Evacuated

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Letter of Barnabas.

A doctrinally unsound, anti-Judaism, pseudoscripture, formed well after the commencing of a time of successful, apostate, invasive, contamination of true Christian teaching  is no basis for contradicting a simple understanding of the scripturally termed implement of Jesus's execution.

This late second/early third century, magical amulet depicting the "crucfixion"(pictured above) seems to have a connection with spiritistic darkness. Notwithstanding a possible chronological disconnect between the picture on one side and the lettering on the other,  Roy D.Kotansk, (THE MAGIC ‘CRUCIFIXION’ GEM IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM), has stated that: "Its invocation must have served as a kind of secret (or magic) formula, known only to the Christian ‘initiate’ who, in so using it, is seen to be calling upon the power of the cross for its redemptive force."

Speaking of such "invocations" the gem's contemporary 2nd/3rd Century theologian, Origen, noted: "Such power, indeed, does the name of Jesus possess over evil spirits, that there have been instances where it was effectual, when it was pronounced even by bad men" (Against Celsus, I.6).

These spiritistic connections with such "evidences" disqualify (for me) a serious consideration of them as a challenge to the view that the stake of Jesus execution was anything other than an upright stave. To me this is akin to the calling of Al Capone as a character witness for Enoch L.Johnson.

In fact, the greater the antiquity of such evidences, the firmer the confirmation of Pauls words at 2Thess.2:7:

" True, the mystery of this lawlessness is already at work.."

😊

3 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

....... they announced from the platforms that it was I who had been disfellowshipped.

😱 At last....I think I am starting to understand you. That is simply outrageous.

10 hours ago, Anna said:

The Greek word is HAND, so to translate it correctly, one must say hand in English also. 

This is perfectly valid. As the acount in Luke  23:39 was written by a physician, it would be curious that he would intentionally confuse matters anatomically if the specific word for "wrist"  in Greek (karpos) was in common usage. After all, he was quite specific regarding the healing of the lame man a few weeks later, when he described this at Acts 3:7, using the terms "feet" and "ankles". But, he didn't use the word "palm" which was in common use (Mark 14:65) to desribe the nail positions. It has been theorized that Luke was sticking more to  the account as relayed to him, not being an eye-witness, and if karpos was not in general use particularly among Galileans of the time, then his use of the word for "hand" which. in the parlance of the day included the "wrist", (wheras "palm" did not) is quite acceptable. However, this no argument to definitely ascertain the positioning of the nail (s).

With regard to the notion of the palm's inability to support the weight of the body, this appears to be based on the suspect experiments carried out by Pierre Barbet (1884–1961), subsequently challenged rather thoroughly, if bizarrely, by Frederick Zugibe (1928-2002. Notwithstanding the Shroud of Turin theories being the object of attention, his conclusions are considerably relevant.

Altering illustrations to show Jesus nailed through the wrists is quite a generous step to take, given the weight of academic opinion however, and for the Governing Body to take this step shows a perfectly reasonable approach in view of the lack of concrete information -  concession without compromise.

On 11/14/2018 at 5:17 AM, Anna said:

As for the plural nails, I don't really have an answer for that one.

Jesus words (recorded again by physician Luke) at Luke 24:39-40 may well give us a clue to a more complete account of  his response to the doubts of Thomas, the details of which may have only been partially reported by John (John 20:25). The reference of Jesus to hands and feet as an evidence of his being the one resurrected  would necessitate the minimum of two nails, hence the use of the plural.

I do not have a uncompromising view of this matter however, because, as noted frequently, the Scriptures are not definitive on the matter. But I am not aware yet of a successful challenge to our view, despite the many learned attempts at such. 😊

5 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

Outta Here There's this also

Santa Sabina 5th Century door panel. Said to be one of the oldest depictions of the "crucifixion". But I am not sure what I am looking at. What are the triangular bits?

4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Jesus gave accurate knowledge about the more important things

This is an interesting statement because it begs (for me) the question as to what is "accurate knowledge" as opposed to "knowledge"? And also are "false" or "wrong" necessarily antonyms of "accurate" in connection with knowledge?

I suppose the principles behind statements such as:

• 1Cor 8:1"If anyone thinks he knows something, he does not yet know it as he should know it."
• 1Cor.13:8 "For we have partial knowledge"

would have a part to play in answering these questions, as well as a comprehension of the Greek word "epignosko".

Ah well, no time to toss it around now. Maybe better in it's own thread.  🌙ZZZZZZZZZZZ...............

57 minutes ago, Shiwiii said:

you do not comprehend what the trinity is, nor what trinitarians believe

Does anyone?

 "the Triune reality of God is ultimately beyond human reasoning. As St. Augustine remarked, “If you understood Him, it would not be God” 

Carl E. Olson. Editor of Catholic World Report and Ignatius Insight.

