Today's Excellent Church.

[Benson]

Acts 2 gives the narrative of how the Body of Christ His Church was brought into being by the coming of The Holy Spirit, according to Joel ch. 2 as cited by Apostle Peter.

Today, there are no features within modern Christendom which are a continuation of either Acts ch. 2, Joel ch. 2, The Jerusalem Messianic Church, or the Pauline Gentile Church.

This post remains very short because there is no other information in Scripture to authenticate the state of today's so called "Church." If one thinks the Church does exist today according to the foundation of the Apostles with Christ as the Cornerstone, tell us where on Earth it exists in the hearts of Men before God. No place in Paul's teaching says the Church is some intangibly perceived group of minds set upon faith in Christ.

[2timothy316]

While we wait for RR to shock the world by producing those original manuscripts there are references to Christian writings that were burned by Jewish opposes to the Divine Name.

Right on cue. The JW claim that Christian writings were corrupted. Unfortunately, this is speculation on the part of JW’s to justify their bias translation. See below.

Yet you don't deny there was a very rigorous effort to remove the Divine Name, that someone changed the Bible before us.
Also, there were Bibles with the Divine Name in the Greek Scriptures before the JWs came along. We are not the only ones that know the Greek Scriptures were altered. You speak of our bias ignore the bias in the 4th century.

[RightReason]

Well we can clear that up when you produce a screenshot (or link) to "the originals manuscripts"

RightReason wrote: ↑Sun Apr 18, 2021 4:26 pm...when the original manuscripts use words like Lord or Christ or Jesus or God, the JW’s change those words to Jehovah (or whatever the equivalent of Jehovah is in another language) when it suits their theology to do so.
I am still waiting ... over to you,

Again, I do not have access to ancient original manuscripts, but historians and Bible scholars do and I have already posted their consensus. But I will post more . . .

******

Over 5,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts have been discovered, yet “Jehovah” does not appear in a single one of these.


https://jw.support/jehovah-is-not-in-the-new-testament/

The New World Translation adds "Jehovah" into the New Testament 237 times, where there is absolutely no ancient manuscript evidence of any kind to support it.

https://bible.ca/jw-YHWH.htm


No form of the divine name, whether the tetragrammaton, the Greek phonetic form IAΩ, or any other form, appears in any of the nearly six thousand Greek manuscripts of the New Testament writings that are extant today.9


The evidence is truly overwhelming that the New Testament writers did not use the divine name YHWH or any form of it, except for the expression Hallelujah in Revelation 19:1-6. As much as any statement of fact can be made about the original wording of the New Testament, this conclusion should be regarded as a well-established fact.


https://wit.irr.org/was-name-jehovah-or ... -testament

Yet you don't deny there was a very rigorous effort to remove the Divine Name, that someone changed the Bible before us.

Wrong. I do deny that there was a very rigorous effort to remove the Divine Name!

******


Here is the fatal problem with the Watchtower claim that the New Testament writers used the divine name: the claim inevitably requires a fantastic conspiracy theory to explain how all of the manuscripts that are extant, including manuscripts discovered in the past hundred-plus years, happen to lack the divine name. We have a couple dozen or more New Testament manuscripts dating from before Constantine and not one uses the divine name. Again, the church had no mechanism during the second or third centuries to gather up unacceptable copies of the New Testament writings and dispose of them.

The evidence is truly overwhelming that the New Testament writers did not use the divine name YHWH or any form of it, except for the expression Hallelujah in Revelation 19:1-6. As much as any statement of fact can be made about the original wording of the New Testament, this conclusion should be regarded as a well-established fact.

https://wit.irr.org/was-name-jehovah-or ... -testament


If Jehovah's Witnesses can argue that YHWH was deleted from the Bible, then what else was deleted that we don't know about? Perhaps the word trinity was also used in Matthew 28:18-19, but it too was deleted!

If men edited out the name of God, "YHWH" when they copied the New Testament, as only the Watchtower organization claims, then how can we have any confidence in any of the New Testament? Should we discard the New Testament or the Watchtower organization as unreliable?

https://bible.ca/jw-YHWH.htm



We do seek to honor God’s word by translating it as He chose to reveal it rather than altering it to suit the imbalance of our own traditions. God inspired the New Testament writings without using the name YHWH. Any agenda that requires us to add into the Bible what God Himself left out so as to “restore the truth” is unbiblical and is not Christian.


https://carm.org/jehovahs-witnesses/was ... tradition/

Also, I already showed how even JW’s NWT differs from its original King Linear Translation. Why the change?

