Jump to content
The World News Media

Evacuated

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,758

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    42

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Evacuated

    Did Stephen pray to Jesus? Acts 7:59

    in Topics

    Posted

    3 hours ago, HollyW said:

    Please explain.

    Well, there is no direction in your references to pray to Jesus, and the bone of contention with most protagonists for Jesus in this role is that Jehovahs Witnesses do not.

    You are usually better researched and more ordered in your arguments I thought? 

    Did Stephen pray to Jesus? Acts 7:59

    in Topics

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

    it's most natural.....

    3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

    context and wording

     

    Not conclusive arguments these, because wider context demands otherwise. I believe the Bible presents Jehovah alone as the Hearer of prayer at Ps 65:2. This (for me) overrides any narrower contextual argument otherwise. I see no conflict in understanding Paul's appeal as directed to Jehovah as his Lord, and no conflict in his appreciation for Jesus role in the matter of relief. As we are considering Paul's words to Corinthians, include this: "there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him" 1Cor.8:6.

    Jehovah's name is included at Acts 7:60 for clarity of understanding about which Lord is referenced. No more a problem than understanding Jesus's earlier reference to Ps 110:1 at Mat.22:44 and maybe asking the question: "Who was David's Lord?" (Oh dear!! Is that another WTS interpolation I see??)

     

     

    Chilean flag displayed in Kingdom Halls

    in Topics

    Posted

    6 hours ago, HollyW said:

     Isn't meat offered to idols a ritual of false worship?

    As you are probably aware, the ritual of offering is the false worship bit. The meat....well that's just the edible bit. (Although likely unattractive to vegetarians regardless).

    Did Stephen pray to Jesus? Acts 7:59

    in Topics

    Posted

    5 hours ago, Cos said:

    Your response from the viewpoint of the Watchtower Society has to now be “no” (another flip flop)

    You are doing that thing again in trying to force an answer to a polar question but never mind.

    5 hours ago, Cos said:

    “Barnes’ Notes

    I haven't got a problem with selective quoting here as the point is to address an interpolation in the King James version. It is hardly necessary really, as the marginal references in the KJ I use indicate this anyway, and I expect this is widely recognised as an example of the doctrinal insecurity that went on at 1 Jn .5:7-8.

    Thanks for setting out your position on Stephen's relationship with Jesus so clearly. It isn't one I share, but I have met it several times before as held by members of a variety of groups including Pentecostal, Evangelical, Roman Catholic, (although I recognise personal beliefs may not necessarily reflect those of the invidual's denominational identity.)

    4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

    Did Paul pray to Jesus?

    I feel no, actually. The text seems to display Paul's earlier recognition as expressed at 1Cor.1:24.

    4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

    'Jehovah' has been inserted into the NWT translation of the following verse 60

    Valid point. It could have been marginally referenced I suppose.

    4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

    consistent with the immediate context

    Not a foolproof technique, as consistency may be only apparent (erroneously).

    4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

    This is how the verses ought to read

    Just your opinion of course. However, I can accept such a rendering conditional on a marginal reference as mentioned, particularly as Stephen's words "“Lord, do not charge this sin against them.”  would appear to reflect what was expressed by Jesus at Luke 23:34: "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing" , similarly directed.

    Did Stephen pray to Jesus? Acts 7:59

    in Topics

    Posted

    4 hours ago, Cos said:

    Stephen prayed to Jesus. Stephen therefore actually worshipped Jesus!

    Wow! That wasn't handled very well in 1959 was it?.

    Although, to be fair, the dictionary does state on the term "pray":     adverb formalarchaic     1. used as a preface to polite requests or instructions. "ladies and gentlemen, pray be seated"

    Anyway, there's a clearer explanation now, published in the Watchtower a bit later than the '94 reference:

    *** w05 1/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
    Does Stephen’s exclamation at Acts 7:59 indicate that prayers should be directed to Jesus?

    Acts 7:59 says: “They went on casting stones at Stephen as he made appeal and said: ‘Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.’” Those words have raised questions in the mind of some, since the Bible says that Jehovah is the “Hearer of Prayer.” (Psalm 65:2) Did Stephen really pray to Jesus? Would this indicate that Jesus is the same as Jehovah?

