Bridge of Reason

The New World Translation (NWT) bible, produced by Jehovah's Witnesses, inserts the name “Jehovah” into the New Testament 237 times. The vast majority of bible scholars do not agree that the name should be added, since the Name does not appear in any of the approximately 5700 manuscripts of the Greek Scriptures (New Testament) in existence[1]. Yet translators of the NWT defend the addition of the name by saying that at one point in history, the Divine Name was removed from manuscripts of the new testament. One particular argument, contained in the appendix to the NWT, says: “ Early Jewish writings indicate that Jewish Christians used the divine name in their writings. The Tosefta, a written collection of oral laws that was completed by about 300 C.E., says with regard to Christian writings that were burned on the Sabbath: “The books of the Evangelists and the books of the minim [thought to be Jewish Christians] they do not save from a fire. But they are allowed to burn where t

If you want to know what this series is about see my  first post here . We looked last time at Brian Simmons’ version of the story of Photini, the woman at the well. He drew some pretty peculiar teaching from the text in John 4 and you might be forgiven for wondering where it came from. It came from ‘Sod.’ No more than 17 seconds into his talk he says, ‘someone’s going to get into Sod,’ later exclaiming, ‘Come on Sodites,’ as he goes on with his story. ‘Jesus is speaking out of the Sod realm,’ he tells us. We need to see this dialogue, ‘in the Sod lens,’ he insists.. He is drawing on a Hebrew model of Exegesis with the acronym PaRDeS, which postulates four levels of understanding in Hebrew thought. According to Wikipedia , the levels in this 3,000-year-old tradition are: Peshat – the surface, straight, or literal meaning. Remez – ‘hints’ or the deep (allegorical: hidden or symbolic) meaning beyond the literal sense. Derash – from the Hebrew darash: ‘inquire’ (‘seek’)

Editor's Note:   We get asked from time to time about our use of the word 'cult.' I understand people's unease and discomfort but there seems no honest alternative. Here is an article, originally published in 2015, that explains how we arrive at the term. I hope you find it helpful. CULT! It seems such a pejorative word and certainly in ministry it is not intended as a compliment. But is it an insult? Is its use an example of disagreeing while being disagreeable? To listen to many there is no excuse for using it, especially when what people see as sensible alternatives are available such as sect, or the more acceptable “new (or alternative) religious movement.” So is “cult” used out of nothing more than spite? Or is there a legitimate  application in ministry terms? History “ Cult” comes from the Latin, cultus , from colore , to cultivate or to worship. Colore is the same root for the Latin cultura, from which we get culture. One of many ways of

I spend a significant amount of time speaking with Jehovah's Witnesses about the deity of Christ. It's one of their favourite topics, since they have memorised verses which seem to indicate that Jesus was created and somehow “less than” the Father. If you are willing to go down this theological rabbit hole with one of Jehovah's Witnesses, you are a brave soul indeed. Yet, such a discussion needn't scare us. Some Christians say that the only thing we can do is share our personal testimony with Jehovah's Witnesses, as any other discussion is fruitless. Whilst a testimony is powerful and I'd certainly encourage sharing it, the fact remains that at some point the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses need to be addressed biblically. Therefore consider: every Jehovah's Witness has one main argument against Jesus deity. If you address their core misunderstanding, the rest may fall down like a house of cards. Let's explore this together and hopefully, h

If you want to know what this series is about go to my  first post here . The more I look at Brian Simmons the greater my concern. Follow him and down the rabbit hole you go to a world so unfamiliar to the keenest Bible student you simply must take his word for it, and that is troubling. In a  7 minute video  he tells the story of the woman at the well. The familiar story is related, along with some Brian Simmons flourishes, then he says, ‘The Lord, when I was translating John 4, said, ‘Well, she has a name. Would you like to know her name? Her name is Photini.’ There is already a  question mark  over his claim to be a Bible ‘translator,’ his work sounding more like an act of channelling than translating, as he ‘shares the heart of God.’ Having related this revelation from God about the woman’s name, he goes on to relate what happened next to Photini. You might be forgiven for thinking he is continuing to relate what God told him. After all, he begins by saying God told