JOHN BUTLER

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Wikipedia shows a simple staurogram on an oil lamp from Caesarea, now at a museum in Israel, that could have come from the 300's CE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staurogram#/media/File:Nahsholim-Tel-Dor-3187.jpg

This was one of the pieces of evidence that made me think that some Christians, especially those with Jewish family backgrounds, might have found staurogram designs to be preferable to the type of graven imagery apparently forbidden in the Mosaic Law.

There is also early imagery like this:

The graffiti is dated to the late second century, likely within 100 years of the book of Revelation. It shows a man looking up to a donkey on a cross and says in Greek: “Alexamenos worships god.”

It's polemic, of course, depicting Jesus as a donkey. The book that @indagator recommended by Frank Shaw, discussed elsewhere, helps explain why Jesus was depicted as a donkey. The word for donkey seems to be a bit like onomatopoeia, like calling a donkey a "hee-haw" or "Eeyore". In Coptic the word for "donkey/ass" was EIO and the divine name known to have been used by Jews and evidently Christians and even pagans for the Jewish God was IAO [Ya'o/Yaho], the equivalent of "Yah" or "Yaho" [cf. Jah, Jaho, Jahowa].

Jewish and perhaps even Christian writers changed the names of pagan gods slightly so that they would sound insulting. (Compare Beelzebul, "Lord of the High Place," to Beelzebub, "Lord of the Flies."). The similarity between a word for "donkey" and the Jewish God's divine name made it a prime candidate for the same type of derision. And the Jewish name for Jesus contained both the divine name "Yaho" and the connected word for "Savior" or "Salvation." (Yaho-shuah/Joshua/Jesus means "Jehovah [Yaho] is Salvation.")

It was not because of the legend that "Your Savior will come riding on the back of a donkey" is the reason for the cross on the back of so many breeds of donkeys:

Thank you. 

Was the Apostle Paul politically motivated when he chose to buy Roman citizenship for himself  ? 

2 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

So does the GB disfellowship itself when it understands better something it said in the past and changes it?  For example, the superior authorities are Jehovah God and Christ Jesus, now it is the governmental authorities.  They are brothers who understood what this meant before the GB.  That is why all this inquisition should stop. People can believe what they wish to. They don't have to spread everything to cause disorder. 

 

 

 

The GB changed it twice. Firstly it was the Governmental Authorities, then it was God and Jesus, it is now back to the Governmental  Authorities.  It suited their purposes to change it. they are not inspired, not even guided, just devious. 

The GB has tried to make sure that no one else can disfellowship them. Probably another reason they say only they, 8 men, are the 'faithful and discreet slave'. Discrediting all the other Anointed and making them powerless..

The inquisition, as you call it, is very important. So that everyone can see the truth about the GB. How bad they  really are . 

52 minutes ago, Nicole said:

That is my point, if it were only a matter of conscience, where others have to respect your decisions,  there would not be judicial comitees for this, and as I mentioned before, the brother I know would not have been reproved. Unless they got a new "light" about that theme recently. 

I would suggest you ignore Melinda Mills. She is like an Ostrich with her head buried in the sand. 

Nicole, you are completely right. We know from true life experience that the GB make rules and the Elders act like policemen. 

This is the same as shunning, JW's  don't know why they have to do it, they just do it out of fear. They are frightened to be reported to the Elders.  

Allowed is the right word. You are right.