[RightReason]

Hi Tam, seems like we are going in circles and simply repeating ourselves, so I will just comment on some of the new stuff . . .

I think perhaps it is you who missed who decided Judas' replacement:

So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.


Obviously Christ was not gone. He was no longer with them in the flesh, but He was still with them.
He taught them, spoke to them, gave them direction and commands

Congratulations! You might be on track to understanding Christ’s Church. Yes! Christ’s Church is guided by the Holy Spirit, as promised by Christ Himself! So, again, you do realize that Jesus was not physically present at this ‘casting of lots’, right? It was Christ’s Church who trusting in Christ, chose Matthias. Just like Jesus told His Church, He will be with her always and guide her in truth. This is a beautiful example of how Christ’s Church works!

(not just the twelve, but any of His sheep, as one can see from the examples of Paul and Ananias, see Acts 9).

Are you saying everyone at that point who claimed to be believers cast lots? Ridiculous and inaccurate.

Paul did not have to check with the apostles; Paul learned the truth from Christ.
Incorrect. Paul did check with the Apostles.
Paul went to the apostles because of the men who were preaching what was incorrect, those men claiming to have come from the apostles. But Paul did not have to check with the apostles to know what was true. Paul already knew what was true from Christ. Otherwise Paul would not have been in sharp dispute with those men who were teaching falsely.

<sigh> and I thought you were doing so well. Again, this is how the Church works. Those who trust in Christ know Him and have a right and even an obligation to use fraternal correction with other members in the Church if they observe something that they don’t think is right. But I can assure you, again, we are not talking about doctrinal matters here. Christ will not let those He appointed get doctrinal matters wrong. And maybe part of Him not letting them get it wrong is having others point out that something is wrong and ultimately Christ’s leaders listen, so error never prevails. You just do not understand how Christ’s system of His beautiful Church works. It’s actually genius. But you have to trust Christ. You have to trust the process. You have to listen to His Church, even if you don’t like the guy He appointed, because it’s not about the guy!


By you thinking all you need is Christ, but then denying the authority of the Church, He established, unfortunately has allowed you to miss what Christ wanted to reveal to you through His Church. It has caused you to not see all the treasures of His Church He desires for you. And that is the saddest part. Because He loved His Church and gave her to us.

Galatians 1 (Paul writing):

I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from [Jesus] Christ.

For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14 I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb and called me by his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, my immediate response was not to consult any human being. 17 I did not go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia. Later I returned to Damascus.

18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.

Beautiful! Paul admits, kind of like you, he was wrong to persecute the Church. He saw no need for it. He wanted to destroy it, but when he realized God was calling him he knew how wrong he had been for hating the Church. He realized it was actually through the Church that he would get to know God. And he eventually recognized the importance of the Church and its role and became acquainted with Peter, as he explained . . . and the rest is history!

There is ample evidence in the New Testament that Peter was first in authority among the apostles. Whenever they were named, Peter headed the list (Matt. 10:1-4, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-16, Acts 1:13); sometimes the apostles were referred to as “Peter and those who were with him” (Luke 9:32). Peter was the one who generally spoke for the apostles (Matt. 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 12:41, John 6:68-69), and he figured in many of the most dramatic scenes (Matt. 14:28-32, 17:24-27; Mark 10:23-28). On Pentecost it was Peter who first preached to the crowds (Acts 2:14-40), and he worked the first healing in the Church age (Acts 3:6-7).

Everything being claimed here regarding Peter has been examined and refuted in this post:

viewtopic.php?p=876330#p876330

None of it was refuted. Historical record shows the majority of Christendom recognized Peter as leader, but you now want to claim they all got it wrong.

He warned us there would be many who came in His name, that there would be false teachers, false christs. He did not say that He would not speak to His sheep just because there would be fakes out there.

He warned us, He would remain with His Church, so look to her so that you do not follow the false teachers and false prophets that will come along and tell itching ears what they want to hear – things like, ‘You don’t need religion. You don’t need a church to tell you what’s what. That stuff is a bunch of whoo-ha. You got this. You don’t need to listen to a human being who is no better than you. You’re smarter than that. They don’t get God like you do!”

You don’t know your history.
And you are whitewashing yours.

No. You are reciting anti-Catholic propaganda because it fits your pre existing narrative. Even bringing up the inquisition proves you don’t know the whole story.

I may have heard about it. I have never seen it though. I tend not to watch those kinds of shows (too bothered by whatever is false in them), but if I have some time I will check it out.

