What is the Kingdom of God?

Originally posted by FabianFnas
It's always fun to see christians use the bible as a weapon against other christians.

i am not sure if robbie carrobie is a christian?

Originally posted by RBHILL
i am not sure if robbie carrobie is a christian?

Do I follow and advocate the teachings of Christ, then I am a Christian.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
this is all very well Jaywill but it rely on rather tenuous interpretations of scripture especially with regard to the term Spirit which has various connotations depending on the context. Clearly we are to take in knowledge, Paul qualifies this statement,

(Romans 12:2) . . .[b]but be transformed by making your mind over, that you may prove t ...[text shortened]... it being a purely emotional acceptance or clinical head knowledge, its is a culmination of both.[/b]

Of course I am not downplaying study of the Scriptures by any means. I would think that would be a little self evident, that I did not intend the neglect of study.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
It's always fun to see christians use the bible as a weapon against other christians.

Actually Jaywill and i were having a rather civil and insightful discussion, not marred by the usual base materialism and watering down of the word of God. I have gained an insight into his thinking, hopefully he has a better understanding of my perspective also. I would like to keep it both civil and fruitful if you dont mind.

Originally posted by jaywill
Of course I am not downplaying study of the Scriptures by any means. I would think that would be a little self evident, that I did not intend the neglect of study.

I really wonder if we come across rather staid and not a little legalistic, i mean we dont do any of that stuff, speaking in tongues, faith healing, emotional appeals on T.V. of 'I am a sinner send me your money', messing with snakes, or bashing tambourines. Instead we advocate, meetings, study, prayer, meditation and a public ministry.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
this is all very well Jaywill but it rely on rather tenuous interpretations of scripture especially with regard to the term Spirit which has various connotations depending on the context. Clearly we are to take in knowledge, Paul qualifies this statement,

(Romans 12:2) . . .[b]but be transformed by making your mind over, that you may prove t ...[text shortened]... it being a purely emotional acceptance or clinical head knowledge, its is a culmination of both.[/b]

===========================
(1 Corinthians 2:14-16) . . .But a physical man does not receive the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot get to know [them], because they are examined spiritually. However, the spiritual man examines indeed all things, but he himself is not examined by any man. For “who has come to know the mind of Jehovah, that he may instruct him?” But we do have the mind of Christ.
===================================

This again is not a good translation, while we're talking about the study of the Bible.

It has been said that every translation is also an interpretation. I suspect there is some truth to that.

Your paraphrase there talks about the physical man. But I prefer something more representative of the orginal Greek.

Now I do not read (well) the New Testament in Greek. I'm pretty bad. But when I do want to know what was written in the Greek more closely then what a "helpful"
paraphrase reflecting someone's interpretation of what he THINKS the Greek must mean, I go to my own Recovery Version Bible.

But if one wants she can go to the 1901 American Standard BIble which has a reputation among translators for being "wooden". That means sacrificing nice sounding English for the sake of getting to a more true rendering of the actual Greek words.

Ironically, the Jehovah's Witnesses USE to use the 1901 American Standard Bible in decades past. The two that I have in my library were published by the Watchtower Society. And I think I may understand why the Watchtower Society stopped using that translation.

I wish you would go BACK to that version. You are far more likely to get me to sit up and listen. That New World Translation I simply would not trust at all. It is clearly a paraphrase like Good News For Modern Man, The Living Bible, J B. Phillips New Testament.

Anyway, the SOULISH man is not really the same thing as "the physical man." This is a very bad rendering suggesting what someone thought Paul meant. But it may be limited by that "translators" spiritual experience.

If that "scholar" has never experienced the second birth, she or he may think Paul meant something like the physical man. But Paul is not talking about a man with a physical body problem but with a problem IN HIS SOUL which is the mind, emotion, and will.

Someone can correct me if I am wrong about (First Cor. 2:14)

To me your paraphrase is enfluenced by someone's lack of experience to insert what he thinks will be "helpful" to understand what he thinks Paul must have meant.

Some say "Every translation is an interpretation". Maybe so. I want translators who have walked in Paul's shoes basically as well as having mastered New Testament Greek.

Originally posted by jaywill
==========================
(1 Corinthians 2:14-16) . . .But a physical man does not receive the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot get to know [them], because they are examined spiritually. However, the spiritual man examines indeed all things, but he himself is not examined by any man. For “who has come t ed in Paul's shoes basically as well as having mastered New Testament Greek.[/b]

The New world Translation of the Holy Scriptures is a superlative translation, we have consulted almost every available manuscript in deciding the rendering of a text.