9 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

After all they are 'supposed to be' guided Holy Spirit are they not ?

Strange comment this.

Either you know what it means to be "guided by holy spirit",  or you do not.

If you do know, then the comment is malicious. If you don't know, then how are you guided? 

14 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So the picture must be wrong. Artistic licence should not be used to try to pretend lies are true. GB failure. 

I wish people could make their mind up!!!

Where did this idea come from ?

QUIZZTIME!!

And where are these from??? EDIT: Well done @JWInsider who got the one above pretty quickly!

EDIT: And now he's got the other one (below), the old clever-cloggs!

3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So, if i am totally wrong then I have hope in God that His Christ will guide me to the right way.

Now you're talking. Keep following that thread.

3 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Strategy by satan is to much perfidious for humans, to be able aware of apostasy.

I think you mean that Satan is too clever for humans for them to detect his subtle "machinations?

Yes, if that is what you meant. Certainly Adam amd Eve were overcome although Adam was not deceived. Jesus was not deceived either, and his defence of "It is written" stood him in good stead. Those who acted as a restraint in the 1st Century were not deceived, thanks to Jehovah's existing word and the gift of discernment. But some others of their contemporaries and eventually the vast majority of their successors were deceived..

Your focus of 1940, 70, 90, etc is too narrow for me, although i presume you are just using those decades as an example to illustrate your point that yesterday's "truth" becomes tomorrow's "lies"?. I suppose the most prominent example would be how adherents to the Mosaic Law, once God's "chosen people", became his enemies by clinging on once that arrangement became redundant. The new system scrolls and their impact will be interesting, (Rev 20:12), and of course the implications of Christ's subjecting himself even more so. (1Cor.15:28).

I would like to see a chart indicating the relevant proportionate value of teachings whilst at the same time indicating what has changed, what has remained constant from the first Century. I might put it together myself one of these days. ?

12 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

look as if i said something which in fact Anna said.

Actually Gamaliel said it and that is obvious in the thread.

I agree in your observation that there are those having problems with being Jehovah's Witnesses, but it is going too far to attribute this to of necessity being "honest hearted". it could well be the opposite.

Honest hearted ones actually love Jehovah, and to such ones Ps.119:165 applies "Abundant peace belongs to those who love your law; nothing can make them stumble"

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I'm trying to figure out the reason for the word "however"

By "however" I mean that whilst Hurtado draws strongly held conclusions from the arguments he presents, we need tp keep in mind that  he recognises that:

• by "the earliest use"  he means "the earliest use" by Bible copyists
• he points out that "the device (adapted from pre-Christian usage)"
• also proposes that "this scribal device employed by ca. 200 CE"

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

You call it "disturbing" later. Why?

Anything that implies a tampering with the Scriptural text (other than chapters and verses and obvious technical devices for ease of use), I treat with suspicion.

Christians are fully aware of the subtle strategy employed by Satan and his agents to undermine and pollute pure teachings of true Christianity through apostasy, (likened to "gangrene" 2Tim.2:17). Paul at Gal.2:4 speaks of apostates as having been  "smuggled in" (pareisaktous), having "crept in" (pareiselthon).  2Pet. 2:1 speaks of them "smuggling in" (pareisaxousin) their "sects" (haireseis). The fact that this infiltration was well under way long before the employment of "staurogram" in the Scripture text, undermines the integrity of drawing conclusions on doctorine based on what indisputedly are later additions. 

Attractive though "schadenfreude" may be to those prone to such indulgences, it is really against the sprit of true worship and has long been identified as an undesirable trait, (compare "You should not gloat over your brother’s day on the day of his misfortune" Ob.12). I am quite sure we can say in confidence that we "did not learn the Christ to be like this" Eph.4:20. 

Nevertheless, this does not detract from the fascinating nature of the detail on this topic, bearing in mind the one who is often likely to be found in there! Thanks for the research tips. ?

7 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Seems to me you cannot handle the real truth. That is you own problem, you have to deal with it yourself.

You're on the run John I'm afraid. You seem scared of the real truth, and you're hiding from your responsibilities behind this quixotic crusade. Have a look at the Jonah video again. It might unlock something. ?

12 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

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.

Did you miss that?

People have been attcking Jehovah's Witnesses for a loooooooong time. They just come and go. And, funnily, their tactics never change. Or did you miss that as well?

9 hours ago, Witness said:

"Today we are going to consider, the grief many are suffering, due to the spiritual abuse of the WT. Please join us.

How boring and thoroughly depressing. I'm sure you'll get a great audience. I'm sure everyone will go home happy and fulfilled..... Not!

Like saying come and listen to our presentation. Today we are going to consider the pain many suffered under the physical and spiritual abuse of the Spanish Inquisitors. Audience participation welcome"

13 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

the majority of the Anointed are pushed to the sidelines

Who says this?

