pleasure.” *He said this because Esau’s reaction had been in harmony with Jacob’s prayer to God. (Ge 33:9-11; 32:9-12) After God’s interrogation of Job out of a windstorm had clarified that man’s understanding, Job said: “*In hearsay I have heard about you, but now my own eye does see you.” *(Job 38:1; 42:5; see also Jg 13:21, 22.) The ‘*eyes of his heart’ *had been enlightened. (Compare Eph 1:18.)
That Jesus’ statement about seeing the Father was meant to be understood figuratively and not literally is evident from his own statement at John 6:45 as well as from the fact that John, long after Jesus’ death, wrote: “No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.Joh 1:18; 1Jo 4:12.
Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else, believe because of the works themselves. Compare:
17:21 (Darby Translation)
21that they may be all one, as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us, that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Gotta go…back later next week.
V
Vasian
Guest
M
mackbrislawn
Guest
No, JW isn’t mentioned in the New Testament. It’s in the Old Testament, and applies to them. Christians are Christ’s witnesses. That’s what Christian means.Not only that, all you need to say to a JW is where does Jesus mention a JW in the New Testament? And why would He wait 2,000 years to call you that? Gets them every time.
V
Vasian
Guest
Not to be splitting hairs, but I believe that “Christian”, means to be “Christ-like”
V
Vasian
Guest
BTW,
From age 28-44 I was a Jehovah’s Witness. I am now 55.
I’ve read every book that Russell himself penned, and every single book the “Society” had written up to 1997.
I’ve defended at the door, every doctrine the Watchtower Society had at the time.
They talk against the Catholic religion as having a plethora of doctrines, and articles of faith, yet claim they have none. What a lie!
They state that they do not have any sort of special dispensation from God, but at the same time claim that the “Faithful and Discreet Slave” is in fact “The Channel Of God”.
the list goes on and on and can in fact be substantiated by their own reams of writings.
They have lead people astray by demanding adherence to their dogma, and when thinking individuals have brought to them the error of certain doctrines they kicked them out and have labeled them “apostates”.
Yet years later they have adopted such new understanding as their own and claim that it came to them as “new light”, yet never ever have they apologized to those they kicked out as “apostates”. Such arrogance is part of the culture of the Watchtower Society.
From age 28-44 I was a Jehovah’s Witness. I am now 55.
I’ve read every book that Russell himself penned, and every single book the “Society” had written up to 1997.
I’ve defended at the door, every doctrine the Watchtower Society had at the time.
They talk against the Catholic religion as having a plethora of doctrines, and articles of faith, yet claim they have none. What a lie!
They state that they do not have any sort of special dispensation from God, but at the same time claim that the “Faithful and Discreet Slave” is in fact “The Channel Of God”.
the list goes on and on and can in fact be substantiated by their own reams of writings.
They have lead people astray by demanding adherence to their dogma, and when thinking individuals have brought to them the error of certain doctrines they kicked them out and have labeled them “apostates”.
Yet years later they have adopted such new understanding as their own and claim that it came to them as “new light”, yet never ever have they apologized to those they kicked out as “apostates”. Such arrogance is part of the culture of the Watchtower Society.
- Status