Am willing for anyone not believing in the Trinity and seeing Jesus as a seperate god to God to please tell me how this does not contradict the first commandment (you shall not have any gods before me)
In the LXX the text of Zech 12:10 in "και επιβλεψονται προς με" (and they shall look upon me) the "με" is listed as a textual variation. Thius means it does not appear in all texts, so depending on versions translators use could explain lack of me in translation. In Luk 2:35 it says a sword would pierce her "ψυχήν" or Soul, not heart. I see know way that Zech 12:10 could be applied to Mary. It does say Mary's soul would be pierced and she would know the thoughts of many hearts.
Alright, it is hard sometimes to put yourself into a position where you can truly understand another's thoughts. I was thinking about my interpretation and your interpretation of "souls" and I guess that with the way that it is used in Luke 2:35, it would not necessarily go against WTS teachings in the way that you have presented it. Although it does seem a stretch for me for the NWT to include it, I will drop that. But, I am still curious about Rev. 1:7-8.
Many translate this here as "his" but according to Strongs concordance his is not a valid translation. So the NWT was probably trying to stay as close to a accurate translation as possible.
So the NWT committee was translating from the actual scrolls? "It" is an accurate translation for our Only Lord from the scrolls? I appreciate your loyalty to a religious organization, but do you feel that the NWT is justified in calling The Son of God "it"... or any human being for that matter?
I must admit that I am a bit surprised that the NWT used "soul" in Luke 2:35. According to page 209 of my "WHAT DOES THE BIBLE really TEACH", "the word 'soul' clearly stands for people". Is the NWT wrong, or is JW literature wrong?
The book says that once the soul is taken, that being dies... and I agree (but not in the same way). It says that "Jesus gave his soul, life, in behalf of all...". They teach that the soul is the bodies need to breathe, etc... so "life". It even gives verses to justify the reasoning on page 209-211, but there is not another translation of The Bible that uses "soul" in most of the verses that they give for support. Why did God wait so long for a proper translation of The Bible?
fezik82 ~NWT (alone) credits this vs. to The Father, suggesting that He was pierced (not symbolic) & that He is "to come".
Not quite sure what you mean here. This vs is speaking of Jesus coming and him being the one whom is pierced. One thing that confuses alot of people is Rev is speaking in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd person.
I did see that correctly yesterday, sorry... I was in a hurry! If that was in reference to Christ ("to come" in Rev. 1:8), then why does the NWT call Him "Jehovah God" and "the Almighty"?
Where to even start...no one claims Mary that Mary had a sword pierce her soul when Jesus was pierced; the figurative sword pierced her watching her son die a criminal's death. You can't literally pierce a soul anyway...it's a figure of speech, meaning that she'd be deeply grived.
Here are the facts that this video did not repudiate:
1) The Hebrew in the Masoretic text is "ME;" the Greek in the LXX is "ME" in Zech 12:10...there are no ancient MSS that I know of that say "him." cont
2) Just because John didn't quote the prophecy word for word and used "the one" doesn't mean there is corruption in the MSS and the autograph must say "THE ONE"; the evangelists will frequently summarize the essence of OT prophecies rather than quote them word for word.
3) THe Hebrew is daqar for pierced; it occurs 9 other times in the OT and always means "thrust through with a weapon," not deeply grieved. It has no double meaning in the OT; it simply means thrust through.
4)THe speaker in Zechariah spoke of a day he'd be LOOKED UPON pierced. Jesus was looked upon pierced after dying on the cross.
5) I accuse the WT of being deceptive versus the other translations because they have a LOT to lose if the Zech 12:10 says "me" (and it does). Like it or not, they have a long history of deception...I'll gladly show anyone some of the rubbish they pulled in a recent WT mag if you dont believe me. The other translations did not translate the Hebrew properly...cont
cont. either...they no doubt assumed that because John rendered it "the one" that the original must have said "the one" too, despite there being no MSS evidence.
I'm flattered that I've gained a modicum of notoriety to be mentioned in a video...but honestly, the end...the persecution part??? Guys, I'm a nice guy...I'm not looking to persecute anyone. If I accuse the WT of mischief, it's only in hopes of waking you up to the fact that you're trusting a false prophet who...cont
cont. has pulled all sorts of shenanigans to influence people to their position with your eternity. If what you have is truth, it needs no shenanigans to win the minds of people it is presented to.
And if answering heresy out of love for a person's eternity is persecution...read Galatians 4:16.
