No Thanksgiving, Christmas, or Easter ! (Help) ?

by hubert 12 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • hubert
    hubert

    Well, the wife and I got the word last night while talking with our J.W. Bible study daughter. She won't be coming over for the annual meal(s) on Thanksgiving, Christmas, Easter, and whatever else she can think of that are holidays. She says it's because of the "origins". (At this time, I had to get my wife down from the ceiling).

    I had to calm my wife down some, but I surprisingly stayed pretty calm, because I knew that that was coming, sooner, if not later. So I said, "That's why you should still come. There's nothing wrong with celebrating Thanksgiving." I told her to show me in the Bible where it says you can't celebrate Thanksgiving. She didn't respond to that, only changed the subject.

    She brought up the subject of why don't other religions use the "real name" of God, Yaweh?

    I said it's not important what He is called, it's more important THAT He is called. She said wouldn't you rather be called by your real name? I said, I've been called lots of names, and answer to most of them, and it doesn't matter to me which name is used. It's not a big deal. (But, the W.T. makes it a big deal, just to get the converts riled up). It's really trivial to me, but they make a big issue of it.

    We talked about shunning, too. I didn't mention this forum, because I don't want her to know I am in it yet. Because if she knows I get info from this, she probably won't listen to anything I say to her regarding my research on the Watchtower. I will eventually, I believe, but ...What's that saying?...... Food at the proper time? .....That's it. (duh).

    She says she doesn't believe any of the shunning stuff. I gave her scenarios to think about, and she just jumped over them and onto other subjects.

    She repeated her stand and said that she just wants to learn to read the Bible. I said, then why not use another Bible other than the NWT? She also mentioned that I never wanted her to read the Bible. I said, "That's not true! Remember when you started to get involved with the j.w.'s, I even bought you a Baptist Bible for you to read? (and I'm not even a Baptist) So, she couldn't deny that. She did say she also has the KJV, and compares scriptures with the NWT.

    So, I said, "Look up some of the Jesus' verses in the new Testament, in the KJV and NWT, and compare them, and see how the W.T. removed "Blessed" and "Grace" from Jesus' verses in the NWT, in order for Him to look like a good "man", and not God.

    we discussed other things, too, and I can say, thanks to what I've been learning from you people here, I was able to keep up with the debate pretty well. I said to her that I don't think she has been researching the W.T., like she said she would and I told her I want to continue sending her info as I see fit in e-mail, for her to research it, and I expect a reply each time. She grudgingly said she would do it. I said I wouldn't overload her with stuff, just sometimes help her to do some research. (Whether or not she will, time will tell). So that about covers our talk. What I need now is to find answers to her question on the use of God's real name, because that is the first thing she throws in our face, and I don't know what really to answer to that. Can anyone help with this? .Any other advice is sincerely welcome, also.

    Thanks, friends..... Hubert

  • Mulan
    Mulan

    Hubert, one thing most JW's do NOT know is that the name of God does not appear in the New Testament (they call it Christian Greek Scriptures). It was added to the NWT.

    Their own "Divine Name Brochure" admits that. I'll bet she is not aware of that.

    It sounds to me like you did a good job with her. Be very, very patient or you will drive her deeper into their fold.

  • hubert
    hubert

    Mulan> "Divine Name Brochure"

    Thanks, Mulan, How can I get a copy of that brochure, or can anyone link it to me? Is it an old item or new?

    I'm pretty sure I discussed how the W.T. put Yaweh in the New Testament a while back, when I had my 2 hour talk with her and her husband, but it didn't seem to affect her much. I didn't have any material to back up my statement, too, I think.

    I'm thinking of looking more at the U.N.issue, and see if that has any effect on them. I know I have to do it gradually. I can't flood them with info. I know it would just scare them away.

