Wikipedia / New World Translation

by jstalin 10 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  jstalin

  Howdy all - I'd like to enlist the help of some of the bible experts on this forum. The main Jehovah's Witnesses article on wikipedia has been pretty thoroughly filled with correct and embarassing WTS doctrine. We've been able to get the disfellowshipping and shunning section to stick, as well as mention of the "examination period" of 1914-1919, and general slaughter at Armageddon. Now, we need to move on to the New World Translation page:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Translation_of_the_Holy_Scriptures

  Currently the NWT page is very much pro-WTS. We need to mix it up a bit, like the Faithful and Distcreet Slave section. A "criticism" section needs to be added, and the stauros section should be expanded with counter-arguments. I'm not much of a bible scholar, so I'm wondering if y'all out there could take a look at the NWT page and get the changes moving.

  I'm hoping that maybe Auldsoul, leolaia, and jgnat, who i've noticed have a tremendous grasp on biblical translation/mistranslation, could help out.
• 

  Narkissos

  I just introduced a few modifications down to the NT section (included). I think Leolaia would do a better job on the stauros issue... It feels like writing on the sand, but maybe it'll help.
• 

  AuldSoul

  jstalin,

  As you may or may not know, I am Evident on Wikipedia. Just wanted to make sure I mentioned that first.

  I recommend adding a section under NWT called "suspect verses" where examples of improper verse translation can be discussed. This can be anything from stretching the Greek as far as possible into English in favor of preexisting dogma to the examples of outright adding or removing of words. It should demonstrate examples of manipulation in basic word meaning.

  I will try to work up some later today.

  AuldSoul
• 

  jgnat

  I am flattered that I was included in this illustrious group, but I am no bible scholar. Just articulate.
• 

  undercover

  I can't even get Wikipedia to come up...

  Is it down today?
• 

  Nate Merit

  Hi jdstalin
  
  I had no idea that Wikipedia is written by just anyone on the net who wishes to register and post. What a travesty. An encyclopedia should be written by various experts in the subject matter covered. Thanks for an eye-opening post.
  
  Nate
• 

  IronGland

  Nate, anything biased or inaccurate is quickly corrected. Many of the entrees are written by experts in their field. When you're a member and make changes, if it's inaccurate, it will be deleted unless you can provide some verification for that. As a member you can easily view which entrees have had changes made to them recently.
  
  I was skeptical of an open source encyclopedia as well, but the way it's set up seems to work.
• 

  Nate Merit

  Hi IronGland
  
  Thanks for clarifying the matter. I have some confidence in Wikipedia again. With those checks and balances in place, it sounds sound.
  
  Yours in alliterative redundancy,
  Nate
• 

  DannyHaszard

  
  Fear. You can just feel it in the air, can't you? There is fear everywhere that Google has become too powerful. As John Battelle notes, the tide of public opinion is starting to turn from loving Google to fearing them.
  

  ---

  Editor's Note: How big will Wikipedia become? Will it grow to the size of a Google-like company? If so, will the user-friendly online encyclopedia feel some of the same backlash? Discuss at WebProWorld.
  

  ---

  Perhaps. But I have news for you. Google's not the only monarch to watch - or fear - anymore. Despite the media's fascination with all things search, Wikipedia is waiting in the wings as the next Google. They (or maybe that's "we") are the emerging king disruptor; the one entity that we will soon fear most, if not already.
• 

  DannyHaszard

  
  Fear. You can just feel it in the air, can't you? There is fear everywhere that Google has become too powerful. As John Battelle notes, the tide of public opinion is starting to turn from loving Google to fearing them.
  

  ---

  Editor's Note: How big will Wikipedia become? Will it grow to the size of a Google-like company? If so, will the user-friendly online encyclopedia feel some of the same backlash? Discuss at WebProWorld.
  

  ---

  Perhaps. But I have news for you. Google's not the only monarch to watch - or fear - anymore. Despite the media's fascination with all things search, Wikipedia is waiting in the wings as the next Google. They (or maybe that's "we") are the emerging king disruptor; the one entity that we will soon fear most, if not already.