4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Not really. You don't have to be able to read Greek. It's the same word just inflected differently because of the way it's used in a sentence. Kind of like "He seeks" and "He sought" or "they own it" and "it is theirs" or "one child" and "two children."  A quick way to see this is to go to:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/jhn/20/25/t_concf_1017025

and

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/act/12/7/t_concf_1030007

You should be looking at the "Interlinear" Greek of each verse. Just roll your cursor slowly over the Greek words in the Textus Receptus (the NWT will be closer to the GNT Morphological at the bottom of the verse, but they are usually the same). If you are looking at the Greek Interlinear tab (or the Reverse Interlinear tab) you can see that in John 20:25  χερσὶν is the same noun for "hand" but that it is in "Dative Feminine Plural" (dative is the possessive/ownership case, as in they vs. theirs). This will usually provide the answer for variations of the same word. In this particular case it doesn't help so much because the same basic reasons are true of both, and the difference is due to a writer's choice based on a prepositional inflection in this case. Biblehub provides all the variations of cheir χεὶρ:

Strong's Greek 5495
179 Occurrences

χεὶρ — 13 Occ.
χεῖρα — 30 Occ.
χεῖρας — 60 Occ.
χεῖρες — 2 Occ.
χειρὶ — 20 Occ.
χειρῶν — 18 Occ.
χειρὸς — 26 Occ.
χερσὶν — 10 Occ.

Wow, just wow. Great stuff but all beyond me. 

So to think that every JW does all this to prove to themselves that what they believe is true. That's amazing.  That is what you call studying God's word. 

3 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Well then, why not stsrt a thread on that topic and see if  you can there achieve your objective?. 

Because I'm showing each point on each topic individually. You actually proved that be saying i do it on every topic. But the idea is to stay on topic and prove my point at the same time. Thereby showing in each case how bad the GB is. 

9 hours ago, Anna said:

Well then we have nothing to worry about!

For instance, before these days Theuʹdas rose up, saying he himself was somebody, and a number of men, about 400, joined his party. But he was done away with, and all those who were following him were dispersed and came to nothing.  After him, Judas the Gal·i·leʹan rose up in the days of the registration, and he drew followers after himself. That man also perished, and all those who were following him were scattered. So under the present circumstances, I say to you, do not meddle with these men, but let them alone. For if this scheme or this work is from men, it will be overthrown;  but if it is from God, you will not be able to overthrow them. Otherwise, you may even be found fighters against God himself. (Acts 5: 36 -39)

What has to be worried about is this :-

1. Bringing God's name into disrepute.

2. Stumbling those already in the JW Org.

3. Taking false information to those 'on the doors'.

4. Showing up the JW Org as something that cannot be trusted at all. 

14 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

Must stop using the word "allowed" and at the same time saying it is a personal decision or a matter of conscience.   "Allowed" has the connotation that someone is making the decision for you and you don't need to study the Bible and come to a conclusion.

Using the word "allowed" shows that persons don't understand Christian freedom and that one has to have knowledge and  based on that knowledge make their own decision. Everyone uses his Christian freedom based on the understanding gained from Romans chapter 13. Christians  put Jehovah God first and also respect the superior authorities which were allowed to rule by God to keep order in the earth until his Kingdom arrives. How each Christian does it is for him to decide.

JW's use the word allowed, and people talking about JW's use the allowed, because it is 'what is allowed and what isn't' by the GB.

The GB are dictators. That is a simple fact.  The GB make rules that is another simple fact. JW's have to submit to the GB rules or get disfellowshipped, another simple fact.. Anyone questioning the GB is disfellowshipped for 'causing a division in the congregation' that is another simple fact.

You need to wake up and see the reality of the JW Org and it's GB. It's a bit like saying that Germans in 1940 could talk against Hitler and disobey him. Yes of course physically they could, but they would die for it. And in the JW Org congregants ae told they will get disfellowshipped / spiritually die, if they go against the GB and against the Org. 

So the word 'allowed' is the right word to use when referring to the GB and the JW ORG.. .

@JW Insider your information is fantastic but you are way above me on all of this. I'm such a simple man, BUT so are so many people.

My point being made is, so many people are 'simple' 'down to earth' 'not highly educated' 'not having all these Bible aids' and in honesty not capable of being able to do such research. Will none of you people understand ? Will none of you realise how much responsibility your GB has ? 