Jesus is YHWH...he's uncreated,(Jn 1:3)immutable(Hebrews 1:10-12 and 13:8), and THE GOD of the apostles (Jn 20:28, Ti 2:13, 2 Pet 1:1), Has THIS Jesus saved YOU?
I am not trying to be at all condescending to JW's, but all around the world... particularly Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Egypt. (not to limit it to these countries), Christians are having their lives stripped away by their own families for believing that Christ is God. This has been prevalent throughout history! I find it hard to believe that Christ's warning of persecutions had much to do with Christians pointing out heresy in an erroneous version of The Bible.
fezik82 with all due respect. He launches accusations about the NWT about a scripture that many translations translate the same. He then makes excusses and don't hold then accountable. Now you don't think that agree's with this?
?lyingly say every sort of wicked thing against YOU for my sake." (Mat 5:11)
I accuse the WT of being deceptive versus the other translations because they have a LOT to lose if the Zech 12:10 says "me" (and it does).
I have already explained that the WT has nothing to loose if "me" is actually there in Zech 12:10. As a matter of fact your explaination of Luke 2:35 is identical. Mike you can't say Zech 12:10 is literal and then dismiss Luke 2:35 as figurative because it just showes your biased opinion.
Luke 2 is written in figurative language...it says Mary's soul would be pierced...souls can't be literally pierced. Zech 12 isn't figurative...it doesn't say "you'll pierce my heart..." it just says "you'll LOOK ON ME who you pierced." Who was looked upon pierced, Richard? The father or Jesus? I'm off to bed...good night.
msm1876~Just because John didn't quote the prophecy word for word
Mike this is speculation on your part at best, and besides it does not explain how you come after the NWT for something many translation found ok to do.
The Manuscripts, Richard, the manuscripts! They don't say THE ONE! It's not speculation when the MSS and the Gospel aren't the same word for word...it's a conclusion based in available evidence. Prophecies are loosely quoted by the evangelists from time to time to get their essence.
msm1876~the figurative sword pierced her watching her son die a criminal's death.
Mike. Was Jesus not Jehoavah's son? Would your reasoning for Mary here also apply to God whatching his son die a criminal's death? Mike I don't think you could deny this for the earth shook when Jesus died. Clearly showing that Jehovah's heart was pierced also.
His heart was figuratively pierced...no doubt. But it wasn't LITERALLY; and the hebrew indicates a literal weapon going thru flesh. And the father wasn't looked upon...Jesus was...and YHWH said that HE personally would be LOOKED UPON PIERCED.
Let go of this 4th century henotheistic heresy, and embrace a belief in Jesus possessed by 1st century Christians! Even Polycarp and Ignatius, 2 of John's students, believed Jesus to be God! Is it not a possiblity that JOHN taught them that???
THat is just nonsense. Everyone knows that the President exist in 2 natures and the presidential nature is the one that did nothing while the military nature of the president chose to invade iraq.
Am willing for anyone not believing in the Trinity and seeing Jesus as a seperate god to God to please tell me how this does not contradict the first commandment (you shall not have any gods before me)
BrentJamesThomas 1 year ago
Love the video. very well done. agape love, your sister in California
shihtzufizzers 1 year ago
as always, amazing! jehovah blessings to you :D
luv6pup 1 year ago
In the LXX the text of Zech 12:10 in "και επιβλεψονται προς με" (and they shall look upon me) the "με" is listed as a textual variation. Thius means it does not appear in all texts, so depending on versions translators use could explain lack of me in translation. In Luk 2:35 it says a sword would pierce her "ψυχήν" or Soul, not heart. I see know way that Zech 12:10 could be applied to Mary. It does say Mary's soul would be pierced and she would know the thoughts of many hearts.
kgxxx10 1 year ago
I am yet to find a unbiased Trinitarian logic. In fact, Trinitarian logic is amoung the worst kind there is.
CamouflagedAgent 1 year ago
The point was well made Josiah. Very good video. Keep up the good work in declaring the good news. Brotherly Love.
~Jehovah First~
JahsProphecy 1 year ago
Thank you for post!
Bobby2k4 1 year ago
and did she get pierced? can the soul be pierced?
jhweh2007 1 year ago
Very good presentation.
Gordenacama 2 years ago
Excellent video my friend! Very well researched and and thought out.
- Rob
bandaidmafia 2 years ago
fezik82 ur a straight BK!
buktomsin 2 years ago
Alright, it is hard sometimes to put yourself into a position where you can truly understand another's thoughts. I was thinking about my interpretation and your interpretation of "souls" and I guess that with the way that it is used in Luke 2:35, it would not necessarily go against WTS teachings in the way that you have presented it. Although it does seem a stretch for me for the NWT to include it, I will drop that. But, I am still curious about Rev. 1:7-8.
fezik82 2 years ago
If no man can see Jehovah and live, how did Abraham wash His feet in Genesis chapter 18?