    The King James Version says that Stephen was “calling upon God.” Understandably, then, many draw the conclusion reached by Bible commentator Matthew Henry, who said: “Stephen here prays to Christ, and so must we.” However, that viewpoint is erroneous. Why?
    Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament makes this honest admission: “The word God is not in the original, and should not have been in the translation. It is in none of the ancient [manuscripts] or versions.” How did the word “God” come to be inserted into that verse? Scholar Abiel Abbot Livermore called this “an instance of the sectarian biases of the translators.” Most modern translations, therefore, eliminate this spurious reference to God.

    Nevertheless, many versions do say that Stephen “prayed” to Jesus. And the footnote in the New World Translation shows that the term “made appeal” can also mean “invocation; prayer.” Would that not indicate that Jesus is Almighty God? No. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words explains that in this setting, the original Greek word, e·pi·ka·leʹo, means: “To call upon, invoke; . . . to appeal to an authority.” Paul used this same word when he declared: “I appeal to Caesar!” (Acts 25:11) Appropriately, then, The New English Bible says that Stephen “called out” to Jesus.

    What prompted Stephen to make such an appeal? According to Acts 7:55, 56, Stephen, “being full of holy spirit, gazed into heaven and caught sight of God’s glory and of Jesus standing at God’s right hand.” Normally, Stephen would have addressed his requests to Jehovah in the name of Jesus. But seeing the resurrected Jesus in vision, Stephen apparently felt free to appeal to him directly, saying: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” Stephen knew that Jesus had been given authority to raise the dead. (John 5:27-29) He therefore asked Jesus to safeguard his spirit, or life force, until the day when Jesus would raise him to immortal life in the heavens.

    Does Stephen’s brief utterance set a precedent for praying to Jesus? Not at all. For one thing, Stephen clearly distinguished Jesus from Jehovah, for the account says that he saw Jesus “standing at God’s right hand.” Also, these circumstances were exceptional. The only other case of such an utterance being directed to Jesus is that of the apostle John, who similarly addressed Jesus directly when he saw Him in vision.—Revelation 22:16, 20.

    Although Christians today properly direct all their prayers to Jehovah God, they too have unshakable faith that Jesus is “the resurrection and the life.” (John 11:25) As it did Stephen, so faith in Jesus’ ability to raise his followers from the dead can help and sustain us in times of trial.
     

    Chilean flag displayed in Kingdom Halls

    in Topics

    Posted

    2 hours ago, HollyW said:

    Are Kingdom Halls in Chile being allowed to display the Chilean flag on September 18th in order to avoid a fine?

    If the conscience of the local body of elders permits, then flags can be displayed in any country on any day if required by the state. It's a bit like meat offered to idols. It's the ritual of false worship Christians avoid, with due consideration for conscience.

    JW's in Malawi vs. Mexico: Why the Disparity?

    in Topics

    Posted

    3 hours ago, HollyW said:

    Surely having a political card in a country where there's only one political party doesn't require any more participation in politics than a JW showing up at a polling place and even going into the polling booth.

    Can we get a view from a Malawian brother on this matter? Maybe someone who has actually faced the issue? Or is that asking too much now?

    Vow of Poverty

    in Topics

    Posted

    Actually, it would probably be good to close this topic now as the contributors seem to have run out of steam and it appears to be going off piste.

    Apologies

    Resurrection

    in Topics

    Posted

    *** w90 9/1 p. 7 ‘Many Bodies of the Holy Ones Were Raised Up’ ***
    ‘Many Bodies of the Holy Ones Were Raised Up’

    “THE earth quaked, and the rock-masses were split. And the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons, coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.” (Matthew 27:51-53) Catholic scholar Karl Staab calls this event that occurred at Jesus’ death “most mysterious.” What happened?

    Epiphanius and other early Church Fathers taught that the holy ones literally came to life and went with the resurrected Jesus to heaven. Augustine, Theophylactus, and Zigabenus believed that these dead ones received a temporary resurrection but later returned to their tombs. The latter opinion, however, “did not gain wide recognition,” comments scholar Erich Fascher. When rendering Matthew 27:52, 53, many modern Bible translations give the impression that a resurrection took place. Not so the New World Translation, which points to the effects of an earthquake. Why?

    First, whoever “the holy ones” were, Matthew did not say they were raised up. He said their bodies, or corpses, were. Second, he did not say these bodies came to life. He said they were raised up, and the Greek verb e·geiʹro, meaning to “raise up,” does not always refer to a resurrection. It can, among other things, also mean to “lift out” from a pit or to “get up” from the ground. (Matthew 12:11; 17:7; Luke 1:69) The upheaval at Jesus’ death opened tombs, tossing lifeless bodies into the open. Such occurrences during earthquakes were reported in the second century C.E. by Greek writer Aelius Aristides and more recently, in 1962, in Colombia.

