- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (t8 @ April 01 2011,17:21) Your point about the source not being able to exist without its image is unscientific and not logical either. And your point about the hammer shows you have learned nothing.
You should give this subject up. It is way above your understanding as proven by your last post.
t8I think everyone can see who it is that needs to give it up.
My analogy of the hammer is true and everyone can see that t8.
It is you that denys the reality of Jesus being God in every way the Father is.
WJ
Sorry WJ. But there are too many holes in your teaching and your rebuttals against myself and Mike are exceptionally weak that they do not stand.
Here are 5 facts that you cannot accept.
1) Others are called theos/elohim in a qualitative or representative sense.
2) We are specifically taught that there is one God the Father.
3) We are specifically taught that the one true God sent Jesus Christ.
4) All Trinity proof verses are added in verses, or are taken out of context.
5) There are hundreds of verses that teach clearly that God and Jesus are different persons/identities.Your doctrine fails all of the above.
Even if it failed one, that would be a worry.Your stubbornness leads you to defending error and tradition even in the face of scriptural truth.
When you oppose truth WJ, you lose.
http://www.jw-archive.org/2011/04/zechariah-1210-pierced-him-or-pierced.html
I think this video explains this verse quite well.
Hi All
I suppose that they know more about the correct meaning of Zech 12:10 than the inspired Apostle John who aproximately 2000 years ago quoted the verse in John 19:37….
and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced.” John 19:37
So why doesn't he show us how the Greek Grammar of the verse means anything different?
WJ
WJ, could you perhaps explain how what John wrote (John 19:37) conflicts with anything the video said? I actually don't understand the point you are attempting to make.
The problem is, all these questions below, the whole argument in fact was based on bad translating.
Quote Q1) Was the “me” that was foretold to be pierced and looked upon by the inhabitant of Jerusalem in Zech 12:10 a refererence to YHWH? If not, please provide lexical evidence to the contrary. Q2) According to John's inspired-understanding, was Yeshua in fact the “me” in the Zech 12:10 prophecy (John 19:37)? If not, please explain.
Q3) If YHWH makes a prophecy that only YHW
The obvious clue that it was translated wrong (without even getting into the Hebrew is this):
Zechariah 12:10
“I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for [/b]Him,[/b] as one mourns for an only son,If we were reading this without knowing who was being spoken of, it would be obvious that the “Him” is someone other than the “me.” It should obviously say “me” if it is still talking about the first person. Yet it doesn't. That should have been our first clue that we should have looked at the grammar.
Thanks david,
If it is indeed a bad translation, then I am glad that I wrote in the beginning that I saw it this particular way as it was written, but was also open to the translation being bad and hence the confusion that Trinitarians had with this verse. The Trinitarians jumped all over me for saying it could be a bad translation. But in hindsight, they should admit that it was a wise thing to do because lets face it, we know that not all translations are perfect and that there are times when nearly all translations do a bad job at a verse.
How about it Is, WJ, and CultB if you still read here. What about an admission that myself being open to the translation being wrong or imperfect was not a bad thing.
I guess I will be waiting for a long time. I think they would rather clash their swords than honor my reasons for saying something that is certainly within the realms of possibility.
I guess that shows their inability to reason sometimes.
Quote (t8 @ May 07 2007,08:38) Quote (Cult Buster @ May 07 2007,20:15) t8. Again your words which sounds like you are unsure
I say it like this because I am not sure if the translation is completely accurate. If it is, then it appears to be YHWH.I am wisely compensating for this.
Imagine if I said it is without any doubt and later found that the translation actually says …
I would look a little foolish wouldn't I?
Paul often spoke like this too.
The Lord says… I say….
There is nothing wrong with that.
When I say.. it should be the wisdom that God has given me. When God says… It is what God says.
I am not saying “thus says the LORD” in my post. I am reading it honestly and saying what it appears to say, while making sure that it doesn't violate other scripture.
