Posts by menrov

53

Awake! to be part of Watchtower Public Edition!

by Atlantis in

this was posted on a jw site and it would be nice if we could verify.. .. .. as of february 2015, the awake!

will come as a part of the watchtower public edition instead of as a separate magazine.

this is a huge change... with serious cost savings.

menrov

http://hildeydesa.blogspot.com/2014/10/carta-30914-se-recibira-la-revista.html

Strange, the letter is dated 30 Setember 2014 but in the letter is says "starting with edition February 2014 (in Spanish: a partir de los numeros de febrero 2014).

36

I'm tired of the org misquoting scholars to support there heretical NWT

by yogosans14 in

day after day jws are constantly fighting with me over the internet that the nwt is the most accurate translation and then they prove it by quoting scholars from the watchtower magazines.

they tell me i'm biased and there rendering of john 1:1 as "a god" is approved by scholars but i have researched there so called "supporters" and i have found they have tooken what they said out of context to twist the scriptures to there liking.. .

dr. julius r. mantey (who is even recognized by the watchtower as a greek scholar since they quote his book on page 1158 of their kingdom interlinear translation): calls the watchtower translation of john 1:1 "a grossly misleading translation.

menrov

If someone wants to prove a point or doctrine, that someone will search for support and will select statements that support his point or doctrine as much as possible. All translations of the bible were done with an "agenda". The NWT or rNWT is not different. What is different, is the explanations provided by the translator regarding his choice of translations. The NWT is very selective in providing a reason why a certain verse is translated as it is. The NET translation has an explanation for about every verse, so reader at least knows why the words are translated as they are.

Did the trinity brochure contain misquotes? I guess that not all quotes were accurate, but likely just within the limits of the law.

Regarding John 1:1, if it is "a god" does this mean a god like Satan is a god or like Wealth/Money which is represented as a god? And if godly, why treat Jesus as he is a mere angel (Michael)? If one is a god, that one is more than an angel.

Further, if it is translated as "a god" then why not consistently done throughout the bible. The word Theos, presumably used here, is used over 300 times (according to biblehub / Strong). Greek also does not use comma's or punctuations, which means it is up to the translator to add them, which can be at times very arbitrary. Look for example at Romans 9:5, which also contains the word THEOS:

NWT:

To them the forefathers belong, and from them the Christ descended according to the flesh. God, who is over all, be praised forever. Amen.
The verse is by use of a period split into 2 sentences.

Check here http://biblehub.com/multi/romans/9-5.htm to see how other bibles translate this. About all of them translate it as one sentence.

48

New songs coming

by kneehighmiah in

jw
friends

heard from an inside source that there are 3 new songs coming to the songbook.

.

menrov

Londo111, what do you mean with this "

Maybe they want everyone to tradein their songbooks...because of the graphic artwork on the backcover...

This might be a good excuse without bringing attention to it.

What is peculiar abou the graphic on the backcover?

10

Has anybody ever co-related what Jewish scholars beleive about the Hebrew scriptures and what jehovahs Witnesses beleive ?

by smiddy in

i`m just curious as to how different they may be.. smiddy.

.

menrov

kaik, any written support on these points?

42

My Elderette returns for a final Bible Study session, after I avoided her for 2 months (very long post)

by Faithful Witness in

some of this will be repeat, since it's been a little while since i posted about my "bible study" sessions with miss k, my elderette.

we are talking about the name of jehovah.

thanks for talking with us today.

menrov

FW, the only reason why I feel "sad" the study is over is because I know have to miss your excellent wrting skills. I really enjoyed the way you presented your experience, your choice of words, never too offensive, always respectful but still to the point, with a flavour of humour.

Thanks

100

Can anyone disprove 607 BCE date using only the NWT and WT literature?

by Bart Belteshassur in

i haven't come across any arguement that does not involve secular history and external references.

in fact the wt can not get to 607 bce without using external sources as in knowing that they need to get back from 1914 ce to 607 bce, and botching an argument using an external date as reference to create their start point at 537 bce.. i realize that to get the final date we must provide a fixed figure from somewhere which can only be a historical source, but the objective would be to disprove the wt flim flam.

once that is achieve we can use which ever fixed historical point they wish to chose.

menrov

Island Man, I guess you are correct. Regardless the official doctrine one is challenging with scriptural proof, most JW's will disregard. They will say: you are wrong, you have to wait for insight, pray for more knowledge, in due course you will see etc.

Well, so be it.

59

STARTING OVER with my Elderette - What Does the Bible REALLY Teach?

by Faithful Witness in

she said, "so, what made you decide to study this book?

at this point, she opened with a prayer.

"...and some decide that such questions are best left to religious leaders and teachers.

menrov

NeverKnew, sorry but I disagree. As I read the 2 paragraphs, they do not contradict. In both it explains bad things do not come from God, it is not God's will.

42

Are all JWs united in their beliefs?

by enigma1863 in

so i used to think that all witnesses believed the same exact thing but i have heard some claims that they believe things i'm not familiar with.

do you know if it's true?

menrov

I think there is a difference in actually believing or accepting. What I notice is that most JW's have similar knowledge about doctrines and repeat that. In that sense, they are United. But do they actually believe them? I guess that the majority is not even aware if they believe it or not, it is knowledge. So, my view is that they are united in knowledge but not necessarily in belief.

Having said that, I did not say that the knowledge they share is correct of course. It is the knowledge provided by the organisation, not from personal assessment of the scriptures.

41

I survived a 3-hour manipulation session with 2 elderettes!

by Faithful Witness in

i'm not sure how else to describe this meeting at my kitchen table.

my elderette ("miss k") arrived with her friend in tow.

i vaguely remember the 2nd lady ("miss w") from the times we went to the kh, but like miss k, we never really talked in depth.

menrov

Hi Faithfu Witness...congratulations with your writing skills and also very much appreciate your choice of words. Polite and attractive. Looking forward to therest of the visits.

42

Are all JWs united in their beliefs?

by enigma1863 in

so i used to think that all witnesses believed the same exact thing but i have heard some claims that they believe things i'm not familiar with.

do you know if it's true?

menrov

Hi. I am new to this forum. I also joined another forum where mostly current JW 's like me openly discuss GB / WT doctrines. Why there?? Well as most of them do not believe all the doctrines published but as this doubt is not 'allowed ' they / we discuss the scripture in the forum. I guess like here. So to answer the question :obviously not. Many left because they had different views, others remain for various reasons. What I do believe is that most JWs are sincere in their love for their creator.