Patiently waiting for Truth

Hi again. An example that compares JW’s dramatization of biblical text with “original biblical text” from generally accepted manuscripts (or ... text available as biblical, to be more precise in words) is an indication of how certain past events can be used in a way that "enrich" existing biblical text with a broader account/description of what allegedly happened, and these are words and actions, for which there is no evidence that it really happened. But in the minds and feelings of observers at the JW Congress this will leave an impression given and foreseen by the writer of the modern conversation attributed to characters from the past.
Consequently, the so-called official biblical text of the book itself (with or without certain parts in dispute) gets a new sound. It gets an addition in the form of words spoken by a JW actor that do not exist in the Bible. But after listening to the “biblical drama” these fictional words slowly become an integral part of the beliefs and doctrinal guidance of believers as if they were indeed uttered thousands of years ago and as if they were truly the word of God.
A virtual, "new Greek Scriptures” is being created in the memory of believers, because it will become an interpretation, a description, a picture of events from the past that should become an example of how to live today, because that is how faithful people in the past allegedly spoke and acted. That's the connection.

Yes, you are right. Also, many or most people don't think WTJWorg and JW people are the only true religion.   

I thought that what @Patiently waiting for Truth did here was excellent. He didn't give a miniature summary of the passage, but he used other scriptures to show that the idea was very feasible.
Also, "Patiently" (calling himself 4Jah2me at the time) had already brought up the point about this being a potentially spurious passage several months ago. SM has brought it up several times.
 

The Locust term is used for not only used for God's people, but was also used for Babylonian army of old. One of the reasons why some of the verses interconnect (from both Joel and Revelations) with each other is due to how Locust are, they do not come as one, two or a few, but a swarm:

Christians early on assume the Locusts in Revelations to represent the enemy and or demons, which is in similarity as to how Bible students viewed it early on as did most, even connecting Joel and Revelations at times, however, some after learning, people came to a conclusion in their understanding of things to know who Revelations speaks of, granted the Locust and regards to Joel concerning Babylonians. In Revelations, those who represent the Locusts not only come out of the abyss, they are to finish the gospel work, and proclaim judgement. The way I see it, people's view back then was different due to how the Locust Army seen in Revelations looks like, not knowing that this is a symbolic representation.
The only group who speaks of the Locusts as enemies, even equating Joel to Revelations as identical are anything who shares the same mindset as most Trinitarians. There are other views, which are somewhat nonsensical, and very far from the truth, which some believe today sadly.
For us Biblical Unitarians, we at a time thought of the Locust as Satan's Army against God at a time, ignoring the symbolic representation and took what was said literally, hence the speculation that the horde of demonic locusts, only later to know the true representation.
That being said, people who come to learn and understand what a passage or verse is conveying, it shows that such ones are slowly learning as to what is true; and whatever old reasoning that they had that was not correct, for after learning, they see. If the JW pastor were to continue living, it is by no doubt he would come to that conclusion himself. It is also how they operate due to what Butler linked from the JW website, for the first paragraphs pretty much explains how Christians were back then compared to now, they had to collect findings.
Before the update of this forums, @The Librarian had a list of things concerning how Bible Students, well into JWs come to learn of their findings, you can check it out down here. It will be somewhat difficult because the responses are from the same usual suspects:
 

I asked for who. You just gave me a name deemed a title. 
Therefore if you are going to say someone is wrong, you have to explain.
To anyone else who reads, the name was professed by @Patiently waiting for Truth, his reason for not telling WHO Abaddon is, would either make or break his entire thread - Therefore, to make a claim as to someone being wrong about the Locust notation, but unable to back it up, shows a huge level of bluff on his end. - So if I am wrong, show your evidence.
 
 
That being said, if that isn't addressed, I'd gladly answer by using the Bible alone, if you can't address WHO this angel is. Thanks for the name, despite it is already known, as is, deemed a title.
I thought I should let this known to you, Angel of the Abyss and the Locust has been debated for years now, even predating you and even me. So the make or break factor in this is huge here.

Once again the Storm Trooper demads answers  He asked a question and I gave him an answer.
But note that I told him 'That's all ya gettin'.  One jump ahead, because I knew he would demand more  .
Unfortunately I think SM is now being a Troll, deliberately trying to throw things off topic. 

