Most JWs Lack Bible Knowledge - How Can They Teach What they know not

by Band on the Run 19 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Band on the Run

  I was born-in. Being a JW exposed me to many Bible stories. When I am with any group of people today, except seminary students, I know far more stories and obscure ones, too. After I left, I went on a tour of the cathedral in NY. An artsy volunteer was leading it so we were looking at these beautiful stained glass windows. He explained what was in the panels. He pointed out Nimrod's panel. I was shocked. In fact, I challenged him as to why Nimrod would be exalted with a stained glass window. The Bible states clearly how bad Nimrod was. He politely said Nimrod was a great hunter. I tore into a Bible when I arrived home. Nimrod is not depicted as evil personified. In college, I had to read the Bible in consecutive verses. To my astonishment, I kept calling home surprised that the Witnesses distorted another passage. Paul never said that, he said......I had the text to back me up.

  I am certain there are some Witnesses who truly know the Bible. In my experience, most Witnesses know the stories as though they heard them from oral tradition. Yet these people want me to study with them. It is preposterous. Today when I have a question, I don't go running to clergy or ask other church goers. It is so easy to find a Bible and read the express words. I find the Bible so rich. Much literature can only be read by someone who knows the Bible on more than a rudimentary basis. Our culture is p ermeated by the Bible. I've had friends from other cultures. All I can say is that I live in my culture and want to know my tradition. My mom used to tell me to never toot my own horn.

  I'm aware that someone might have great Christian values in their life and not even know what is in the Bible. Sometimes I know I focus on the Bible way too much.
• 

  wha happened?

  oh gosh this is a constant theme when I speak with my wife, a born in. I'm constantly having to show here scriptures because she doesn't know them
• 

  OUTLAW

  JW`s lack Bible knowledge because they don`t study the Bible..

  JW`s Study WBT$ literature..That tells them what the WBT$ says,the Bible says..

  If the WBT$ says,the Bible says:"Mountains used to be made of Ice-Cream"..

  Then JW`s will teach the Bible says:

  "Mountains used to be made of Ice-Cream"..

  No need to research it..The WBT$ said so..Thats enough for any JW ..

  .................... ...OUTLAW
• 

  Ding

  The WT has its small set of proof texts.

  It also uses repetition to such an extent that often a JW will think the Bible says something when in fact it's only WT spin.

  The WTS isn't the only group that does this, of course, but they are masters at it.
• 

  botchtowersociety

  To my astonishment, I kept calling home surprised that the Witnesses distorted another passage.

  Nimrod is generally depicted in a negative way in all 3 Abrahamic religions. The JWs, in doing so, are not outside tradition.
• 

  freetosee

  Sadly their limited bible knowledge and wt training is enough to convert people.
  They don't teach the bible. They teach wt propaganda while using a set of key scriptures.

  fts
• 

  wha happened?

  didn't the WT originally call Nimrod a warrior FOR Jehovah?
• 

  shepherd

  "Mountains used to be made of Ice-Cream"

  Yeah, and maybe the scripture actually said "1. Mountains used to be made of Ice-Cream 2. colored rocks and dark brown colored rocks." But they will only read verse 1...:)
• 

  shepherd

  Wikipedia says: Since Classical times, Nimrod has traditionally been considered the leader of those who built the Tower of Babel in the land of Shinar, though the Bible never actually states this.
  
  Judaic interpreters as early as Philo and Yochanan ben Zakai (1st century AD) interpreted "a mighty hunter before the Lord" (lit. "in the face of the Lord") as signifying "in opposition to the Lord"; a similar interpretation is found in Pseudo-Philo, as well as later in Symmachus.
  
  This is how the JW's translate that scripture too, but, BOTR you are right, the Bible itself does not actually say it, it is derived from extra-biblical tradition, and "in opposition to the Lord" is not a literal translation of the text at all. It is interesting how they accept certain non-biblical traditions at the same time as rejecting anything that does not agree with their narrow point of view.

  I remember that they also changed the translation to show that Noah preached about the end but the people 'took no note' when in fact the original manuscripts say no such thing.

  Matthew 24:38 For as they were in those days before the flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark; 39 and they took no note until the flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be. - NWT

  ----All other Bibles say, in one way or another say:

  Matt 24:38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away.

  For more proof the NWT changed the scripture to suggest there was a modern parallel with their own preaching activity:

  24:39 κα? "and" ο?κ "not" ?γνωσαν "they-had-acquainted" ?ως "unto-if-which" ?λθεν "it-had-came," ? "the-one" κατακλυσμ?ς "a-dashing-down-of," κα? "and" ?ρεν "it-lifted" ?παντας, "to-along-all," ο?τως "unto-the-one-this" ?σται "it-shall-be" ? "the-one" παρουσ?α "a-being-beside-unto" το? "of-the-one" υ?ο? "of-a-Son" το? "of-the-one" ?νθρ?που. "of-a-mankind." - Westcott & Hort GNT - Literal Translation

  So I agree, BOTR, not only do JW's often not have a clue what the Bible actually says but what they think they know is often based on corrupt mistranslation.
• 

  Band on the Run

  The Bible does not expressly condemn Nimrod. Also, the story is very short. After law school, it is patently clear that they spin. They are very careful with their language. Often what the article says is different from the impression the article leaves. The problem is most people do not want a law school education. As I mentioned, I was shocked that many Bible references were misleading. 1975 is similar. I was present at the convention. Printed copies of Franz' speech were not available. Almost everyone heard 1975 definitely! Maybe Franz used some weasal words. Bethel certainly had to know the way members were spinning it. Bethel had an affirmative duty to correct the misimpression.

  Too many people left for a casual misunderstanding. Perhaps Witnesses need to bring their individual lawyers to KH to catch all the qualifications. Now I definitely have a hostile relationship with Bethel. Most people assume their religion is truthful.