    This view of the event harmonizes with Bible teachings. In 1 Corinthians chapter 15, the apostle Paul gives convincing proof of the resurrection, but he completely ignores Matthew 27:52, 53. So do all other Bible writers. (Acts 2:32, 34) The corpses raised up at Jesus’ death could not have come to life in the way Epiphanius thought, for on the third day thereafter, Jesus became “the firstborn from the dead.” (Colossians 1:18) Anointed Christians, also called “holy ones,” were promised a share in the first resurrection during Christ’s presence, not in the first century.—1 Thessalonians 3:13; 4:14-17.

    Most Bible commentators have difficulty explaining verse 53, although several of them suggest that verse 52 describes the opening of tombs by the earthquake and the exposing of newly buried corpses. For example, German scholar Theobald Daechsel gives the following translation: “And tombs opened up, and many corpses of saints laying at rest were lifted up.”

    Who were those that “entered into the holy city” a considerable time later, namely after Jesus had been resurrected? As seen above, the exposed bodies remained lifeless, so Matthew must refer to persons who visited the tombs and brought news of the event into Jerusalem. Thus, the rendering of the New World Translation deepens Bible understanding and does not confuse readers concerning the resurrection.
     

    Are Jehovah's Witnesses Pacifists?

    in Topics

    Posted

    10 hours ago, JW Insider said:

    Most of us think we are pacifists,

    Probably a true statement, or would many be more accurate? The term pacifism (Emile Arnaud) is a fairly recent one, but, like most humanly defined attitudes, has developed a range of meaning depending on the individual.

    JTR expresses this very well.

    11 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

    There are probably as many gradations of "pacifist" as there are different personalities.

    In fact, due to this, the terms absolute, conditional, and selective pacifism (among others) have been coined.

    10 hours ago, JW Insider said:

    As defined by Webster’s New International Dictionary (2d edition, unabridged, of 1943) pacifism means: “Opposition to war or to the use of military force for any purpose; especially, an attitude of mind opposing all war, emphasizing the defects of military training and cost of war, and advocating settlement of international disputes entirely by arbitration.” Such pacifism not even the Bible itself can be charged with teaching, and neither can Jehovah’s witnesses, who stick most scrupulously to the Bible.

    @JWInsider quotes here from the 1951 Watchtower and (my bold) is still the nearest thing I have read to a statement on the matter as far as Jehovah's Witnesses are concerned. Although Webster lacks definity in it's defininition, as the quote appears to combine the principles of absolute and pragmatic pacifism in a single statement, the answer is correct in that it addresses both.

    So it would appear the original question cannot not be handled simply as a polar (yes/no) question, because it cannot be answered by a mere Yes or No. It requires a qualification of the term pacifist.

    I have seen the use of polar questions as a debating tool to force a responder into a corner on a controversial issue. Because the question appears to demand a Yes/No response, an attempt by the responder to explain appears shifty and unsound.

    A classic example of this appeared recently in a British TV studio debate involving the UK politician Jeremy Corbyn. Known to favor a nuclear-free world, opposing party voters pressed him on the question: Would you, as PM, use a nuclear strike option if the UK was under attack? This created a conflict between personal values and pragmatic policy to which a Yes or No answer was impossible. His attempts to explain made him look as if he was dodging the question.  

    It is a clever live debating technique, but less effective in a forum setting like this which allows for a considered response.

    Russell, The Egyptian Pyramids, Freemasons and Demonology

    in Topics

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Micah Ong said:

    According to the WTS logic - Jesus gave the men in charge imperfect spiritual direction (food)

    According to Micah Ong logic please.

    Actually, the development of this posting and it's excursion into Beth Sarim reminds me of the story of Archimede's Eureka moment. Can you see how this might apply here?

    Vow of Poverty

    in Topics

    Posted

    7 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

     

    Those that can ....do.

    Those that can't ... teach

    Those that can't teach ... teach gym.

    Those that cant teach gym, sell real estate.

    etc., etc.

     

    Those that can't bear others getting expensive gifts

    probably have their hands in the till...

    or would like to (John  12:5-6) etc., etc. 

    (This is fun :))

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.