ABADDON
(A·badʹdon) [from Heb., meaning “Destruction”].
At Revelation 9:11 this Hebrew word is transliterated into the English text. There we read concerning the symbolic plague of locusts that they have “a king, the angel of the abyss. In Hebrew his name is Abaddon, but in Greek he has the name Apollyon.” 
That's all ya gettin'.  

The information i have given was only available in April 2020 Study Watchtower.  I have given a link to the source. 
 
 

Unfortunately it seems there is a young JW here that is being misguided by a man that 'thinks' he knows truth.
Can we please set matters straight about the wrong use of scripture. 
https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-april-2020/An-Attack-Coming-From-the-North/
The Watchtower—Study Edition  |  April 2020 STUDY ARTICLE 14      An Attack Coming From the North!
2 As those Bible students soon found out, however, it can be one thing to learn what the Bible teaches about a certain doctrinal subject but quite another to discern correctly the meaning of a Bible prophecy. Why is that so? For one thing, Bible prophecies are often best understood when they are undergoing fulfillment or after they have been fulfilled. But there is another factor. To understand a prophecy correctly, we generally have to consider its context. If we focus on only one aspect of the prophecy and ignore the rest, we may draw the wrong conclusion. In hindsight, it seems that this has been the case with a prophecy in the book of Joel. Let us review that prophecy and discuss why an adjustment in our present understanding is needed.
 For many years, we have applied that prophecy symbolically to the way in which Jehovah’s people, like an unstoppable swarm of locusts, engage in their preaching activity. We understood that this activity has devastating effects on the “land,” or the people who are under the control of the religious leaders.
However, when we consider the prophecy in its context, we see that a different understanding is appropriate. Let us examine four reasons why this is so.
5 First of all, notice Jehovah’s promise with regard to the plague of locusts: “I will drive the northerner [the locusts] far away from you.” (Joel 2:20) If the locusts represent Jehovah’s Witnesses as they obey Jesus’ command to preach and make disciples, why would Jehovah promise to drive them away? (Ezek. 33:7-9; Matt. 28:19, 20) Clearly, Jehovah is driving away, not his faithful servants, but something or someone who is hostile to his people.
Notice that Jehovah promises to “make compensation” for the damage the locusts have caused. If the locusts picture Kingdom evangelizers, this would suggest that the message they proclaim causes damage.
Did you notice that Jehovah says: “After that I will pour out my spirit”; that is, after the locusts have completed their assigned task? If the locusts are preachers of God’s Kingdom, why would Jehovah pour out his spirit on them after they finish their witnessing? 
We previously connected the plague of locusts described by Joel with our preaching work because of a similar prophecy found in the book of Revelation. 
Admittedly, there are similarities between the prophecy in Revelation and the one Joel recorded. However, there are significant differences. Consider: In Joel’s prophecy, the locusts devastate the vegetation. (Joel 1:4, 6, 7) In John’s vision, the locusts are “told not to harm the vegetation of the earth.” (Rev. 9:4) The locusts Joel saw came from the north. (Joel 2:20) Those John saw came out of an abyss. (Rev. 9:2, 3) The locusts Joel described are driven away. In Revelation, the locusts are not driven away but are allowed to finish their work. There is no indication that they deserve Jehovah’s disapproval. 
The significant differences between the two prophecies lead us to conclude that they are not connected.
17 What has changed? We now have a more accurate understanding of the prophecy found at Joel 2:7-9. Simply put, these verses refer, not to our zealous preaching work, but to the activity of the Babylonian army that invaded Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Watchtower / JW Org / GB, here admitted that what they had been teaching was FALSE.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romans / Superior Authorities scripture was also falsely used by the Org between 1929 to 1962.
Until 1929, the “superior authorities” or “higher powers” were correctly said by Watchtower to be the earthly rulers to whom Christians paid taxes and whose laws they were obligated to follow.