You GB sends you out to preach to people that have no knowledge or understanding of God's word. In fact as time goes on many people now have no knowledge of anything and some can barely read or write properly. Yes even here in the UK. 

You may say, it isn't the GB that sends you out, it is God through Jesus Christ. Yes of course it is, but the GB are the ones that 'feed' you the information that you should 'feed' to others. Hence the GB have people's lives in their hands. Your lives and the ones you preach to. 

If, as can be seen on the topics here, it is proved the GB tell lies, make mistakes, get things wrong. How is this being guided by God?  You  are going out with lies, false information, false hopes in some cases. Is this really how God and Jesus wants the work done ?

Having read through all the comments and had a good laugh, i am now more convinced than ever of the GB not being the FDS.

It seems some people need to hang on desperately to the 'cliff edge', being frightened of losing their 'faith' in thier GB. 

The points are quite simple. The NWT is a 'readable' bible. It uses 'readable words'. The translators have a very great responsibility to God and to 'men'. Yet at John 20 v 25, it chooses to use the words HANDS and NAILS, both in the plural. I am sure it the translators felt it would be right, they would have used the word 'wrists' if that word was also a meaning of the original 'cheir' 

Another point I have just noticed and this may be important. in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greeks Scriptures.

In the GREEK writing, the word for hands at John 20 v 25 is different to the word for hands at Acts 12 v 7. 

I looked and looked at this to be sure I was right, and it is different. I do so wish I could read Greek and Hebrew. 

So back to the picture and the John 20 v 25 scripture..... And another question/s. Is the GB trying to persuade / convince people of things that they themselves do not even know for sure ?  if so is that even a spiritual thing to do ? 

@Outta Here Quote "I fail to see the relevance of your GB jibes in this.They are like a sort of phonic tic that keeps appearing in your postings, regardless of subject matter."

I am proving that the GB are not the 'faithful and discreet slave' and therefore they cannot give the true spiritual food at  the right time. 

Myself and others on this forum are showing quite clearly that the GB very often get things wrong. it is only people such as yourself that worship the GB by not questioning them, that cannot see truth in front of your own eyes.  

Myself and others here have shown that the GB at times deliberately 'get things wrong' or more likely, deliberately tell lies. They deliberately make misquotes trying to prove false points. 

That is not just the opinion of one person (myself) but of many ex Jw's and current JW's. 

4 hours ago, Anna said:

Yes. This is what I was trying to explain to @JOHN BUTLER

No, rather the GB have the high opinion of themselves. And more so since they have become 'screen stars'. 

We get back to the point that according to scripture all of the Anointed should be the Spiritual Jew, but the majority of the Anointed are pushed to the sidelines and the GB also stated in writing that some may even be mentally ill. And the GB make themselves, only those 8 men, the 'faithful and discreet slave'. But they are not able to prove that and they say that they are not inspired.  So, who gave them permission to call themselves the FDS ? Who gave them permission to say some may be mentally ill ? Who gave them permission to judge who should be the important ones and who should not ?  Unfortunately you are worshipping you GB by not even questioning them.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Maybe there were shades of dictatorship, maybe someone was frightened of something. But the reason I share all of this is because we need to know that people will have the same problems now as they had for thousands of years.

Think about what you might have done if you lived in the reign of King Manasseh or had knowledge of David's immorality before it was put in CONTEXT by the rest of the Bible. Of what about being stumbled by the way men from James, and also John and Peter were acting with respect to the Judaizers mentioned in Galatians 1 and 2. Or if you knew that the "Governing Body" had given a decree including not eating meat sacrificed to idols and then you heard the apostle Paul preach that it was OK to eat meat sacrificed to idols? Or what if you had heard Jesus say you have to eat his body and drink his blood? Or what about all those superfine apostles that attracted followers of men in first-century congregations? What if you heard that Peter had killed 2 contributors to the early congregation for holding back some of their claimed contribution.