Clearly, in shows like this the director has to take some liberties, but in my opinion there is nothing wrong with that as long as it doesn’t contradict something. In fact, for most of Scripture I would certainly argue that the specific story isn’t as important as the point. The Bible is not a scientific treatise. It was intended to teach us what God wanted us to know.

In this show the writer gives the disciples each a back story to bring them to life. Obviously, we have no idea their real back story. We know Matthew was a tax collector and Jesus called Him, but it’s super cool to see what his life might have been like, because he represents us or someone we know. And isn’t that the point? When we read Scripture, we should see ourselves in most of the stories because they are all stories about human nature, universal problems/conflicts, etc. And if we get that, then we get it. It is how Christ speaks to each of us. We can all hear the same story, but each take something a little different from it and that’s what we are supposed to do. When we hear the story of the prodigal son, some relate more to the wayward son who squandered the money, but some actually relate to the good son, who stayed and did the will of the father, but doesn’t now understand why his brother gets a big party. There is a lesson for whether you are the wayward son or the brother. That’s how amazing Scripture is and how amazing God is. He speaks to us through His words (the bible) and through His Church. And He can even speak to us through movies or books or conversations with others. I just love it!

Anyway, when I watch this show, I laughed, I cried, it really takes you there. And much of it is straight form Scripture, but it does a really good job of showing how many of the verses would have naturally come up in conversation when Jesus was just speaking to people. I think we are suppose to transport ourselves and imagine ourselves in the crowd when Jesus walked the earth and hear those words as if they were spoken specifically and directly for us not just for those who lived over 2000 years ago. He gave us the Bible because He wants to speak to us hear and now. We shouldn’t view it simply as a good book written a long time ago. It’s for us. Here. And now. When we do that, we get why He gave us Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Take care.

[2timothy316]

Well we can clear that up when you produce a screenshot (or link) to "the originals manuscripts"

RightReason wrote: ↑Sun Apr 18, 2021 4:26 pm...when the original manuscripts use words like Lord or Christ or Jesus or God, the JW’s change those words to Jehovah (or whatever the equivalent of Jehovah is in another language) when it suits their theology to do so.
I am still waiting ... over to you,

Again, I do not have access to ancient original manuscripts, but historians and Bible scholars do and I have already posted their consensus. But I will post more . . .

******

Over 5,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts have been discovered, yet “Jehovah” does not appear in a single one of these.

What years are these manuscripts? You leave out the years don't you! Give us the years of these manuscripts. Post 3rd century aren't they. You don't have to answer we already know the answer. The Catholic religion could have been champions for the Divine Name in those early years but they were cowards. The Catholics and today's Jewish religions think they are different, but really they are exactly the same. Rejecting the very name of God, even removing it.

"They intend to make my people forget my name." - Jeremiah 23:27
The 'they' today is Christendom, Islam and Judaism. All of them have some excuse as to why they don't use the name of God and do not teach it to others.

[JehovahsWitness]

...when the original manuscripts use words like Lord or Christ or Jesus or God, the JW’s change those words to Jehovah (or whatever the equivalent of Jehovah is in another language) when it suits their theology to do so.

Well we can clear that up when you produce a screenshot (or link) to "the originals manuscripts"

... I do not have access to ancient original manuscripts, but historians and Bible scholars do

You are wrong. No original bible manuscripts are currently available. Feel free to produce a reference to ANY bible scholar that claim to be in possession of an original bible manuscript rather than a copy other, that is, than in your imagination.



JW

[onewithhim]

[Replying to RightReason in post #83]

I believe that the King James and Douay translations were taken from the Latin Vulgate and are not linear translations from the original Hebrew language or the Greek. JWs have not changed anything, but the NWT is the most accurate.

[RightReason]

[Replying to RightReason in post #83]

I believe that the King James and Douay translations were taken from the Latin Vulgate and are not linear translations from the original Hebrew language or the Greek. JWs have not changed anything, but the NWT is the most accurate.

The following are some examples of what the JW’s own organization use to publish and then how they changed it in their NWT. And there are many examples of Biblical changes. I just chose to pick a few as examples.

In 1969, the Watchtower Society produced The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, “Presenting a literal word-for-word translation into English under the Greek text as set out in ‘The New Testament in the Original Greek. Many JW’s only go by what their current NWT says, even though the societies original, The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, provides a more accurate view of the original text.

The following is a comparison between the rendering of the Society’s Kingdom Interlinear Translation and the New World Translation:

Verse Col. 2:9 Interlinear Translation New World Translation: “all the fullness of the divinity” dwells in Christ.
NWT: “all the fullness of divine quality” dwells in Christ.