Bump to show that I compensated for the possibility of a bad translation.Quote (t8 @ May 06 2007,20:58) Q1) Was the “me” that was foretold to be pierced and looked upon by the inhabitant of Jerusalem in Zech 12:10 a refererence to YHWH? If not, please provide lexical evidence to the contrary. I think the ME is YHWH. The one who is to be pierced (HIM) is Yeshua.
It says “…They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child,…”
Grammatically, the “Me” and the “him” cannot refer to the same individual can it.
It is clearly talking about 2, not 1. Otherwise it would say: “They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for ME as one mourns for an only child,”. Of course it doesn't say that, so the “him” is obviously different to the “me”.
Bump to show the me and him dilemma in this verse.Quote (david @ June 16 2011,01:01) WJ, could you perhaps explain how what John wrote (John 19:37) conflicts with anything the video said? I actually don't understand the point you are attempting to make.
DavidThe Apostle John is quoting the verse so we should let his rendering of the verse interpret Zech.
John under inspiration gives us the correct translation of the verse.
WJ
Quote (Is 1:18 @ May 07 2007,02:24) Quote (Cult Buster @ May 07 2007,01:15) t8. Don't play around with words. It is very clear that Jehovah ( Jesus) was the One who was pierced. Instead of fighting the truth, repent of your sin and accept Jesus Christ as your God and Saviour.
Quite right CB,
The His/me argument is a red herring. The point is YHWH prophesied that He would be peirced and Yeshua fulfilled it!Q) Did YHWH declare, using the first person singular pronoun “me”, in Zechariah 12:10 that He would be “pierced” and “looked upon”?
A) Yes. (t8 has conceded to this)
Q)If YHWH makes an unconditional prophecy, will it come to pass?
A) Yes. YHWH cannot lie (Numbers 23:19, Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18).
Q) Has this prophecy come to pass?
A) Yes.
Q) When?
A) On the cross, at Calvary. Yeshua fulfilled it (John 19:37).
Q) So….can this prophecy be fulfilled by proxy?
A) No. That would impute a lie to YHWH. But YHWH cannot lie. Therefore Yeshua MUST BE YHWH.
T8 has completely skirted around this dilemma. But it hasn't gone unnoticed.
Bump to show that John 19:37 is the fulfilment of the prophesy in Zech 12:10.Simply put Jesus is YHWH!
I think we can all agree that it is a fulfillment WJ.
But as being YHWH. Absolutely not.There is one God the Father WJ and the verse quoted is not saying that YHWH will hang on a tree.
How absurd. When does the madness end?WJ
Quote Bump to show that John 19:37 is the fulfilment of the prophesy in Zech 12:10. Simply put Jesus is YHWH!
Zec 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
Jn 19:33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:
Jn 19:34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.
Jn 19:35 And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.
Jn 19:36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.
Jn 19:37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.how could that be Jehovah in either verse and prophecy?
?Pierre
Quote (t8 @ June 16 2011,19:43) I think we can all agree that it is a fulfillment WJ.
But as being YHWH. Absolutely not.There is one God the Father WJ and the verse quoted is not saying that YHWH will hang on a tree.
How absurd. When does the madness end?
t8There is no madness in the fact that when the OT scriptures speak of YHWH that it can be speaking of the Father or Jesus since Jesus is the “visible image of the invisible God”, and the patriots claimed to talk to YHWH face to face as to a man.
The inspired writer John took a Hebrew scripture that says “YHWH will be pierced” and applied it to Jesus…
And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced. John 19:37
This same John in his prologue stated he was the Word that was with God and was God.
As Paul has pointed out the scripture could not be fulfilled by anyone but YHWH himself. This is another one of those thorns in the crawl of the anti-Jesus is God crowd.
WJ
Quote (t8 @ June 15 2011,17:40) Nice one david. I will place that video here for convenience.
Hi Everyone,How many would consider “Google translations” to be biased?