Perhaps if you looked at the context you may get a better understanding, for clearly the physical man is in contrast to the spiritual man.

The rendering of physical comes from the Greek and Latin terms, soulical Greek, psykhikos and the Latin, Animalis.

The text is not a paraphrase its a translation of the original Greek. You dont think we have Greek translators, you know that were born in Greece, that speak Greek, that have studied Greek, both modern and Koine? Please we only publish our publication in over 234 languages and developed the worlds first multi translation system, Meps because we knew nothing about language.

Originally posted by jaywill
The reason why your "translators" have that as the [b]"physical man" is because they do not want to propogate a belief that there is a soul and a body.

The Watchtower doctrine of the nature of man dictates that they do not put a human SOUL in justaposition with a human BODY.[/b]

Yes we do not believe that there is a part of you that transcends death, in fact, we do not state that it is a biblical teaching at all. We in fact profess that the soul is the body and spirit. Its not a watchtower doctrine, its a biblical teaching. If you are going to continue to speak disparagingly about the New world translation and the watchtower society which is nothing more than a legal corporation used by us for printing literature, then i will leave.

Originally posted by jaywill
JW teachers will harp on the SOUL being in the blood or that there is no separation of the Soul from the phsycial body. So they hammered out Paul's words in English to push this Watchtower view of man.

This is horrible.

ok, i am leaving, i have had enough, i dont mind discussing Biblical scriptures, but you have gone too far. Good evening and goodbye. Just for the record, in order to expose Jaywills lies, to anyone that is interested here are some alternative renderings,

1 Corinthians 2:14 (New International Version, ©2010)

The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (The Message)

The unspiritual self, just as it is by nature, can't receive the gifts of God's Spirit. There's no capacity for them. They seem like so much silliness. Spirit can be known only by spirit—God's Spirit and our spirits in open communion. Spiritually alive, we have access to everything God's Spirit is doing, and can't be judged by unspiritual critics. Isaiah's question, "Is there anyone around who knows God's Spirit, anyone who knows what he is doing?" has been answered: Christ knows, and we have Christ's Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (Amplified Bible)

But the natural, nonspiritual man does not accept or welcome or admit into his heart the gifts and teachings and revelations of the Spirit of God, for they are folly (meaningless nonsense) to him; and he is incapable of knowing them [of progressively recognizing, understanding, and becoming better acquainted with them] because they are spiritually discerned and estimated and appreciated.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (New Living Translation)

But people who aren’t spiritual can’t receive these truths from God’s Spirit. It all sounds foolish to them and they can’t understand it, for only those who are spiritual can understand what the Spirit means.

1 Corinthians 2:14 (Wycliffe New Testament)

For a beastly man perceiveth not those things that be of the Spirit of God; for it is folly to him, and he may not understand, for it is examined ghostly [for it is examined, or assayed, ghostly].

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The New world Translation of the Holy Scriptures is a superlative translation, we have consulted almost every available manuscript in deciding the rendering of a text.

Perhaps if you looked at the context you may get a better understanding, for clearly the physical man is in contrast to the spiritual man.

The rendering of physical comes from ...[text shortened]... eveloped the worlds first multi translation system, Meps because we knew nothing about language.

=====================================
The New world Translation of the Holy Scriptures is a superlative translation, we have consulted almost every available manuscript in deciding the rendering of a text.
=========================

No it is not.

===========================
Perhaps if you looked at the context you may get a better understanding, for clearly the physical man is in contrast to the spiritual man.
========================

No it is the SOULISH man in contrast to the SPIRITUAL man.

That is a man who has spirit and soul and body (1 Thess. 5:23). But he is not dominated by the spirit but by the SOUL.

The strongest part of his being should be his regenerated spirit indwelt with by the Holy Spirit. But instead, though he may be born of the Spirit in his spirit, he still LIVES primarily in the SOUL. He sufficates his spirit. He keeps his spirit under his big SELF.

========================
The rendering of physical comes from the Greek and Latin terms, soulical Greek, psykhikos and the Latin, Animalis.
=======================

The human soul and the human spirit need to be separated by the sharp two edged sword of the word of God (Hebrews 4:12)

Otherwise the Christian has a hard time discerning what is of God within him and what is simply of his SELF, his soul. This requires exprience.

