Saved - Past, Present, Future

Originally posted by sonship
Robbie, I see your commentaries and you own commentary.
But what you wrote was "literally".

And the LANGUAGE does not "literally" have written what you said it literally had written.

Of course you or anyone may add his commentary.

You Wrote:

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
"Those who are calling* upon the name of Jehovah will ...[text shortened]... 32, quoted by Paul in Romans chapter 10:13

*literally "those who are evangelising".

As I said it was a footnote in the New World translation to the verse Joel 2:32 and I think its warranted as the context infers, I have not checked the original Hebrew nor its Greek equivalent but i would be interested to know just what the term, 'calling upon the name of the Lord', is in their original languages.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie

I think its warranted, 'calling on the name of the Lord', literally is evangelizing. I have not checked the original Hebrew nor its Greek equivalent but i would be interested to know just what the term, 'calling upon the name of the Lord', is in their original languages.

I recommend that you read this extensive encompassing discussion.

"Calling on the Lord"

http://www.callingonthelord.org/

Originally posted by sonship

[b]I think its warranted, 'calling on the name of the Lord', literally is evangelizing. I have not checked the original Hebrew nor its Greek equivalent but i would be interested to know just what the term, 'calling upon the name of the Lord', is in their original languages.

I recommend that you read this extensive encompassing discussion.

"Calling on the Lord"

http://www.callingonthelord.org/[/b]

Interesting

This appositional structure strongly implies that to call on the Lord is to cry and shout to Him. . . .Such a confession with one’s mouth is obviously vocal and not silent.

Originally posted by sonship
Robbie, I see your commentaries and you own commentary.
But what you wrote was "literally".

And the LANGUAGE does not "literally" have written what you said it literally had written.

Of course you or anyone may add his commentary.

You Wrote:

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
"Those who are calling* upon the name of Jehovah will ...[text shortened]... 32, quoted by Paul in Romans chapter 10:13

*literally "those who are evangelising".

found it al last,

And it must occur that everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will get away safe; for in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will prove to be the escaped ones, just as Jehovah has said, and in among the survivors*, whom Jehovah is calling.” Joel 2:32

According to the Masoretic Hebrew text found in Codex Leningrad B 19A
“In among the survivors,” from the Greek 'euaggeli zomenoi', “those telling good news; those evangelizing.”

for a rendering of 'euaggeli zomenoi', see

http://lovewins.us/bible/compare/Acts%2014:7

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Interesting

This appositional structure strongly implies that to call on the Lord is to cry and shout to Him. . . .[b]Such a confession with one’s mouth is obviously vocal and not silent.[/b]

No necessarily shouting. But uttering out to audibly loudly or softly.

Originally posted by sonship
No necessarily shouting. But uttering out to audibly loudly or softly.

The point I tried to make although not very successfully at first is that those who were calling upon the name of the Lord are among the survivors and are evangelizing.

Robbie,

found it al last,

And it must occur that everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will get away safe; for in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will prove to be the escaped ones, just as Jehovah has said, and in among the survivors*, whom Jehovah is calling.” Joel 2:32

According to the Masoretic Hebrew text found in Codex Leningrad B 19A
“In among the survivors,” from the Greek 'euaggeli zomenoi', “those telling good news; those evangelizing.”

for a rendering of 'euaggeli zomenoi', see

http://lovewins.us/bible/compare/Acts%2014:7

Thankyou for something.

Now the Masoretic text is in Hebrew.
I am a little confused. Are you talking about a Greek translation of the Masoretic text ?

The reference discussed in your link is to Acts 14:7 a completely different Greek New Testament passage.

It seems that you are saying that a Greek translation of the Hebrew Masoretic text Joel 2:32 has the same expression in the Greek NT at Acts 14:7.

Acts 14:7 - Your Link -

http://lovewins.us/bible/compare/Acts%2014:7

The implication of someone saying Joel 2:32 should read the same way in Greek implies a meaning that "among the survivors are those telling good news." Which means to me that the survivors include some who were telling good news. Okay.

I have no objection to believing that among the survivors who called and were saved some were there who were telling good news. If that is what the Greek translation of the Hebrew Masoretic text of Joel 2:32 says.