While I am bringing it up, I have been trying to figure out who the other two men were with Jehovah, could you give me your opinion?
fezik82 2 years ago
I misread your post, I'm sorry... I am in a huge hurry, I'll try to get back to you later today.
fezik82 2 years ago
Comment removed
fezik82 2 years ago
I went back to reread the verse about Mary, why is it that in the verse before (Luke 2:34), Jesus Christ is called "it"?
fezik82 2 years ago
Many translate this here as "his" but according to Strongs concordance his is not a valid translation. So the NWT was probably trying to stay as close to a accurate translation as possible.
Strongs concordance:
αὐτός autos
1) himself, herself, themselves, itself
2) he, she, it
3) the same
Josiahvidz 2 years ago
So the NWT committee was translating from the actual scrolls? "It" is an accurate translation for our Only Lord from the scrolls? I appreciate your loyalty to a religious organization, but do you feel that the NWT is justified in calling The Son of God "it"... or any human being for that matter?
fezik82 2 years ago
I must admit that I am a bit surprised that the NWT used "soul" in Luke 2:35. According to page 209 of my "WHAT DOES THE BIBLE really TEACH", "the word 'soul' clearly stands for people". Is the NWT wrong, or is JW literature wrong?
fezik82 2 years ago
The bible Teach book does not say it is only people. It also says it is animals or Life that a person enjoys. Here is a copy and paste.
"this word basically refers to (1) people, (2) animals, or (3) the life that a person or an animal enjoys. "
So figuritively speaking it would kill Mary to see her son die a criminals death.
Josiahvidz 2 years ago
The book says that once the soul is taken, that being dies... and I agree (but not in the same way). It says that "Jesus gave his soul, life, in behalf of all...". They teach that the soul is the bodies need to breathe, etc... so "life". It even gives verses to justify the reasoning on page 209-211, but there is not another translation of The Bible that uses "soul" in most of the verses that they give for support. Why did God wait so long for a proper translation of The Bible?
fezik82 2 years ago
@Josiahvidz can a soul be piersed?
jhweh2007 1 year ago
Comment removed
fezik82 2 years ago
fezik82 ~NWT (alone) credits this vs. to The Father, suggesting that He was pierced (not symbolic) & that He is "to come".
Not quite sure what you mean here. This vs is speaking of Jesus coming and him being the one whom is pierced. One thing that confuses alot of people is Rev is speaking in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd person.
Josiahvidz 2 years ago
I did see that correctly yesterday, sorry... I was in a hurry! If that was in reference to Christ ("to come" in Rev. 1:8), then why does the NWT call Him "Jehovah God" and "the Almighty"?
fezik82 2 years ago
Sorry msm1876, I didn't mean to direct my comment at you. I had two windows open and I hit reply in the wrong spot:)...
fezik82 2 years ago
Well, whatever, you hit the nail upon the head, brother!
msm1876 2 years ago
Where to even start...no one claims Mary that Mary had a sword pierce her soul when Jesus was pierced; the figurative sword pierced her watching her son die a criminal's death. You can't literally pierce a soul anyway...it's a figure of speech, meaning that she'd be deeply grived.
Here are the facts that this video did not repudiate:
1) The Hebrew in the Masoretic text is "ME;" the Greek in the LXX is "ME" in Zech 12:10...there are no ancient MSS that I know of that say "him." cont
msm1876 2 years ago
2) Just because John didn't quote the prophecy word for word and used "the one" doesn't mean there is corruption in the MSS and the autograph must say "THE ONE"; the evangelists will frequently summarize the essence of OT prophecies rather than quote them word for word.
3) THe Hebrew is daqar for pierced; it occurs 9 other times in the OT and always means "thrust through with a weapon," not deeply grieved. It has no double meaning in the OT; it simply means thrust through.
cont.
msm1876 2 years ago
4)THe speaker in Zechariah spoke of a day he'd be LOOKED UPON pierced. Jesus was looked upon pierced after dying on the cross.
5) I accuse the WT of being deceptive versus the other translations because they have a LOT to lose if the Zech 12:10 says "me" (and it does). Like it or not, they have a long history of deception...I'll gladly show anyone some of the rubbish they pulled in a recent WT mag if you dont believe me. The other translations did not translate the Hebrew properly...cont
msm1876 2 years ago
cont. either...they no doubt assumed that because John rendered it "the one" that the original must have said "the one" too, despite there being no MSS evidence.
