Timeline for Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses cite William Barclay as to the identity of the speaker in Revelation 22:13 knowing he believed it is Jesus?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 28, 2020 at 8:28 | comment | added | Revelation Lad | I believe the issue is in citing Barclay but not providing his conclusion as to who it identifies. So the Watchtower use is at best misleading or at worst purposely deceitful. Good exegesis cites scholarly analysis and includes their conclusion. There is no good reason to cite Barclay's analysis of the passage and fail to give his conclusion. For example, a more honest approach would be to say "Barclay concludes “the Alpha and the Omega” at Revelation 22:13 is Jesus but it can be identified as the same Person given this title elsewhere in Revelation—Jehovah God." | |
| Jul 24, 2020 at 1:16 | history | edited | Kristopher | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Jul 23, 2020 at 20:14 | comment | added | Kristopher | Feel free to roll back my edit if it is not something you want included in your answer. | |
| Jul 23, 2020 at 20:12 | history | edited | Kristopher | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 524 characters in body; added 49 characters in body
|
| Jul 22, 2020 at 7:30 | comment | added | Kristopher | @Anne See christianity.stackexchange.com/a/78535/23657. Read the quotes texts from Barclay in my answer | |
| Jul 22, 2020 at 7:00 | comment | added | Anne | @Kris In The Daily Study Bible series, "The Gospel of John" Vol. 1, Barclay writes of the Logos, how John was challenging the Greeks to consider "a new category in which the Greek might think of Jesus, a category in which Jesus was presented as nothing less than God acting in the form of a man." (p8) John also exposed Gnostic heresies (that Jesus was not really divine or not really human): "The Gnostic beliefs at one and the same time destroyed the real godhead and the real manhood of Jesus." (p14) Barclay agrees with John as to Christ's godhead and manhood = trinitarianism re. Christ. | |
| Jul 21, 2020 at 11:39 | comment | added | Kristopher | @Anne you may want to double check on Barclay being a trinitarian. | |
| Jul 21, 2020 at 8:52 | comment | added | Anne | @agarza It's utterly illogical to partially quote Prof. Barclay as a reason to come to a different conclusion than the one he came to. One sentence is wrested away from Prof. B's conclusion, whereas had his logical conclusion being admitted to, nobody would have used his partial quote to bolster their contradictory conclusion. The Watchtower Society had made a similar distortion to what the Prof. wrote re. John 1:1, trying to give the impression that he supported their anti-trinitarian stance when he was a trinitarian, believing that the Word was God (capital 'G'): scholastic dishonesty x2. | |
| Jul 19, 2020 at 12:35 | comment | added | Kristopher | @Lucian the Op is asking specifically about the quote in watchtower from Barclay and why it was used to bolster jws conclusion that Jehovah is the speaker in rev 22:13 in light of the fact that barclay himself came to a different conclusion as demonstrated in subsequent writings by him. | |
| Jul 19, 2020 at 11:52 | comment | added | user46876 | In his third paragraph from the end, the OP was making the following point: by applying the same reasoning to the expression the first and the last, one would then be forced to conclude that it refers to Christ (1:17, 2:8); as such, since 22:13 contains this term as well, it would have to denote the same person. Their ad hoc dichotomy between the two expressions (next-to-last chapter) is supported neither by the words' very meaning (alpha & omega being the first & last letters of the Greek alphabet, and therefore its beginning & end), nor by any explicit passage from Revelation itself. | |
| Jul 19, 2020 at 1:39 | history | answered | agarza | CC BY-SA 4.0 |