But I think among the many independent English translations of Joel 2:32 that I listed, should be at least ONE that has this kind of rendering. Wouldn't you think, eliminating some collective collusion or conspiracy to mislead?

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to tell me how you got this concept. Without further exploration, I am assuming that you are saying:

A Greek translation of the Masoretic Hebrew text of Joel 2:32 contains an expression found in the Greek New Testament at Acts 14:7.

That is a bit of a labored stretch to, as I assume, say that JWs going door to door announcing what they teach is the Gospel, will be saved.

Originally posted by sonship
Robbie,

[quote] found it al last,

And it must occur that everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will get away safe; for in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will prove to be the escaped ones, just as Jehovah has said, and in among the survivors*, whom Jehovah is calling.” Joel 2:32

According to the Masoretic Hebrew text found in Codex Leningrad ...[text shortened]... assume, say that JWs going door to door announcing what they teach is the Gospel, will be saved.

yes that's exactly what I am saying (not the part about going from house to house as a form of salvation, merely that those who are evangelizing are among those who are saved) and no there is no conspiracy nor collusion to mislead, these things are often hidden in scripture until we make a diligent search for them, as for hidden treasure.

As for going from house to house i was absolutely amazed at the opposition to the idea that i received from professed Christians, honestly I was taken aback, how one can read the gospels and not get the sense of urgency, the sense of dynamism of first century Christianity is unfathomable. It is still a puzzle to me. If Gods word is alive and exerts power and is sharper than a two edged sword then it needs to be used skilfully. The apostle reminds us that we aught to be teachers in view of the times, are we still needing milk?

As for going from house to house i was absolutely amazed at the opposition to the idea that i received from professed Christians, honestly I was taken aback, how one can read the gospels and not get the sense of urgency, the sense of dynamism of first century Christianity is unfathomable. It is still a puzzle to me. If Gods word is alive and exerts power and is sharper than a two edged sword then it needs to be used skilfully. The apostle reminds us that we aught to be teachers in view of the times, are we still needing milk?

Going door to door in itself is not to be at all condemned. It is hard work. I have done it. It is hard.

I do not criticize taking the Gospel truth from door to door. Going door to door preaching "another Jesus" who is Michael the angel, well, you know how I feel about that. And that is what the Watchtower pupils do, sorry to say.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes that's exactly what I am saying (not the part about going from house to house as a form of salvation, merely that those who are evangelizing are among those who are saved) and no there is no conspiracy nor collusion to mislead, these things are often hidden in scripture until we make a diligent search for them, as for hidden treasure.

As for ...[text shortened]... apostle reminds us that we aught to be teachers in view of the times, are we still needing milk?

But where is the need to "go from door to door"? Yes, I can understand a sense of urgency in these latter days, but wouldn't that suggest there is a more intelligent use of your resources instead of sowing your seed far and wide, expecting it all to take root? The sheer number of those who take your evangelizing to heart and adhere to it *must* be small indeed. Has your corporation crunched any actual numbers (instead of merely making them up to look good) to determine the efficacy of your efforts? I imagine most of those you confront on a daily basis simply do not want to hear it. This suggests you are simply "throwing your pearls before swine", if you get my meaning. Wouldn't it behoove those looking for people who are thirsting in the wilderness to actually focus their efforts on the ones who need it most?

Originally posted by sonship
Going door to door in itself is not to be at all condemned. It is hard work. I have done it. It is hard.

I do not criticize taking the Gospel truth from door to door. Going door to door preaching [b]"another Jesus" who is Michael the angel, well, you know how I feel about that. And that is what the Watchtower pupils do, sorry to say.[/b]

But jaywill, they do profess to be Christians, and as such, they do believe in Jesus Christ as the foretold Messiah. If they can bring people to Jesus first, that may be enough. Those who thirst soon look beyond the proffered water to a more permanent source and people can then use what they have learned to make their own decisions regarding what surely is a matter of life or death.

Free will is given to us all by God. We must have faith in it.

Originally posted by Suzianne

But jaywill, they do profess to be Christians, and as such, they do believe in Jesus Christ as the foretold Messiah. If they can bring people to Jesus first, that may be enough.