These might have seemed causes for stumbling, and we could easily conceive of many brothers backing away from their congregations in doubt or even defiance of false understandings. But what was the correct response? If some might have known better, or saw that something was not really handled Biblically, would merely running from it have been the loving thing to do?

I think some have too high an opinion of what the GB represent, even higher than what the GB seem to be claiming themselves. For those persons, it's good to review the record. For others, too, it's good not to place too high of expectations on humans, but appreciate the truths themselves. The message outweighs the messenger.

Zechariah 8 v 23.

“This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘In those days ten men out of all the languages of the nations will take hold, yes, they will take firm hold of the robe of a Jew,  saying: “We want to go with you, for we have heard that God is with you people.”’”

The Anointed are the spiritual Jew. In my opinion it is all of the Anointed, not just, or even, the GB. 

Micah 4 v 2

And many nations will go and say:“Come, let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah And to the house of the God of Jacob. He will instruct us about his ways, And we will walk in his paths.”For law will go out of Zion, And the word of Jehovah out of Jerusalem.

The GB put themselves in the place of Jesus, and they compare themselves to Moses. They exalt themselves above the others of the Anointed.  This has all been shown on here many times and it gets tiresome. 

The GB are pretending to be that spiritual Jew. JW's are falling for it hook, line and sinker. 

JW's think that the JW Org' is going up that mountain to Jehovah. The mountain is supposed to be high above all else.  But just look at the truth of it all. Shown many times on here. The GB and the JW org / Watchtower are not that mountain, they are not above any other. They are full of disgusting things. False teachings, dictatorship, Child Abuse, lack of love, misguidance, 'U' turns on various man made rules and much more.... 

In the 1st Century the Greek scriptures were only being written. They were actually living it. Nowadays we have it all in many languages, and lots of the early manuscripts to check thing by.  All the information is readily available. BUT, what i don't see is anyone showing that they are inspired of God. The Bible is inspired of God. it needs those Spiritual Jews that should be inspired of God also. Otherwise how will anyone know who to 'take firm hold of ?

(Enough for one day, 8pm, my wife wants me to go and watch a film with her on Netflix  )

@Outta Here still doesn't want to see truth.  but I've said it above for all to see. 

24 minutes ago, Anna said:

I think you are missing the point. The simple answer is if you are going to depict Jesus at his moment of sacrificial death, then you have to decide what you are going to depict him on. The GB's preference is obviously a stake, and why not?  There is evidence that the word "stauros" could have meant just one piece of timber. So really it comes down to the interpretation of what "stauros" meant at the time it was used. As @Srecko Sostar shows; the The Imperial Bible-Dictionary talks about both possibilities, one piece of timber or two pieces of timber. Take your pic. It's quite possible that "a modification was introduced as the dominion and usages of Rome extended themselves through Greek speaking countries" after the death of Jesus. The dictionary goes on to say that that "a cross beam was more common in Jesus day", but still, that is no proof that Jesus was indeed put on a cross. And if it was a cross, we don't even know "the precise form of the cross" as the dictionary puts.

 

So you disbelieve the account of Thomas and his words ? So be it , you turn against God's word. 

The GB have obviously turned against God's word by using that picture. Remember : NAILS = PLURAL, HANDS PLURAL 

NOT WRIST WITH ONE NAIL.  HANDS  NAILS...    It could not be any clearer.  

Luke 16 v 10.

The person faithful in what is least is faithful also in much, and the person unrighteous in what is least is unrighteous also in much. 

Have a good day. 

5 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

It was well-known that he would be threatened with dismissal if he grew a beard, even though his was very neatly trimmed and short. It had happened to others. Why in the world anyone would want to test this was a mystery to me. He didn't even claim it was a skin thing which might have got him a reprieve. He was not disfellowshipped, but he was dismissed from Bethel and remained an elder after shaving. There was no written rule about beards that I ever knew of. Rutherford was adamantly against them, and I think it was just a long tradition, and it fit in with the idea of trying to present ourselves at all times without giving anyone a cause for stumbling.

