I will never forget Dr. Mantey's letter as it was the first piece of evidence that made me realize WT dishonesty. It was shown to me in early 1976 by a young San Diego State University student named David Tidd. David was a young Christian man who had started "studying" with one of our elders. This elder couldn't cope with David's questions so he turned the "study" over to me (the young pioneer). I didn't study with David, he studyed with me. I didn't convert him to the WT, but he started the process that eventually led me to Christianity. God bless you David, twenty-five years later!
Jehovah, and Watchtower Dishonesty
by Maximus 21 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
ozziepost
I can recall the day when Mrs Ozzie was reading a book that detailed some of the many mis-quotes in the publications.
Her reaction? "Liars, liars, liars. They've been lying to me all these years!"
Yep, just as with Had Enough, Mrs Ozzie had been raised a Witness and took on trust what the organisation had told her. After all, they wouldn't (couldn't) lie, could they? But when she saw it in black and white, she was shocked in the extreme. Never again would she, or has she, had any regard for the publications. The magazines which she used to devour (especially Awake!) were left unread, or if they were read it was with a degree of scepticism.
Looking back, however, we can be grateful. That may seem strange but at least now we know the truth, and we know it ain't 'the troof'!
Cheers,
Ozzie"Truth persuades by teaching, but does not teach by persuading."
TERTULLIAN, Adversus Valentinianos -
Big Tex
"(1) THE WORD 'JEHOVAH' DOES NOT ACCURATELY REPRESENT ANY FORM OF THE NAME EVER USED IN HEBREW." [emphasis mine]
I did not know this. I always thought Jehovah was an English derivative of Yahweh. Well it just figures they would warp this too.
How do you feel about such misleaing quotations?
Sad. I remember all the times in school witnessing to the other kids and oh-so-smugly feeling like I knew something they didn't. I remember once getting into an argument with a preacher's kid about the name. He said his father told him Jehovah was meaningless. I deftly used my Watchtower trained skills and "showed" him the truth. I won the argument, but I was wrong.
-
blondie
A little off topic, Big Tex, I always wondered if God had the power to preserve the Bible down to now, why couldn't he preserve the pronounciation of his name?
Blondie
-
Big Tex
Good question. Because some copyist in the 14th century didn't know how to spell?
Don't worry about that Blondie, just keep your head down and make your two comments at the next meeting.
-
blondie
BigTex, no can do; I no longer attend. But I do post "comments you won't hear at the WT study."
Blondie
-
Big Tex
I know, I was just joshing. My humour button doesn't work so well early on a Sunday morning.
-
Earnest
This subject was also discussed at http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/34547/460032/post.ashx#460032.
"(1) THE WORD 'JEHOVAH' DOES NOT ACCURATELY REPRESENT ANY FORM OF THE NAME EVER USED IN HEBREW." [emphasis mine]
Hmmm. It is probably true that 'Jehovah' is not a transliteration of the Hebrew. There is good reason to believe the first vowel was an 'a' but it is possible the name was pronounced as three syllables rather than the two in 'Yahweh'. Of course, it is even more certain that THE WORD 'LORD' DOES NOT REPRESENT ANY FORM OF THE NAME, ACCURATE OR NOT. Every translator of the Hebrew bible knows that "lord" is not a translation of God's name in any sense, it is a substitution. That is what Jews do when they read God's name in the Bible...they substitute, and they know they are doing it. At least, in the Hebrew bible the name is still printed. If one believes that they are translating the word of God it really is quite blasphemous to remove his name in thousands of places. If the Committee believes that "the word 'Jehovah' does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew" and that it is "almost if not quite certain that the Name was originally pronounced 'Yahweh' ", then they should use 'Yahweh', as the Jerusalem Bible does.
I did not know this. I always thought Jehovah was an English derivative of Yahweh.
As we don't know how the Jews pronounced it, it seems quite dogmatic for the NRSV Committee to say that 'Jehovah' doesn't represent ANY form of the name EVER used in Hebrew. But the reason that God's name is translated as 'Jehovah' is that is the name the first English translators (e.g. Tyndale) used. If they had used 'Yahweh' or 'Henry' then it is unlikely 'Jehovah' would ever have been used. But that is how they translated his name and, as a result, that is his name in English.
Earnest
-
DanTheMan
Earnest,
I think the point of this very old post by a very missed poster was that the WT used selective quoting unfairly to villify their hated enemy Christendom and to put it into the reader's mind to "trust US, not THEM, because THEY'RE BAD!"
Typical WT propaganda.
-
unclebruce
BTTT