Your Jehovah's Witness teaching forbids you to see the trichotomous nature of man - "spirit and soul and body" (1 Thess. 5:23)

When I speak of your spirit being born of the Spirit you don't know what I am talking about. You have within you, deeper then your soul something which needs to be awakened, resurrected, brought out of its comatose state and enlivened by the Spirit of God. That is your spirit.

=================================
The text is not a paraphrase its a translation of the original Greek. You dont think we have Greek translators, you know that were born in Greece, that speak Greek, that have studied Greek, both modern and Koine? Please we only publish our publication in over 234 languages and developed the worlds first multi translation system, Meps because we knew nothing about language.
=============================

Maybe so. But your translators do not put their names on that New World Translation. It is secretive. And Greek translating PEERS cannot find out what are the credentials of such translators.

In the mean time some of us can see that your doctrine enfluences how you want to render the original language.

I don't think these men have experienced regeneration. But they want to come into my house and give their spin on the spirit, born again, the Holy spirit. etc and let us not forget Christ being the arch angel Michael.

I am praying for you. I hope other Christians here are praying for you. And I myself need prayer.

Originally posted by jaywill
=====================================
The New world Translation of the Holy Scriptures is a superlative translation, we have consulted almost every available manuscript in deciding the rendering of a text.
=========================[/b]

No it is not.

===========================
Perhaps if you looked at the context you may get a better un raying for you. I hope other Christians here are praying for you. And I myself need prayer.

ok Jaywill tell the forum which publications and manuscripts we consulted prior to publishing the New world translation, now that you seem to be an expert, if you cannot you will publicly apologise. Secondly, if you want to discuss anything with me, you stick to scripture, I will not have you bad mouthing our translation nor our organisation nor the work of preaching and teaching. I find it ultimately ironic that so called Christians can sit comfortably in their houses praying for us while we are the ones out in all weathers, giving up our time and effort, doing the work of teaching and preaching in order to help anyone that may be interested, dont yah think!

(Matthew 23:1-4) . . .Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying:  “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses. Therefore all the things they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds, for they say but do not perform.  They bind up heavy loads and put them upon the shoulders of men, but they themselves are not willing to budge them with their finger. . .

(Matthew 25:24-27) . . .‘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?  Well, then, you ought to have deposited my silver monies with the bankers, and on my arrival I would be receiving what is mine with interest.

(Luke 11:23) . . .He that is not on my side is against me, and he that does not gather with me scatters.

Amen Jesus the Christ!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
ok Jaywill tell the forum which publications and manuscripts we consulted prior to publishing the New world translation, now that you seem to be an expert, if you cannot you will publicly apologise. Secondly, if you want to discuss anything with me, you stick to scripture, I will not have you bad mouthing our translation nor our organisation nor the ...[text shortened]... r houses praying while we are the ones doing the work of teaching and preaching, dont yah think!

=================================
ok Jaywill tell the forum which publications and manuscripts we consulted prior to publishing the New world translation, now that you seem to be an expert, if you cannot i will. Secondly, if you want to discuss anything with me, you stick to scripture, I will not have you bad mouthing our translation nor our organisation, i hope i make that clear.
==============================

Without study I cannot tell you what manuscripts your editors and translators consulted. You have me there for the moment.

However, why dost thou not open up, yea, evenest thine own New World Translation and tell me WHO are the translators and what are their credentials?

To obligue you I will tell you that my Recovery Version New Testament uses the Nestle Greek Text and has as translator Dr. Kerry S. Robichaux.

And the other version (one of a number) which I frequently consult 1901 American Standard Version which I cannot seem to locate in the room at the moment, lists a commitee of scholars I am pretty sure.

I would use also J.N. Darby's New Translation.
I would even consult the NIV Greek and English Interlinear.

Open your NWT and tell me who the average reader can know was responsible specifically for the translation.

I don't think you can do that. Can you ? Are you going to plead that they are too humble to want their names and credentials listed ?

I am not saying we should trust the wisdom and credentials of man in place of the Holy Spirit.

Hopefully men guided by God also with able schooling would be translators. But WHY does NWT not want to furnish that information for any reader of the NWT to see? Is it only "inner circle" information that you have to be in on the elite board members in Brooklyn to know ?