13 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

the GB also stated in writing that some may even be mentally ill.

Are they not?

13 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So, who gave them permission to call themselves the FDS ?

Why would they need permission? Who from?

13 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Who gave them permission to judge who should be the important ones and who should not ?

Who is it who makes the assessment of who is or is not important? And who is it that is considered unimportant?

Sorry to be picky, but I think you need to get your ducks in a line if you are going to start firing out these kind of questions.

13 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Unfortunately you are worshipping you GB by not even questioning them.

This is just insulting. I think you must really be in pain. It just isn't healthy to be so obsessed with jibing the GB all the time and others too. Are you trying to cause pain to people or something? I just don't get it. 'Spose it's a social media inadequacy really.

On 9/8/2018 at 4:49 PM, Jack Ryan said:

This must be the #1 jw phrase of all time.

Why would anyone have a religion they did not think was the truth?

5 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

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

Oh dear! Not sure that he did actually: 

"So the military commander approached and said to him: “Tell me, are you a Roman?” He said: “Yes.” The military commander responded: “I purchased these rights as a citizen for a large sum of money.” Paul said: “But I have them by birth.”" Acts 22:27-28.

2 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

What should we call this type of witnessing / preaching?

Screening

1 hour ago, Jack Ryan said:

A Jehovah's Witness elder has been jailed for five years for sexually assaulting a "terrified" schoolgirl.

Good news for everyone. Good also to see "Caesar" doing his job. We pay him enough!

So, he was mid 20s when he committed this crime,  and seems to have been convicted for something else when he was 47. Was he a witness through all that? Is he still one? The paper says he is an elder member"? What's that mean?

On 11/3/2016 at 7:29 PM, JW Insider said:

"Cemetery witnessing" has not been recommended in the United States for many years,

It is not recommended where I live either as an organised activity. Where I live many know each other and funerals are a big well attended affair. ain fact locally raised brothers will not call on someone who has been recently bereaved as it is seen to be highly distasteful and insensitive.

Meeting someone informally is different however, and striking up a one to one when visiting a cemetery would not be objectionable. I recently conducted a funeral for a brother whose very large family are mostly not witnesses. About 75 in attendance had no Bibles so the scriptural part of the talk I put on the screens in the kingdom hall. They were very appreciative, I could see everyone focussed on the scriptures and got excellent feedback after. One said they are not used to going home from a funeral feeling happier. They usually feel worse than when thay went in.

So there we are. The scriptures do their work. It is up to us to ensure the apples of gold are set attractively. Pro. 25:11.

13 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Larry W Hurtado

Interesting stuff, especially the difference between Chi Rho and Tau Rho.

Howeve,r he states:

"2)............the earliest uses of the tau-rho are not as such free-standing symbols, but form part of a special way of writing the Greek words for “cross” (stauros) and “crucify” (stauro-o), in NT texts which refer to the crucifixion of Jesus.

3) The tau-rho is not an allusion to the word “christos“.  Indeed, the letters have no relation to any terms in early Christian vocabulary.  Instead, the device (adapted from pre-Christian usage) seems to have served originally as a kind of pictographic representation of the crucified Jesus, the loop of the rho superimposed on the tau serving to depict the head of a figure on a cross.

4) So, contra the common assumption taught in art history courses, the earliest visual reference to the crucified Jesus isn’t 5th century intaglia, but this scribal device employed by ca. 200 CE. 

There's no denying that this scribal device is employed in some early Greek Scripture manuscripts. How early? With occurences, for example,  at Luke 9:23; 14:27,  P75 of the Bodmer Papyrii (imaged earlier) was originally dated as 175-200CE,. This early assignment has been recently challenged, where some favour a later date closer to the 4th Century. Other evidences, such as Chester Beatty's P45 manuscript is dated about 250CE, and contains this device at Matt.26:2 and also Luke 14:27. A further papyrus in the Bodmer colllection, P66, contains the staurogram in at least ten places in the papyrus (corresponding to chapter 19 of John's Gospel. Like P75, this papyrus is subject to similar discussion on it's antiquity, being more recently proposed as originating "in the early or middle part of the fourth century."

So, basically, we have a scribal insertion of a contemporary "Christian " symbol some 135-300 years after the establishing of the Christian congregation at Pentecost 33CE .

However, a disturbing comment is made regarding the staurogram on the Bible History Today page cited in the earlier post by @JWInsider at

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/crucifixion/the-staurogram/:

"The tau-rho staurogram, like other christograms, was originally a pre-Christian symbol. A Herodian coin featuring the Staurogram predates the crucifixion. Soon after, Christian adoption of staurogram symbols served as the first visual images of Jesus on the cross."