@Equivocation please consider one important detail, because you are JW member and as such you absorb (everything) what is taught from GB. 
Dramatizations of biblical events have long been an important part of the Congress program, and many await with great anticipation and enthusiasm “biblical dramas” that are costumed and that contain a script specially prepared. As it is today, this summer.
Is every word, every sentence uttered by JW actors in any of these plays written in the Bible? It's not! I'm sure you know the same thing.
What explanation do you have for staging biblical events based on fictional dialogues attributed to historical biblical figures? Do you have to believe that real biblical characters uttered just such sentences written by screenwriters in WTJWorg?
You tend to prove that something Jesus did not say and do, and on the other hand you “swallow” fictional dialogues written by some people in Bethel, which are attributed to being spoken by people of biblical times.
Do not you see that you (and SpaceM) are supporting the absurdity, in an expanded form with respect to this form of Bible teaching (through "biblical dramas" performed by JW actors)?
 

I asked you who is The Angel of the Abyss, I didn't ask for a name. Again, if you are going to say someone is false, prove to your claims, JB.
It isn't a hard question by the way.
 
EDIT:
You continue to prove my points - 

Wrong. The Pharisees used scripture and facts to ask their questions. That shows you don't know as much as you pretend to know. 

Pharisees used lies in the face of the Christ, but, the trick question was to root out a reasoning. So you linking that to the Pharisees was false, and it shows willful error
If you want to go down that route, I can easily quote you for Romans 12:9 which you used said verse to defense problematic issues that is not of God's favor. Man of God you say, but you do not abide by context, therefore you said what you said because you fled from the question.
Utter Pharisees again, and I will gladly link your quote.
That being said, while you were in hiding, the general public do interact with homosexuals in the workplace or in public, and to the homosexuals they are not psychic, they do not who you are or your views of homosexuality, therefore, if one asks you, you are in a position to explain to the person as to why you can't do this or that, in this trick question - why a Christian should not involve himself with such things, and how to convey to the homosexual the reason.
Quite the hypocritical mindset, on your part, Butler.

In the workplace, you are bound to meet people like this. Co-workers, whom you work with. The answer to that would be, I would tell him I won't attend, or take some form of responsibility for this event. If I am told WHY, my answer would not only I am a JW, but also tell the person as to, in a respectful manner, as to why I can't attend via Bible examples.
We do these to be very respectful, and I know it was address already, to not mingle with conduct or customs that are not in God's favor.
@Pudgy To a degree, it can be a waste of time depending on the person, but there are people who will listen. Believe it or not, some people out there can conquer this imperfections and be a follower of Jehovah God and Christ. I can't read French, but someone translated it already.
The article is a little bit pushing for acceptance of same sex marriage. The bible makes it clear marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Are you inspired to know this?
You’re checking the hand of God.  (Isa 55:8)  If God inspired the addition of lost information in the book of John, and did this through an individual, what is it to you?
25 "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written."  John 21:25
 
 

My point was that Jesus could have done so. I never said Jesus did so in that scripture. 
But i see you are treating this all as a game. Trying to score points for SM.  So be it. 
Yes this forum is probably a game, but serving God through Christ is not a game. 
 

Did it ever occur to you that the early scribes may be have been at fault for leaving out this passage, and that God made sure it was replaced, especially for our sake in the last days?  Read it, and notice what Jesus was speaking about in the temple before the event with the adulterous woman took place. 
"On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. 38 Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them."  John 7:37,38
At dawn of the very next day, he was teaching in the temple courts. The Pharisees brought in the woman, attempting to trap him with their questions. Notice, Jesus bent over and wrote in the dust. (John 8:6) We have a reference of another writing in the dust, and the connection to "living water".  
"Lord, you are the hope of Israel;
    all who forsake you will be put to shame.
Those who turn away from you will be written in the dust
    because they have forsaken the Lord,
    the spring of living water."  Jer 17:13
The majority of the Jews rejected Jesus Christ as the source of living water.  They preferred the "yeast of the Pharisees".  (Matt 16:11,12)  Today, the same is happening in your organization.  "Living water" in Jesus Christ is polluted by doctrines of men.  (2 Thess 9:9-12; Heb 12:15; Rev 8:10,11)  Judgment is made against individuals by your laws in a book compiled by men.  Do they dare cast the first stone, these men who have trampled down the Temple of God, assuming God has assigned them to shepherd the people above and beyond His priesthood?  (Mark 13:14) (Mal 2:7; 1 Cor 6:1,2)
Do you prefer the "yeast' of the GB over the living water in Jesus Christ?
 