I'm flattered that I've gained a modicum of notoriety to be mentioned in a video...but honestly, the end...the persecution part??? Guys, I'm a nice guy...I'm not looking to persecute anyone. If I accuse the WT of mischief, it's only in hopes of waking you up to the fact that you're trusting a false prophet who...cont
msm1876 2 years ago
cont. has pulled all sorts of shenanigans to influence people to their position with your eternity. If what you have is truth, it needs no shenanigans to win the minds of people it is presented to.
And if answering heresy out of love for a person's eternity is persecution...read Galatians 4:16.
Jesus is YHWH...he's uncreated,(Jn 1:3)immutable(Hebrews 1:10-12 and 13:8), and THE GOD of the apostles (Jn 20:28, Ti 2:13, 2 Pet 1:1), Has THIS Jesus saved YOU?
msm1876 2 years ago
I am not trying to be at all condescending to JW's, but all around the world... particularly Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Egypt. (not to limit it to these countries), Christians are having their lives stripped away by their own families for believing that Christ is God. This has been prevalent throughout history! I find it hard to believe that Christ's warning of persecutions had much to do with Christians pointing out heresy in an erroneous version of The Bible.
fezik82 2 years ago
fezik82 with all due respect. He launches accusations about the NWT about a scripture that many translations translate the same. He then makes excusses and don't hold then accountable. Now you don't think that agree's with this?
?lyingly say every sort of wicked thing against YOU for my sake." (Mat 5:11)
Josiahvidz 2 years ago
So other than the end. What is your take on this scripture?
Josiahvidz 2 years ago
I accuse the WT of being deceptive versus the other translations because they have a LOT to lose if the Zech 12:10 says "me" (and it does).
I have already explained that the WT has nothing to loose if "me" is actually there in Zech 12:10. As a matter of fact your explaination of Luke 2:35 is identical. Mike you can't say Zech 12:10 is literal and then dismiss Luke 2:35 as figurative because it just showes your biased opinion.
Josiahvidz 2 years ago
Luke 2 is written in figurative language...it says Mary's soul would be pierced...souls can't be literally pierced. Zech 12 isn't figurative...it doesn't say "you'll pierce my heart..." it just says "you'll LOOK ON ME who you pierced." Who was looked upon pierced, Richard? The father or Jesus? I'm off to bed...good night.
msm1876 2 years ago
msm1876~Just because John didn't quote the prophecy word for word
Mike this is speculation on your part at best, and besides it does not explain how you come after the NWT for something many translation found ok to do.
Josiahvidz 2 years ago
The Manuscripts, Richard, the manuscripts! They don't say THE ONE! It's not speculation when the MSS and the Gospel aren't the same word for word...it's a conclusion based in available evidence. Prophecies are loosely quoted by the evangelists from time to time to get their essence.
msm1876 2 years ago
msm1876~the figurative sword pierced her watching her son die a criminal's death.
Mike. Was Jesus not Jehoavah's son? Would your reasoning for Mary here also apply to God whatching his son die a criminal's death? Mike I don't think you could deny this for the earth shook when Jesus died. Clearly showing that Jehovah's heart was pierced also.
Josiahvidz 2 years ago
His heart was figuratively pierced...no doubt. But it wasn't LITERALLY; and the hebrew indicates a literal weapon going thru flesh. And the father wasn't looked upon...Jesus was...and YHWH said that HE personally would be LOOKED UPON PIERCED.
Let go of this 4th century henotheistic heresy, and embrace a belief in Jesus possessed by 1st century Christians! Even Polycarp and Ignatius, 2 of John's students, believed Jesus to be God! Is it not a possiblity that JOHN taught them that???
msm1876 2 years ago
terrible visual effects, not worthy for giving testomony about JEHOVAH
afterraincomessun 2 years ago
Good soundtrack and visual effects.
Here's one.
President Bush ousted Saddam Hussein. U.S-coalition forces (the military) invaded iraq and captured Saddam. Therefore, the military is the president.
tonyschmoeredux 2 years ago
THat is just nonsense. Everyone knows that the President exist in 2 natures and the presidential nature is the one that did nothing while the military nature of the president chose to invade iraq.
-D-
DarkShadowM99 2 years ago
Thoroughly explained and pretty much put an end to that argument. Nice video bro.
IvanDefendingTruth 2 years ago
Awesome brother. Jehovah soon will reveal everything to the world and those who are waiting in him will not be SHOCKED>
accord93rg 2 years ago