Larry Hurtado confirms this when discussing the Tau-Rho among other "Christian" symbols as he states: "these are all pre-Christian devices and were appropriated by early Christians." He also says "P45, P66 and P75 offer us evidence of a Christian appropriation of the tau-rho device that (whatever and whenever its origin) was already becoming familiar in Christian circles at the time that these copyists worked."  (Quotes from The Staurogram in Early Christian Manuscripts: The Earliest Visual Reference to the Crucified Jesus?)

Reference is made to Herodian coins issued about 37 BCE where the Tau Rho appears (apparently as some sort of date code?)

,

Jack Finegan, (The Archaeology of the New Testament. 1969) is referenced by Hurtado. In his book section The Cross. Abbreviations and Monograms, among other things, he cited Egyptian influences on the development and use of the Staurogram, likening it to the Egyptian ankh, a symbol of life. He presents an memorial inscription from a 4th Century tomb at Armant near Luxor on the NIle. Here the staurogram symbol is presented on the bottom 3rd right in line with the ankh and the Chi Rho symbol, (another "christogram). 

An additional aspect is the proposed influence of the use of isosephy in formulating the staurogram. This practice,  known also as gematria, seeks to find numeric relationships in words and concepts by assigning numeric values to letters and thus to words, then looking for parrallel meanings. An attempt is made to equate this to the reckoning of the wild beast's number of 666 in Rev.13:18. "Christian" Isosephists equate this number to the value determined for the name "Nero", their interpretation then misinterpreting the scripture. The staurogram is thus said by some to have a mystical significance in this regard. The whole practice has a ring of divination about it. Although Hurtado does not promote this view, it is not rejected as a contributory factor.

Whilst interesting and formidably detailed, these speculations on the early uses of staurogram symbols are not very convincing as to their relevance to genuine Christianity. It just cannot be that difficult to find the truth, if it is actually there. 

• It seems that an early date for the use of these symbols as some propose is not clear at all, as the relevant papyrii whilst significantly old, are of disputed antiquity.
• There appears to be a pagan and superstitious influence at work in the appropriation of these symbols, for obscure reasons.
• It is clear from scripture that definite attempts to distort and corrupt the true Christian faith were well under way from earliest times, prior to the adoption of the "staurogram". Paul warns that "the mystery of this lawlessness is already at work", Peter warns that "the ignorant and unstable are twisting the...Scriptures", and John warns that "even now, many antichrists have appeared".  (Before we even get to Rev. Ch.2-3).
• The scriptures have no word for cross as such. Both stauros and xylon are simple words to understand, as is the background for the necessity of the use of this method for Christ's execution. There is no definitive way to conclude the exact nature of the instrument of Christ's death.
• The existence of the dispute complicates and obscures the very reason for Christ's sacrifice, a paucity of understanding on this matter being a prominent feature of many two-beamed cross promoters.

On that basis, I remain satisfied  with the scriptural description as far as it goes, and the conclusion we draw on the likelihood of a single stake being the instrument of Christ's death. I will not be adding an extra beam to the account at this stage. ?

2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

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. 

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

8 hours ago, Anna said:

Also there is an interesting debate here including an interesting comment "If one wants to get anatomically picky, the eight bones of the human wrist are counted among the 27 hand bones".

This was very interesting. The reference to Matt.22:13 particularly because it says "bind him hand and foot". Now when hands are bound as a restraint, we assume it is the wrists that are tied becuse it would be easy to slip out of literal hand ties. (Similarly with feet and ankles) So this seems confirm that,  in the lack of a specific word for "wrist", the Greek word for hand has a broader application.

I like the comment that said :

"And it’s true that Luke and John imply that Jesus was nailed in His “hands,” but then again the Bible also says that Rebeka wore bracelets on her “hands” (Genesis 24:22,30, 47), that the chains fell off of Peter’s “hands”(Acts 12:7), that when Nebuzaradan declared Jeremiah freed: “I release you today from the chains on your hands” (Jeremiah 40:4), that “the ropes that were on [Samson’s] arms became like flax that is burned with fire, and his bonds broke loose from his hands” (Judges 15:14) If you’re reading a more literal translation, that is.

In Hebrew and biblical Greek, bracelets and fetters are something put on someone’s yad/cheir ‘hands’, though we might be more precise and say ‘wrist’ or ‘forearm’. (Also see Ezekiel 16:11 “And I adorned you with ornaments, put bracelets on your hands and a necklace around your neck”; 23:42 “And they put bracelets on the hands of the women and beautiful crowns on their heads”)

I mean, even today, handcuffs are put on the wrists, right?"

Seems that some advocates point to the "Shroud of Turin" as evidence in this matter.  ?

17 minutes ago, Anna said:

*apparently the Greek word for hand also includes the wrist.

I was just looking for a reference on that. Can you share it? ?