    Thanks, Mulan...Hubert

  • kj
    kj

    Another good question to ask- Do the JWs believe that Jehovah has preserved the Bible all these years? If so, then why didn't He make sure that His name remained in the New Testament? Why did the JWs have to insert it back in? The claim to have restored it, when in fact, it was never in the New Testament to begin with. You're doing a good job. Stay calm, and continue to ask questions and make her think. And by the way- welcome to the forum!

    kj

  • Jez
    Jez

    To call God by his first name is disrespectful and is tantamount to putting yourself on the same level as him. Why do students call their teachers only by their last name? Why do we call our bosses Mr or Mrs? Children say, 'Mom or Dad' out of respect for the position that they hold. If my child called me by my given name, I would view it as a sign of disrespect. In any formal situation (many known examples) where there is a power shift, the lower party never calls the party in power by their first name. Why the hell do JW's think that they have the right to call the 'almighty, epitomy of power' God, by his NAME? I now find it very wrong to call him Jehovah, his title should suffice, as it is a sign of respect.

    JW's encourage the use of his name so heavily because it serves as a constant reminder that THEY are JEHOVAH's WITNESSES, the only true organization.

  • bernie45
    bernie45

    Christ told us to pray to our Father in heaven.Not Jehovah.

  • hubert
    hubert

    Jez <> Thanks for the reminder about God's name. That's a good point.

    Bernie 45<> Welcome to the forum.

    Hubert

  • Scully
    Scully

    Hubert

    The Divine Name brochure is featured on the WTS's official website. This is the section that Mulan was referring to, but notice how they quickly jump in and defend the insertion of "Jehovah" into the New Testatment:

    http://www.watchtower.org/library/na/index.htm?article=article_06.htm

    The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever

    God's Name and the "New Testament"

    THE position of God's name is unshakable in the Hebrew Scriptures, the "Old Testament." Although the Jews eventually stopped pronouncing it, their religious beliefs prevented them from removing the name when they made copies of older manuscripts of the Bible. Hence, the Hebrew Scriptures contain God's name more often than any other name.

    With the Christian Greek Scriptures, the "New Testament," the situation is different. Manuscripts of the book of Revelation (the last book of the Bible) have God's name in its abbreviated form, "Jah," (in the word "Hallelujah"). But apart from that, no ancient Greek manuscript that we possess today of the books from Matthew to Revelation contains God's name in full. Does that mean that the name should not be there? That would be surprising in view of the fact that Jesus' followers recognized the importance of God's name, and Jesus taught us to pray for God's name to be sanctified. So what happened?

    To understand this, remember that the manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures that we possess today are not the originals. The actual books written by Matthew, Luke and the other Bible writers were well used and quickly wore out. Hence, copies were made, and when those wore out, further copies were made of those copies. This is what we would expect, since the copies were usually made to be used, not preserved.

    There are thousands of copies of the Christian Greek Scriptures in existence today, but most of them were made during or after the fourth century of our Common Era. This suggests a possibility: Did something happen to the text of the Christian Greek Scriptures before the fourth century that resulted in the omission of God's name? The facts prove that something did.

    The Name Was There

    We can be sure that the apostle Matthew included God's name in his Gospel. Why? Because he wrote it originally in Hebrew. In the fourth century, Jerome, who translated the Latin Vulgate, reported: "Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language . . . Who translated it after that in Greek is not sufficiently ascertained. Moreover, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea."

    Since Matthew wrote in Hebrew, it is inconceivable that he did not use God's name, especially when quoting from parts of the "Old Testament" that contained the name. However, other writers of the second part of the Bible wrote for a worldwide audience in the international language of that time, Greek. Hence, they did not quote from the original Hebrew writings but from the Septuagint Greek version. And even Matthew's Gospel was eventually translated into Greek. Would God's name have appeared in these Greek writings?

    Well, some very old fragments of the Septuagint Version that actually existed in Jesus' day have survived down to our day, and it is noteworthy that the personal name of God appeared in them. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Volume 2, page 512) says: "Recent textual discoveries cast doubt on the idea that the compilers of the LXX [Septuagint] translated the tetragrammaton YHWH by kyrios. The oldest LXX MSS (fragments) now available to us have the tetragrammaton written in Heb[rew] characters in the G[ree]k text. This custom was retained by later Jewish translators of the O[ld] T[estament] in the first centuries A.D. " Therefore, whether Jesus and his disciples read the Scriptures in Hebrew or Greek, they would come across the divine name.

    Thus, Professor George Howard, of the University of Georgia, U.S.A., made this comment: "When the Septuagint which the New Testament church used and quoted contained the Hebrew form of the divine name, the New Testament writers no doubt included the Tetragrammaton in their quotations." (Biblical Archaeology Review, March 1978, page 14) What authority would they have had to do otherwise?