Originally posted by jaywill
=================================
ok Jaywill tell the forum which publications and manuscripts we consulted prior to publishing the New world translation, now that you seem to be an expert, if you cannot i will. Secondly, if you want to discuss anything with me, you stick to scripture, I will not have you bad mouthing our translation nor our organi circle" information that you have to be in on the elite board members in Brooklyn to know ?[/b]

so you cannot, hardly surprising is it,

Codex Sinaiticus, Gr., fourth cent. C.E., British Museum, H.S., G.S.
Codex Alexandrinus, Gr., fifth cent. C.E., British Museum, H.S., G.S.
Aleppo Codex, Heb., c. 930 C.E., Israel, H.S.
Aquila’s Gr. translation of H.S., second cent. C.E., Cambridge, England.
Armenian Version, fourth to thirteenth cent. C.E.; H.S., G.S.
Vatican ms 1209, Gr., fourth cent. C.E., Vatican City, Rome, H.S., G.S.
Bauer A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by W. Bauer, second English ed., by F. W. Gingrich and F. W. Danker, Chicago and London (1979).
Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, by Brown, Driver and Briggs, Oxford, 1978 reprint.
Biblia Hebraica, by Kittel, Kahle, Alt and Eissfeldt, Privilegierte Württembergische Bibelanstalt, Stuttgart, seventh to ninth ed., 1951-55, H.S.
Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, by Elliger and Rudolph, Deutsche Bibelstiftung, Stuttgart, 1977, H.S.
Codex Ephraemi rescriptus, Gr., fifth cent. C.E., Paris, H.S., G.S.
Cairo Codex, Heb., 895 C.E., Cairo, Egypt, H.S.
Bezae Codices, Gr. and Lat., fifth and sixth cent. C.E., Cambridge, England, G.S.
Massoretico-Critical Text of the Hebrew Bible, by C. D. Ginsburg, London, 1926.
Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible, by C. D. Ginsburg, Ktav Publishing House, New York, 1966 reprint.
The Massorah, by C. D. Ginsburg, Ktav Publishing House, New York, 1975 reprint.
Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, by E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley, Oxford, England (1910).
The Interlinear Hebrew/English Bible, Vol. I-III, by J. Green, Wilmington, U.S., 1976.
The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, Brooklyn, 1969, a word-for-word rendering from Greek into English.
Old Latin Versions, Itala, second to fourth cent. C.E.; H.S., G.S.
Matthew, Heb., edited by J. du Tillet, with a Lat. translation by J. Mercier, Paris, 1555.
Matthew, Heb., incorporated as a separate chapter in [“Tried Stone”], by Shem-Tob ben Isaac Ibn Shaprut, 1385. Mss of 16th and 17th cent., Jewish Theological Seminary, New York.
Matthew and Hebrews, Heb. and Lat., by Sebastian Münster, Basel, 1537 and 1557 respectively.
Matthew, Heb., by J. Quinquarboreus, Paris, 1551.
Liturgical Gospels, Heb., by F. Petri, Wittemberg, 1573.
Liturgical Gospels, German, Lat., Gr. and Heb., by Johann Clajus, Leipzig, 1576.
Christian Greek Scriptures in 12 languages, including Heb., by Elias Hutter, Nuremberg, 1599.
Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by William Robertson, London, 1661.
Gospels, Heb. and Lat., by Giovanni Battista Jona, Rome, 1668.
The New Testament . . . in Hebrew and English, by Richard Caddick, Vol. I-III, containing Matthew—1 Corinthians, London, 1798-1805.
Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by Thomas Fry and others, London, 1817.
Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by William Greenfield, London, 1831.
Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by A. McCaul, M. S. Alexander, J. C. Reichardt and S. Hoga, London, 1838.
Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by J. C. Reichardt, London, 1846.
Luke, Acts, Romans and Hebrews, Heb., by J. H. R. Biesenthal, Berlin, 1855, 1867, 1853 and 1858 respectively.
Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by J. C. Reichardt and J. H. R. Biesenthal, London, 1866.
Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by Franz Delitzsch, London, 1981 ed.
Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by Isaac Salkinson and C. D. Ginsburg, London.
John, Heb., by Moshe I. Ben Maeir, Denver, Colorado, 1957.
A Concordance to the Greek Testament, by W. F. Moulton and A. S. Geden, fourth ed., Edinburgh, 1963.
The Emphatic Diaglott (Greek-English interlinear), by Benjamin Wilson, New York, 1864, reprint by Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, Brooklyn, 1942.
Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by United Bible Societies, Jerusalem, 1979.
Christian Greek Scriptures, Heb., by J. Bauchet, Rome, 1975.
A Literal Translation of the New Testament . . . From the Text of the Vatican Manuscript, by Herman Heinfetter, London, 1863.
St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, by W. G. Rutherford, London, 1900.
Psalms and Matthew 1:1-3:6, Heb., by Anton Margaritha, Leipzig, 1533.
Die heilige Schrift des neuen Testaments, by Dominik von Brentano, third ed., Vienna and Prague, 1796.
Journal of Theological Studies, Clarendon, Oxford.
Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros, by L. Koehler and W. Baumgartner, Leiden, Netherlands, 1953.
Hebräisches und Aramäisches Lexikon zum Alten Testament, by W. Baumgartner, third ed., Leiden, Netherlands, 1967 and later ed.
Leningrad Codex Leningrad B 19A, Heb., 1008 C.E., H.S., Saltykov-Shchedrin State Public Library, Leningrad, U.S.S.R.
A Greek-English Lexicon, by H. Liddell and R. Scott, Oxford, 1968.
Septuagint, Gr., third and second cent. B.C.E., H.S. (A. Rahlfs, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart, 1935).
Bagster Septuagint (with an English translation by Sir Lancelot Brenton, S. Bagster & Sons, London, 1851).
Septuagint (P. de Lagarde, Göttingen, Germany, 1883).
Septuagint, translated by C. Thomson, Pells ed., London, 1904.
Masoretic Hebrew text found in Codex Leningrad B 19A as presented in BHK and BHS.