Zech.12:10 (Google) And I will pour upon the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication
and look on Me whom they pierced, and mourn his eulogy on the individual and Convert to gamble on older.God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (WorshippingJesus @ June 16 2011,00:30) Hi All I suppose that they know more about the correct meaning of Zech 12:10 than the inspired Apostle John who aproximately 2000 years ago quoted the verse in John 19:37….
and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced.” John 19:37
So why doesn't he show us how the Greek Grammar of the verse means anything different?
WJ
Hi WJ,John 19:37 (Google) And again another scripture says · They shall look at whom they have pierced.
God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Ed J @ June 17 2011,16:00) Hi Everyone, How many would consider “Google translations” to be biased?
Hi Ed,Show everyone how accurate Google is in their translation of Psalm 2:7.
And what is “and Convert to gamble on older” suppose to mean?
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 17 2011,10:51) This is another one of those thorns in the crawl of the anti-Jesus is God crowd.
Yes Keith,The fact that you claim mere mortal men could KILL Jehovah, the Maker of the heavens and the earth and everything in them IS a “thorn in my crawl”.
(Btw, I think the saying is “thorn in my craw”.)
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ June 16 2011,00:30) Hi All I suppose that they know more about the correct meaning of Zech 12:10 than the inspired Apostle John who aproximately 2000 years ago quoted the verse in John 19:37….
and, as another scripture says, “They will look on the one they have pierced.” John 19:37
So why doesn't he show us how the Greek Grammar of the verse means anything different?
WJ
You are right in that this does seem to point in the direction you believe, when referring to the argument from the video.However, something else I found interesting about Zech 12:10 is that some translation (even trinitarian ones) translate it like this:
“… when they look upon him whom they have pierced” – RSV.
See Also:
NRSV; GNB; MLB; NAB (1970); NAB (1991); LB; Mo; AT; JB; NJB; NLV; BBE; and Byington. (The ASV says in a footnote for “me” in Zech. 12:10: “According to some MSS [manuscripts], `him'.” Also see Rotherham footnote.)
http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/zech-1210-john-1937.htmlSo, WHICH TRANSLATION MATCHES THE CONTEXT?
AFTER SAYING THAT THEY WILL LOOK UPON ME (OR HIM) God continues with “they shall mourn for HIM.”
It seems many Bibles contradict themselves here.
The “me” in the first half does not agree with the “him” of the second half.If we looked at all manuscripts and translated with CONTEXT in mind, the disputed word of the first half (which has manuscript evidence for both renderings) must be translated as “him” or “the one.”
Ignatius, Irenaeus, and Tertullian (repeatedly) rendered Zech. 12:10 as “him whom they pierced”!
The septuagint of course uses “me” in the existing copies. (4th cent. CE)
BUT, the Hebrew is significantly different.
“The [Hebrew] text of Zech. 12:10 is corrupt. The LXX [Greek Septuagint] text reads:… (`they shall look upon me whom they have treated spitefully') …. The text in [Jn 19:37] does not follow the LXX; but it has also avoided the impossible [`me'] of the Hebrew text.” – p. 195, John 2, Ernst Haenchen, Fortress Press, 1984.
JOHN 19:37 (LET'S ASK AN INSPIRED BIBLE WRITER [JOHN] HOW IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN TRANSLATED: “ME” OR “HIM”??)
But most important of all, closely examine John 19:37 (even in the KJV) where this scripture has been quoted by John! All translations show John here translating Zech. 12:10 as “They shall look upon him [or `the one'] whom they pierced.” So we have this Apostle and inspired Bible writer telling us plainly (and undisputed even by trinitarian scholars) that Zechariah 12:10 should read: “They shall look upon him” (not `me'). (Same source as above)
SO, is it “me” or is it “him”?
1. Later, in the same verse, we are told it is “him.”
2. John clearly understood it to be “him.”
3. Other manuscripts translate it as “him.”So, things that disagree with the most common translation are: (other manuscripts; the context of the rest of the verse; John's inspired writing)
WJ, your argument is definitely a valid one as far as arguing against the video I presented. But, how would you address the above.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