People can be saved by an inadequate and even wrong presentation of the Gospel. The Holy Spirit can use something defficient presented by man to cause a person to open up to receive Christ.

If that is what you mean, I agree. But all the Jehovah's Witnesses I have ever known consider it their duty to Jehovah to put down the Son of God, as some kind of service to the Old Testament Jehovah. So they labor much on devaluing Christ in order to (in their mistaken minds) uplift an UN-incarnated God of the Old Testament.

The Word did not become flesh. And John 1:1 is wrong to the Jehovah's Witnesses. That is why they call themselves "JEHOVAH's Witnesses." The meaning actually is "Witness AGAINST the incarnation of God as a man in Jesus Christ."

What does the New Testament say though of the new covenant witnesses? Jesus told the disciples in the book of Acts -

" ... and you shall be MY [Christ's] witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and unto the uttermost part of the earth." (Acts 1:8)

Witnesses of Jesus Christ to the uttermost parts of the earth - that is what Jesus said. So the witness of Jesus Christ IS the true witness of Jehovah.

Of course witness is not just a teacher. But it is to witness by living out the Christ who is imparted within the believers -

"the last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)

The true witness of Jehovah is living in the realm and sphere of the divine life giving Spirit, the Holy Spirit who Christ became in His resurrection.

Those who thirst soon look beyond the proffered water to a more permanent source and people can then use what they have learned to make their own decisions regarding what surely is a matter of life or death.

I would advise such to stop inviting the Jehovah's Witness into their homes to teach them Watchtower Christology. I would put infinite more stock in them just picking up the New Testament and starting to read it on their own, prayerfully.

Is this just my opinion or the instruction of the New Testament ? Consider -

"Everyone who goes beyond and does not abide in the teaching of Christ does not have God; he who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son.

If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house, and do not say to him, Rejoice! For he who says to him, Rejoice, shares in his evil works." (Second John 1:9-11)

Now the deceptive teaching John is talking about is the teaching denying that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh (v.7) -

"For many deceivers went out into the world, those who do not confess Jesus Christ coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist." (v.7)

Now I can hear that some JW teachers protest - "But we DO believe that Jesus Christ came in the flesh."

But you have to be careful. Every man born has been a man who "came in the flesh" in that sense. The Apostle John is probably not suggesting that anyone teaching that a man Jesus was born, is a proper teacher of the New Testament salvation.

If we look at his next sentence -

"Look to yourselves that you do not lose the things which we wrought, but that you may receive the full reward." (v.8) I think you have to refer to the things which the Apostle John and the other apostles wrought. We could certainly refer to his First Epistle - First John.

And there are too many things in that letter, expressing the absolute deity of Jesus Christ, which the deniers of the incarnation would fight against. This includes those who deny the Son do not have the Father either.

The language may sound the same. But at the bottom you have a denial of the Son of God. Those who deny the Son of God do not have the Father -
For example - "Who is the liar if not he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who confesses the Son has the Father also." (2:22,23)

Try to get a Jehovah's Witness to kneel on his knees with you and confess that Jesus is the Son of God. You will not be able to get him to do so. For at root, they deny that Jesus is the Son of God, though in their dictionary they have some similar sounding language.

For example - "Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him and he in God." (4:15)

For example - "He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life." (1 John 5:12)

Free will is given to us all by God. We must have faith in it.

Originally posted by sonship
[quote] As for going from house to house i was absolutely amazed at the opposition to the idea that i received from professed Christians, honestly I was taken aback, how one can read the gospels and not get the sense of urgency, the sense of dynamism of first century Christianity is unfathomable. It is still a puzzle to me. If Gods word is alive and exerts p ...[text shortened]... , well, you know how I feel about that. And that is what the Watchtower pupils do, sorry to say.

Indeed it is a different Jesus, one created by God, having a beginning, subject to the Father, the only begotten son as in progeny, the foremost angelic messenger termed the Word, stated by the scriptures as returning with an archangels voice, a very different Jesus indeed to the trinitarian concept and you know how i feel about that, its blasphemous if i am perfectly honest.