Papyrus Chester Beatty 1, Gr., third cent. C.E., Dublin, G.S.
Papyrus Chester Beatty 2, Gr., c. 200 C.E., Dublin, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A., G.S.
Papyrus Chester Beatty 3, Gr., third cent. C.E., Dublin, G.S.
Papyrus Bodmer 2, Gr., c. 200 C.E., Geneva, G.S.
Papyrus Bodmer 17, Gr., seventh cent. C.E., Geneva, G.S.
Papyrus Bodmer 14, 15, Gr., c. 200 C.E., Geneva, G.S.
The Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah, Jerusalem, found in 1947 in Qumran Cave No. 1.
Pentateuch in Samaritan, fourth cent. B.C.E., Israel.

Hebrew Old Testament, by N. H. Snaith, Israel, 1970.
Syriac , Christian Aram., fifth cent. C.E., S. Lee, London, 1826, reprint by United Bible Societies, 1979.
Curetonian Syriac, Old Syriac, fifth cent. C.E., Gospels, Cambridge, England.
Philoxenian-Harclean Syriac Version, sixth and seventh cent. C.E.; G.S.
Jerusalem (Hierosolymitanum) Version, Old Syriac, sixth cent. C.E.; G.S.
Sinaitic Syriac codex, fourth and fifth cent. C.E., Gospels.
Greek translation of H.S., by Symmachus, c. 200 C.E.
Targums, Aram. paraphrases of parts of H.S.
Jerusalem Targum I (Pseudo-Jonathan) and Jerusalem Targum II (Fragmentary Targum).
Targum of Onkelos (Babylonian Targum), Pentateuch.
Palestinian Targum, Vatican City, Rome, Pentateuch.
Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (English ed.), Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, U.S.A., 1974 and later ed.
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (English ed.), Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, U.S.A., 1964 and later ed.
Greek translation of H.S., by Theodotion, second cent. C.E.
Textus Receptus (Received Text) of G.S., by R. Stephanus, 1550.
Latin Vulgate, by Jerome, c. 400 C.E. (Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, Württembergische Bibelanstalt, Stuttgart, 1975).
Latin Vulgate, Clementine recension (S. Bagster & Sons, London, 1977).
Latin Vulgate, Sixtine recension, 1590.
Novum Testamentum Latine secundum editionem Sancti Hieronymi ad Codicum Manuscriptorum Fidem, by J. Wordsworth and H. J. White, Oxford, 1911.
Vetus Testamentum, E. J. Brill, Leiden, Netherlands.
Freer Gospels, fifth cent. C.E., Washington, D.C.
The New Testament in the Original Greek, by Westcott and Hort, 1948 ed. (reprinted in Int).
ZorellGr Lexicon Graecum Novi Testamenti, third ed., by F. Zorell, Paris, 1961.
ZorellHeb Lexicon Hebraicum et Aramaicum Veteris Testamenti, by F. Zorell, Rome, 1968.

As you can see, the list is rather extensive, perhaps you can produce any other translation which has taken so much time and effort but i doubt it, and yet here you are bad mouthing it as usual, without knowing anything about it, prejudiced or what! As for translators, they are not as bold as King James so as to have their names printed in the word of God, so why dont you just get over the fact.