No, it was forbidden because housekeepers were on the lookout for Bible study material that was not approved and several brothers got in trouble for owning it in their rooms. The crackdown on Bible study in groups was done because someone (perhaps more than one person) thought there was a direct connection between this and the rumors of apostasy. It turned out that there were dozens of such Bible study groups uncovered that had been going on since the early 1970's if not before. I attended two per week, about two hours each, in the room of a member of the Writing Department, and I knew others who had attended others also often in the room of members of the Writing Department, former Gilead Students etc. The ones I attended were discussions of a chapter or two at a time of the Bible in context until the whole book was finished. After every paragraph a brother would ask questions to draw people out, and people would comment about what it seemed to mean in context.

One of these meetings, I think it was the one in the room of Mark Nevajans (who was not in Writing, and might not have even been a Bethel Elder), was turned in for allowing the discussion of alternative doctrines like "great crowd" "other sheep" "disagreement with 1914". I'm told that this sparked a kind of "witchhunt" where everyone had to "rat out" anyone else they knew who was participating in Bethel Bible studies. These studies turned into a big scandal which were actually forbidden. Then ownership of non-Witness commentaries was questioned, and the actual idea of a "commentary" was questioned -- which was the basic mistake made in the book "Commentary on the Letter of James" which made it considered to be "apostate." Bethelite access to the Bethel Library and Gilead Library was also restricted. Those libraries were full of commentaries of all kinds. Very soon, these libraries were both moved to another building away from Bethelite access, and away from buildings that were residences like 124 and 107 CH. They were now attached to the offices of Writing, Service, etc, and were much harder to get to.  Smaller libraries of only a few of the WTS books and a dictionary replaced them for the average Bethelite's use.

My goodness, a dictatorship. what were they frightened of ? I'm in shock ! 

47 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Do you really want to believe it? :))

The GB are humans. They are not inspired. they make rules. So the rules are human rules. 

As an update : I'm looking on Ebay at Hebrew Interlinear translations. Some are very expensive and i don't exactly have £50 to spend. 

Any sensible suggestions as to a particular version i should be going for ? 

There are Strong's on ebay for less than £20 GBP but, A, i don't exactly know what I'm buying, and B, would i even know how to use it ? 

Help !!!!! 

8 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

The one you had was an update of the 1969/70 version. The update included changes to the NWT modern text in the right and several other updates/corrections. Some of these had been mentioned in the Kingdom Ministry:

*** km 6/70 p. 3 Announcements ***

◆ Correction: In The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures on page 1171 the date Nisan 10 should be moved down two lines so that the first event listed for that day will be “Barren fig tree cursed; second temple cleansing.” We suggest that you mark this correction in your personal copy.
◆ Also, on page 615, under the last Greek word on the top line, change the preposition “to” to read “of,” so as to make it read “of us.”

Even this Interlinear was an update to the Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson. The Watch Tower Society purchased the plates and the full rights to republish and distribute this interlinear. This was available through the WTS for many years, from 1902 even up to the 1960's until the inventory ran out.

Yes. But not for the public. It was created digitally and based on J.P.Green's Hebrew Interlinear. You can see a glimpse of it in the introductory video at Patterson (for tours) showing how NWT Bible translators go back to both the original Hebrew and Greek. It's an online tool, but may be too much of a derivative from a previously published work to be republished by the Watchtower. A limited number of Green's Hebrew Interlinear was made available to some Bethelites in 1979 and then effectively "forbidden" for private use in 1980 after some Bible study groups at Bethel began using it. Anyone who asked for a copy after December 1979 was thoroughly questioned until the WTS stopped making it internally available by April 1980. The brother in "Purchasing" who was in charge of procuring them for Bethelites, GB, and the Library was dismissed for growing a beard in April, and there were no more responses to the requests.  