Originally posted by Suzianne
But where is the need to "go from door to door"? Yes, I can understand a sense of urgency in these latter days, but wouldn't that suggest there is a more intelligent use of your resources instead of sowing your seed far and wide, expecting it all to take root? The sheer number of those who take your evangelizing to heart and adhere to it *must* be small i ...[text shortened]... ho are thirsting in the wilderness to actually focus their efforts on the ones who need it most?

no one expects it all to take root, we simply cannot be presumptuous, some will fall on good soil, some on rocky soil, some will take root and quickly wither, some will be eaten by little birds. Jesus himself warned against presumptuousness,

‘Master, I knew you to be an exacting man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you did not winnow. So I grew afraid and went off and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours.’ In reply his master said to him, ‘Wicked and sluggish slave, you knew, did you, that I reaped where I did not sow and gathered where I did not winnow?

Who are we to say where Jesus will reap and gather?

and the fact that we are small in number is irrelevant,

(Matthew 9:37, 38) Then he said to his disciples: “Yes, the harvest is great, but the workers are few. Therefore, beg the Master of the harvest to send out workers into his harvest.”

Originally posted by robbie carrobie

Indeed it is a different Jesus,

Yes, a different Jesus of a heretical teaching - a Jesus that you yourself do not know.

one created by God,

God did create man. But the Word WAS God. So the uncreated eternal life [b]"became flesh and tabernacled among us "(John 1:14)

Man is an item of God's creation. Show us a verse that says God ever created the Logos, the Word. You cannot because "the Word was God".

Your teaching is antichrist.

having a beginning,

Man as a creation of God had a beginning in Genesis 1:26,27. But the Son is addressed as God in Hebrews. He is also likened to the type pf Melchizedek "without beginning of days or end of life" (Hebrews 7:3)

The Son also speaks that He exactly like Jehovah of the book of Isaiah, is the First and the Last.

"Thus says Jehovah the King of Israel, ... I am the First and I am the Last, And apart from Me there is no God." (Isaiah 44:6)

" ... and He placed His right hand on me, saying, Do not fear; I am the First and the Last and the living One; and I became dead, and behold, I am living forever and ever; ..." (Revelation 1:17b,18)

So if Jehovah had no beginning so also did the Living One who became dead, who is living forever and ever, also have no beginning.

subject to the Father,

Jesus Christ being subject to the Father does not make the Word not God as John 1:1 states. Jesus being subject to His Father underscores that the Word became flesh and tabernacled among US - us human beings.

the only begotten son as in progeny,

The child born is called the Mighty God in Isaiah 9:6.
And the son given is called "Eternal Father" in the same passage.

God is triune.

the foremost angelic messenger termed the Word,

The Angel of Jehovah in the Old Testament is sometimes used completely interchangeably with Jehovah.

The writer of Hebrews absolutely emphasizes that to NO angel though was the honor of being called "My Son" by God.

"For to which of the angels has He ever said, "You are My Son; this day I have begotten You" ? (Hebrews 1:5)

There are only three angels mentioned by name in the whole Bible.

1.) Michael
2.) Gabriel
3.) Daystar [Lucifer (Latin)]

To the rhetorical question "To which of the angels has He [God] ever said, "You are My Son ..." the answer is -

To NO angel has God ever said that to.
Jehovah's Witnesses answer incorrectly. They would say "To Michael the angel it was said."

The true answer is that to NO angel did God honor in this way.

stated by the scriptures as returning with an archangels voice,

That reading of First Thessalonians 4:16 is tortured and ludicrous.

The Lord Himself, with a shout of command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, will descend ..." .

It is fantasy to attempt to derive from that passage that Jesus Christ is an archangel. You might as well say that because He also comes "with the trumpet of God" that He is also a trumpet.

a very different Jesus indeed to the trinitarian concept and you know how i feel about that, its blasphemous if i am perfectly honest.

Different from the Jesus of the Bible and heretical, rightly dismissed by the ancient brothers when Arianism was correctly identified as a false teaching.

Charles T. Russell dusted the old heresy off and tried it again. And it is rejected again by the Christian brothers today who can see through its antichrist nature.