Is the Watchtower behind this "unbiased" website?

by SeymourButts 16 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  SeymourButts

  I just happened to stumble across this website while doing some research. Although it claims to not be biased toward any religous denomination, it has a decidedly Watchtower slant to all of its Bible translations and subject commentaries. It completely supports 607bc and even claims that only 144,000 will be going to heaven. Although I have not had time to referance any of it yet, it appears that much is virtually straight from the pages of the Watchtower and its publications. The arguments are identical.

  Also, make sure you look at their translation of John 1:1

  http://www.2001translation.com/index.html

  This one is their refutation of 587/6 and support for 607
  http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm

  They in virtually every way show support for Watchtower doctrine....only leaving the Watchtower name out. Even their discussion of the "faithful slave" demonstrates it to be a "class" of annointed not not applicable to all.

  The more I read the more apparant it becomes that the Watchtower has their hand in this. It looks like an attempt to show that an "un-biased" party agrees with their doctrine.

  What do you all think? Have any of you seen this before?
• 

  peacefulpete

  looks to me like one of the many sites run by individual JWs who hate going door to door.
• 

  cabasilas

  I once wrote the webmaster of the http://www.geocities.com/onlinebibletranslations/ who used to carry the 2001 Translation. I asked him about both the 2001 Translation and the New Simplified Bible and got this reply:

  --------------------

  I appreciate your kind email. The New Simplified Bible is the work of James Madsen, who is one of Jehovah's Witnesses. It has, however, no ties with the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, rather it is a completely independent and private project.
  
  The 2001 Translation may or may not have had some Jehovah's Witnesses work on it. Some of the views it expresses in its footnotes are not in harmony with the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses.

  --------------------

  Perhaps others have more info.
• 

  zugzwang

  The footnote at the bottom of the page of the second link you listed makes it clear that this is not a website set up directly by the WTS.

  One of our advisers sent this note: ‘I would remove the argument about the timing of Daniel's exile, 3 years of training and then interpreting a dream in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar. Those who make this argument are not taking into consideration the calculation of regnal years/ascension years for Babylonian kings. By the facts, this is entirely possible, hence it is not an argument against secular history's timeline.’

  The WTS would never admit to having "advisers." This is likely a site set up by an individual JW who is using the evil internet in a non GB approved manner.
• 

  AuldSoul

  Hah! Whoever posted that site is probably using the site statistics and logs as his or her Field Service Report at the end of the month. That is hilarious!

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Clothman

  Assuming it is an 'independent site', there appears to be a definite Watchtower influence. I spent a little time navigating and it appears to be a basic lesson in Watchtower dogma dressed up to look like they put some thought into the matter. My speculation, of course..., but I suppose it was probably a lot of work rephrasing Watchtower articles so they look like original works.

  A couple of ponderings...

  I wonder how (or if) the owners and 'translators' at this site would respond to criticism.

  As for a request for having their credentials released for examination, they make it plain that they have none. They are just using a couple of lexicons and dictionaries. However, I looked up several of the passages and they couldn't be translated that way they even if you were only looking at a lexicon. There is undoubtedly an outside force influencing the 'translation'. This is a very misleading (and in my opinion very dangerous) website.

  (Facetiously) I wonder if the Watchtower will eventually sue this site and close them down claiming 'theft of ideas and intellectual property' ;)
• 

  searcher

  * but I suppose it was probably a lot of work rephrasing Watchtower articles so they look like original works.*
  
  
  
  
• 

  Forscher

  A quick look at some of the renderings in his version was interesting. In John 1:1 he translates the last phrase as "and the word was powerful". Rev. 3: calls Jesus the "earliest of God's creations". I didn't check him out on how he handles "Stauros". It should be fun to look at some other things in his translation.
  Forscher
• 

  IP_SEC

  Re: Is the Watchtower behind this "unbiased" website?

  Call em up and see what they say.

  Registrant Contact:
  Private Registration
  Jim Wheeler ()
  +1.8664340212
  Fax: +1.8664340211
  2316 Delaware Ave Suite #266
  Buffalo, NY 14216-2687
  US
  
  Administrative Contact:
  Private Registration
  Jim Wheeler ()
  +1.8664340212
  Fax: +1.8664340211
  2316 Delaware Ave Suite #266
  Buffalo, NY 14216-2687
  US
• 

  sir82

  Probably a frutrated "young anointed" who has no other way to propound his own particular slant on the Bible.

  I would imagine he has written dozens or hundreds of letters to the Society, each of which was likely ignored, and he can't figure out why, since, beein anointed, he is one of the "Faithful and Discreet Slave", and aren't his ideas as good as anyone else's of that august body?

  The website, I'm guessing was his Plan B.