 

Dismissed for growing a beard ? On what grounds ? Was he disfellowshipped or just put down a peg or two ? 

And it seems a bit suspicious that the Hebrew Interlinear was 'forbidden'.  Surely it was a study aid ?  Did it reveal too much truth to others ?   As i keep saying, the plot thickens ....... 

Thank you for all the information. And as for the info' on the Hebrew Interlinear, it's no wonder i could not get a straight answer from the Elders  

1 hour ago, Outta Here said:

"Evil be to him that evil thinks"

As the single stake is a possibility as to the method of execution Jesus experienced, we prefer to illustrate thus. Mainstream Chistendom prefers its own version. Jehovah is a pronunciation of the name of God that is widely recognised and appropriately associated. We are happy using this alternative, especially as it provides a convenient separation of the Father from the Son, something NOT preferred by mainstream Christendom.

The significance of both (far more importantly) is appropriately summed up in the commonly quoted words:

“For God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, so that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life" John 3:16

"This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ." John 17:3

 

A couple of points here :-

There is no mention in either of those scriptures of needing a Governing Body of 8 men to rule over others. 

And, you completely FAIL to answer the questions about THOMAS and the amount of NAILS used, and where those NAILS were PLACED. 

COMPLETE FAILURE ON YOUR PART.  

One more point. You and Anna say that it is not important 'what shape instrument was used' when Jesus was killed. However your GB must think it is important enough because they show a whole page picture of it, and even then they get it wrong.

1 hour ago, Outta Here said:

Is that what you want?

You must be a JW because you try to twist things just like the Kid does. 

It was you that said 'the sooner the better'  So i presume it's what you want. 

But even though you have twisted it I will give a response so that all can see my viewpoint. Which many know already anyway. 

I want the 8 men, the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses, all removed from their position and removed from the Organisation completely. Just as Jesus said about the Wicked Slave :- 

1 hour ago, Outta Here said:

Blustering is a common fault among humans unfortunately. Each man will answer for his own bluster. 

So do you believe the GB of JW Org are God's spokesperson here on Earth ?  If so they will have the lives of million of people to answer for on judgement day, or before. 

2 hours ago, Outta Here said:

The sooner, the better!

Are you wanting the Watchtower and JW organisation to go out of business soon ? 

10 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Bluster is rarely self assessed.

The simple fact of the matter is: make your own decision, and stick to it. And accept the consequence.

Excercise your own conscience and let others excercise theirs. Anything designed to impinge on that freedom can only be......bluster.

PS. I mean "your" in a collective, not personal sense, rather than the rather archaic "one's". I could substitute "my" if the "your" offends or incites. ?

Please talk to the Governing Body and tell them your exact words as written here, as the GB sure do a lot of bluster on many issues, by your standards it seems. 

I love the way you both jump to the defence of the Gb and the JW Org. 

They say a picture paints a thousand words, so please look at the picture. Now tell me is this truth of lies ? Or guesswork ? 

Where is that nail ? What were Thomas' words ?  Nails in the hands.

Not using the cross because the church used it ? Um, they use Jehovah's name and wasn't it a Catholic monk that started that name ? 

The name Jehovah already occurs repeatedly in the 13th Century in the Latin form of Jehovah. The Spanish monk Raymond Mantini, translated about 1270 different parts of the Bible from the Hebrew. In his manuscripts is on the right side the Hebrew text and on the left the Latin with Iehovah.

Cardinal Nikolaus of Kues used the Tetragrammaton vocalized as Jehovah in several of his works, 1428, in his Sermon In Principio Erat Verbum.

Petrus Galatinus published in the year 1518 his work "De Arcnis catholicae veritatis".

As William Tyndale, translated the Pentateuch 1530, he transferred the Tetragrammaton also by using the word Jehovah.

So, is the name Jehovah a false name ?   It seems the Bible Students used the name Jehovah because it was already known so people could relate to it. 

But I digress, the point here is the lie that picture tells.