I don't think you are clearly seeing what Jesus is saying in Matt 10:23.   
I’m sure you agree that “good news of the Kingdom” has been spread throughout the earth since the early apostles’ day.  But Jesus is telling his future anointed disciples about a direct preaching work to the “towns of Israel” – to the Israel of God.   This message cannot reach all before the return of Christ, because of resistance against it.  There is a lockdown of the flow of spiritual food.  There is a warning given by your leaders that any message that comes from outside the organization, is false. Listening to such a message can result in one's condemnation contrived by men.  Dan 11:36; Rev 13:5-7; 11:1,2   Rev 13:15-17
Who is “Israel” today?  Rom 9:6-8; Gal 4:26,28;1 Pet 2:5,9,10; Gal 6:15,16; Heb 8:10; Rev 7:4
Why do they receive the message?  Matt 24:9-12, 15,16,23-24; Acts 20:29-30; 1 Tim 4:1,2; 2 Thess 2:1-4;9-12; Rev 13:5-7,18; 16:13-16; 20:7-9  (Rev 17:1,2,5,6,18;18:3-8)
Why are those of Christ’s disciples who are preaching this “good news”, persecuted for their message they bring to the “towns of Israel”?  Matt 10:16-23,39; John 15:20; Matt 24:48-51; John 16:2; Heb 13:12-14; Rev 13:1,2,11,12,15; 11:1-3,7
God’s Temple in the anointed ones - those “living stones” and dwelling of God’s spirit – has been trampled by your elder body/Beast/organization at the direction of false teachers/prophets.  The anointed have allowed “foreigners” to “enter” God’s sanctuary.  This is why “Israel” receives the “good news” of the restoration of “Jacob”/Israel  in the last days.  Ezek 44:6-9,10,12,15; 20:30,31; Num.18:7; Mal 3:1-5; 4:5,6; Matt 17:11; Rev 11:1-3 (1 Pet 2:5,9; 1 Cor 3:16,17; Rom 15:16; Eph 2:20-22) (Isa 43:1,10-12; 48:20; Rev 18:4)
 
Has God ever condoned the replacement of His royal priesthood as your GB has?  Is there anywhere in the scriptures that tells us a “Gentile” can “represent the royal priesthood”?  2 Chron 13:9  This is a choice every JW must make, to either listen carefully to the word of God, or choose to listen to the words of men.   Isa 2:17,22; Joel 3:14
 
Daniel Chapter 11:31-45

 
 
 

My point was that Jesus could have done so. I never said Jesus did so in that scripture. 
But i see you are treating this all as a game. Trying to score points for SM.  So be it. 
Yes this forum is probably a game, but serving God through Christ is not a game. 
 

As far as I could notice regarding other Jesus stories (chapters of Luke before and after the story of Lazarus), illustrations, parables, and similar descriptions, one could say that they have elements that were real (that happened to someone, somewhere), or would could be real in everyday life (which will happen, they could happen to someone, somewhere). If Jesus did not believe in an immortal soul and hell, and neither did the Jews who listened to him, then I do not see real need, why Jesus would use “pagan” motives to give lessons to the Jews. 
I can answer, at least, on two ways on this. 
A) If Jesus was brave enough to tear down the tables of the merchants in the Temple and make them flee, then I see why it would not be possible for him to deal diplomatically with a multitude of hypocrites, fanatics, seduced believers, self-proclaimed righteous and influential religious leaders.
B) There are also, in fact, many other things that Jesus did, which if ever they were written in full detail, I suppose the world itself could not contain the scrolls written. - Lk 21:25

Quite interesting, but I believe someone has addressed how Christians are to operate in the face of superior authorities, more so, I hope you realize their is a distinction between the usage of the term. Granted the distinction and the already professed explanation of Romans 13, you'd have to do more than that to rely on such.
 