    God's name remained in Greek translations of the "Old Testament" for a while longer. In the first half of the second century C.E., the Jewish proselyte Aquila made a new translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, and in this he represented God's name by the Tetragrammaton in ancient Hebrew characters. In the third century, Origen wrote: "And in the most accurate manuscripts THE NAME occurs in Hebrew characters, yet not in today's Hebrew [characters], but in the most ancient ones."

    Even in the fourth century, Jerome writes in his prologue to the books of Samuel and Kings: "And we find the name of God, the Tetragrammaton [

    The Removal of the Name

    By this time, however, the apostasy foretold by Jesus had taken shape, and the name, although appearing in manuscripts, was used less and less. (Matthew 13:24-30; Acts 20:29, 30) Eventually, many readers did not even recognize what it was and Jerome reports that in his time "certain ignorant ones, because of the similarity of the characters, when they would find [the Tetragrammaton] in Greek books, were accustomed to read

    In later copies of the Septuagint, God's name was removed and words like "God" (The·os') and "Lord" (Ky'ri·os) were substituted. We know that this happened because we have early fragments of the Septuagint where God's name was included and later copies of those same parts of the Septuagint where God's name has been removed.

    The same thing occurred in the "New Testament," or Christian Greek Scriptures. Professor George Howard goes on to say: "When the Hebrew form for the divine name was eliminated in favor of Greek substitutes in the Septuagint, it was eliminated also from the New Testament quotations of the Septuagint. . . . Before long the divine name was lost to the Gentile church except insofar as it was reflected in the contracted surrogates or remembered by scholars."

    Hence, while Jews refused to pronounce God's name, the apostate Christian church managed to remove it completely from Greek language manuscripts of both parts of the Bible, as well as from other language versions.

    See: "The LORD"?Equivalent of "Jehovah"?

    The Need for the Name

    Eventually, as we saw earlier, the name was restored to many translations of the Hebrew Scriptures. But what about the Greek Scriptures? Well, Bible translators and students came to realize that without God's name, some parts of the Christian Greek Scriptures are very difficult to understand properly. Restoring the name is a big help in increasing the clarity and comprehensibility of this portion of the inspired Bible.

    For example, consider the words of Paul to the Romans, as they appear in the Authorized Version: "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Romans 10:13) Whose name do we have to call on to be saved? Since Jesus is often spoken of as "Lord," and one scripture even says: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved," should we conclude that Paul was here speaking about Jesus??Acts 16:31, Authorized Version.

    No, we should not. A marginal reference to Romans 10:13 in the Authorized Version points us to Joel 2:32 in the Hebrew Scriptures. If you check that reference, you will find that Paul was actually quoting the words of Joel in his letter to the Romans; and what Joel said in the original Hebrew was: "Everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will get away safe." (New World Translation) Yes, Paul meant here that we should call on the name of Jehovah. Hence, while we have to believe in Jesus, our salvation is closely linked with a proper appreciation of God's name.

    This example demonstrates how the removal of the name of God from the Greek Scriptures contributed to confusing Jesus and Jehovah in the minds of many. Undoubtedly, it contributed greatly to the development of the doctrine of the Trinity!

    Should the Name Be Restored?

    Would a translator have any right to restore the name, in view of the fact that existing manuscripts do not have it? Yes, he would have that right. Most Greek lexicons recognize that often the word "Lord" in the Bible refers to Jehovah. For example, in its section under the Greek word Ky'ri·os ("Lord"), Robinson's A Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament (printed in 1859) says that it means "God as the Supreme Lord and sovereign of the universe, usually in Sept[uagint] for Heb[rew] Jehovah." Hence, in places where the Christian Greek Scripture writers quote the earlier Hebrew Scriptures, the translator has the right to render the word Ky'ri·os as "Jehovah" wherever the divine name appeared in the Hebrew original.

    Many translators have done this. Starting at least from the 14th century, numerous Hebrew translations were made of the Christian Greek Scriptures. What did the translators do when they came to quotations from the "Old Testament" where God's name appeared? Often, they felt forced to restore God's name to the text. Many translations of parts or all of the Christian Greek Scriptures into Hebrew contain God's name.