Note: Greek scholar Joseph Henry Thayer states that the Greek word used here “Theotes” literally means “deity, i.e., the state of being God, Godhead” (The New Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament, 1974, p. 288)


Verse Col 1:16-17 Interlinear Translation New World Translation: Christ created “all (things).”
NWT: Christ created “all [other] Things.”

Note: The Watchtower Society inserts the word “other” four times into this passage, in order to make it compatible with their doctrine of Christ having been created. However, in John 1:3, we read that Christ created “all things” — not all other things.


Verse Phil. 2:9 Interlinear Translation New World Translation: God gave Christ the name “over every name.”
NWT God gave Christ the name “above every [other] name.”

Note: The Watchtower Society teaches that Jehovah God has the name above every name and therefore, they had to insert the word “other” to justify their doctrine. However, according to John 17:11, Jesus has Jehovah’s Name!


Verse John 8:58 Interlinear Translation New World Translation: “Before Abraham to become I am.”
NWT" “Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.”

Note: The Greek words for “I am” are “ego eimi.” In every place where these words appear in the text of the Bible, the Society correctly translates them as “I am,” EXCEPT in this verse.19. Why the inconsistency in translation? Jesus was identifying Himself with the “I am” of Exodus 3:14 who is Jehovah God, and this is why the Jews tried to stone Him for blasphemy (see verse 59, compare with Leviticus 24:16). The Society mistranslated this verse because its correct translation contradicts their doctrine.

https://www.4jehovah.org/facts-the-watc ... u-to-know/

[RightReason]

You are wrong. [/color]No original bible manuscripts are currently available. Feel free to produce a reference to ANY bible scholar that claim to be in possession of an original bible manuscript rather than a copy other, that is, than in your imagination.

Oh, I see. You and the JW’s hope to get by on a technicality or offering a legalistic excuse.

*******

The Bible is not a single work but rather an anthology of 66 books written by approximately 40 authors over a 1,400-year period that ended nearly 2,000 years ago. As such, the original copies of these works have not lasted to today, though a large number of early copies allow us to reconstruct the text as it stood in its earliest form.



The Old Testament was written from the time of Moses (approximately 1400 BC) until the time of Ezra (approximately 400 BC). Copies of most Old Testament books have been preserved from as early as the second century BC in the finds of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Numerous Old Testament books have also been preserved in the ancient Cairo Geniza from the first century AD. Codex Cairensis includes the Prophets and is dated 895. The Aleppo Codex includes most of the Old Testament and dates from the 930s. The first full Old Testament manuscript in Hebrew, the Leningrad Codex (dated 1008), is over 1,000 years old.


In addition, the entire Old Testament was translated into Greek in the second century BC in a work known as the Septuagint. It is clear from this translation that the complete Old Testament had been compiled prior to this time and that the text is essentially the same as it stood during this period 2,200 years ago, just 200 years after the completion of the final Old Testament book!


The New Testament includes even more textual evidence to support its accuracy. Its 27 books were composed between the AD 40s-90s. A fragment of the Gospel of John exists from approximately AD 125. More than 5,000 Greek manuscripts exist of New Testament writings, enabling comparison to allow a comprehensive reconstruction of the earliest text. The first complete New Testament, the Codex Sinaiticus, dates to the mid fourth century (325-360)


Ample copies from early times exist to provide confidence that the text that exists today is what was originally composed.


https://www.compellingtruth.org/original-Bible.html

It would be a poor argument to suggest since the very original text is unavailable, then we can never know for sure the original Bible.

*********

There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity.


The Old Testament has been more accurately transmitted to us than any other ancient writing of comparable age. The textual evidence is greater for both the Old and New Testaments than any other historically reliable ancient document. The ancient scribes were very meticulous. There were only 1,200 variant readings in A.D. 500.


The New Testament was written in first century A.D. There are some 25,000 early manuscripts in existence, almost 6,000 of which (many being only recognizable fragments) are Greek texts and the others being early translations of the Greek New Testament. The earliest textual evidence we have was copied not long after the original.

https://www.icr.org/bible-manuscripts

[JehovahsWitness]

You are wrong. [/color]No original bible manuscripts are currently available. Feel free to produce a reference to ANY bible scholar that claim to be in possession of an original bible manuscript rather than a copy other, that is, than in your imagination.

Oh, I see.

Do you see you are wrong by saying that bible scholars are in possession of original manuscripts?

[Tcg]

The earliest textual evidence we have was copied not long after the original.

https://www.icr.org/bible-manuscripts

Yes, or so your source claims. Oddly it doesn't provide any verifiable evidence to support this claim. Can you do so?


Tcg