This was address a while back, so what is the point to bring this up now? Witness was debated on this in 2018, and in the reputation, she was confused on who the angel of the abyss was and did not connect who the locust were properly, likewise with The Destroyer, and the misuse of Greek Strong's, as shown here:
Also, references were ignored, therefore, it was amissed that  Revelation 9:7 is symbolic, thus pointing to to Joel 2:4, 5.
That being said, it is also noted Locust is used as a representation several times, figuratively.
Where is the evidence of misuse? Because you seem to even miss the context and references of the latter itself. In regards to Locust, I can easily make quotations to a few pieces of commentary. Likewise with Romans 13, and how Christians operate in this sense, which is no different from the early era of Christians.
Emerging Faiths, not Religions. There is a difference. As was addressed omitted verses and the like have not been used by the latter.
That being said, I find it humorous that the 2 questions addressed was in relation to JWfacts, however, you allowed a JW to answer them.
This essentially proves the point of what Christians and Muslims speak of concerning Former JWs, most of them are lost, as is, misguided.
John 7:53-8:11 and Acts 7:59 were very easy, this is why I used those verses on purpose due to the fact JWfacts deem these are legitimate verses, but the evidence say otherwise.
That being said, the attempt you made with Luke 17:36, shows the lack of knowing history of Scripture. You are free to make some spontaneous reaction if you wish, but the facts still stand as tall as a skyscraper.
You don't need to answer them, but you attempt with, again, Luke 17:36, which tells already, and it proves my point 100%. Not all men who leave their former faiths are that knowing despite the fact they claim to be. The do not dwell on research, in so much of a way, to an extent, build their faith.
That being said, it is funny how your own weapon of choice, JWfacts, ultimately resulted on you falling on your sword. If you actually lived up to your new name, you should know that if one actual sought truth, they'd understand as to why verses are removed/changed, for what reason, as is knowing what is inspired and what is not.
@Srecko Sostar A shame. And before you spoke a lot about Bible errors committed by JWs, yet the deviation of 2 elementary questions that were Textual Analytics focused spun you around. If you want another one, there's 1 John 5:7,8. More so you brought this up in the discussion regarding women leading churches.

That does not answer the question - you are just giving somewhat of a miniature summary of the passage.
I said [Anyways, my question to you see, do you believe Jesus really saved an adulterous woman, even though it was never recorded in the earliest available mss sources we have come to know?]
If Jesus really saved an adulterous woman as seen in John 7:53-8:11, why is it this passage came much, much later when the Book of John was essentially completed? If this passage was canon, it would not have been a later addition, and ALL Bibles would have this passage. I pointed out that nearly 267 early mss does not have those verses about the adulterous woman, so it is a spurious passage, false.
This was my comment, if you haven't read it - 
 
He didn't save an adulterous woman because the passage was never canon. If it was canon, then an explanation could have been given the day the question about the passage was first mentioned.
If Apostle John, who was an inspired person, didn't write the passage, then who are we to assume, or confirm that he did when the mss is available to us?
The only people who consider it as true are those who constantly affirm that the KJV is the one and only true Bible. This passage is also in the same light as Acts 8:37, and the other verses mentioned.

I believe the story of Jesus forgiving the adulterous woman to be entirely consistent with everything else in the New Testament, without exception, and that is why when I go out in Service, use a Bible with those scriptures included.
I used to make rough drafts of essays on index cards, before my first drafts, and later final working transcripts, and then final edits ..... I used to use 3"x5" index cards.
I suspect back in the Apostle's days it was even more important as they were writing on leather with ink. (Think about THAT, willya?). Not just the final Epistle, but outlines and notes.
(Visualizes a small leather "Post-It Note"stuck to the wall with diluted boiled sinew glue, and it fell off, and slipped behind the writing table ...)
I consider the "deleted" scriptures to have possibly been on one of the Apostle's notes, found later, and inserted at a reasonable location, because the copiest made the same determination I did.
Further, I believe that the REAL reason the NWT leaves it out is that it would erode the authority of the GB and Elders, who constantly need to reinforce their management authority.
Like the story of the Quantum Physicist at the Bar, buying drinks for himself and the empty seat beside him, in any analysis of ANYTHING ... I try to ask "What is the most PROBABLE scenario?"
Opinions and results may differ ....

@Patiently waiting for Truth I was unaware of the blackpill reference meaning.
What a sad story.....
Society does feel like it is crumbling.

There are two points here. ( although I never use that 'scripture' as I'm not sure eather way but )
1. Jesus allowed an immoral woman to wash His feet with her tears, then wipre His feet with her hair, then she anointed His feet with oil. Then Jesus said to her "Your sins are forgiven you "  
2.  The Jewish way of life, The Law, demanded death.  However the New way, through Christ, demanded mercy and forgiveness. Jesus and the disciples never punished anyone by killing them. 
So Jesus could have saved an adulterous woman.