    Translations into modern languages, particularly those used by missionaries, have followed this example. Thus many African, Asian, American and Pacific-island language versions of the Greek Scriptures use the name Jehovah liberally, so that readers can clearly see the difference between the true God and the false ones. The name has appeared, too, in versions in European languages.

    One translation that boldly restores God's name with good authority is the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures. This version, currently available in 11 modern languages, including English, has restored God's name every time that a portion of the Hebrew Scriptures containing it is quoted in the Greek Scriptures. Altogether, the name appears with a sound basis 237 times in that translation of the Greek Scriptures.

    Opposition to the Name

    In spite of the efforts of many translators to restore God's name in the Bible, there has always been religious pressure to eliminate it. The Jews, while leaving it in their Bibles, refused to pronounce it. Apostate Christians of the second and third centuries removed it when they made copies of Greek Bible manuscripts and left it out when they made translations of the Bible. Translators in modern times have removed it, even when they based their translations on the original Hebrew, where it appears almost 7,000 times. (It appears 6,973 times in the Hebrew text of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, 1984 edition.)

    How does Jehovah view those who remove his name from the Bible? If you were an author, how would you feel about someone who went to great lengths to remove your name from the book you authored? Translators who object to the name, doing so on account of problems of pronunciation or because of Jewish tradition, might be compared to those who Jesus said "strain out the gnat but gulp down the camel!" (Matthew 23:24) They stumble over these smaller problems but end up creating a major problem?by removing the name of the greatest personage in the universe from the book that he inspired.

    The psalmist wrote: "How long, O God, will the adversary keep reproaching? Will the enemy keep treating your name with disrespect forever?"?Psalm 74:10.

  • Scully
    Scully

    Hubert:

    Regarding holidays, ask your daughter to read Romans 14:5-12 and ask her what she thinks of it.

    5 One [man] judges one day as above another; another [man] judges one day as all others; let each [man] be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day observes it to Jehovah. Also, he who eats, eats to Jehovah, for he gives thanks to God; and he who does not eat does not eat to Jehovah, and yet gives thanks to God. 7 None of us, in fact, lives with regard to himself only; 8 for both if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. Therefore both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah. 9 For this end Christ died and came to life again, that he might be Lord over both the dead and the living.

    10 But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you also look down on your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgement seat of God; 11 for it is written: "'As I live,' says Jehovah, 'to me every tongue will make open acknowledgement to God.'" 12 So, then, each of us will render an account for himself to God.

    Even the Watchtower, in the December 15, 2001 issue (Questions from Readers), appears to have softened the position on holidays. It said that it was a matter of conscience for a JW wife to spend holiday time with her unbelieving husband and unbelieving relatives. The only thing they could not do was participate in false worship involved in the holiday observances. It even went so far as to say that it would not be wrong for a JW wife to purchase gifts, wrapping paper, greeting cards, etc on his behalf, or cooking a meal that her husband wanted to have on those occasions.

    I'll see if I can find that post and put a link to it for you. Or maybe someone has the 2003 WT CD-ROM and will be able to post the article again.

    Love, Scully

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    Your daughter has already been coached to expect the freak-out, and to consider that proof that you are being guided by Satan. Come up with a strategy with your wife to negotiate around the holidays. Whatever you do, keep those connections open. If I were the parent, I would barrage her with mild questions, like, "How about if we simply have a nice dinner, no exchange of gifts, on December 23rd? Boxing day? What about a nice card? Is a card OK? Which symbols are OK? If the card has a pleasant winter scene with no pagan references, is it OK?"

    Keep up on that Thanksgiving thing. They have no reasonable defence.

    Ask her about pagan origins of other things. Do pagan origins=pagan? Ask her how many beheading ceremonies she witnessed at past birthdays. Who first wore a tie? Was it Jesus or a corrupt french king? Are the Witnesses imitating a corrupt french king? Ask her to check with her study leader if it is OK to wear a wedding ring. Wedding rings have a definite pagan origin. Get her to ask her study leader why they are inconsistent on these things. If she tries to dismiss your arguments as silly, agree with her. It is silly to abstain from everything with a pagan origin.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit