in the may 1922 edition of the wt, page 133, rutherford is writing defending the work of russell and the 1914 doctrine, he quotes what some have said to prove russell was wrong :.
" "zedekiah was taken captive and jerusalem fell in the year 587 b. c.; thus showing that the full end of the gentile times and the fall of gentile governments is indicated to take place in 1934".. he goes on, in his own inimitable style, to disprove the above, but note, he is aware of the 587bce date for jerusalem's destruction.. if you are interested, you can read the whole mag here*, just click on pdf to read.. * https://ia700401.us.archive.org/19/items/1922watchtowerarticlesonchronology/1922_watchtower_articles_on_chronology.pdf.
.
From the WT mentioned in the OP:
There can be no more question about 1925 than. there was about 1914 Page 150. In other words, as convinced he was about the "proof" for 1914, it is similar to 1925 proof. Therefore, if 1925 (millions alive now will never die) was wrong despite the so-called proof, what about 1914???
Nog zo 'n rare dutchman hier
pdf.
the date of the letter is october but it was just released today, 2015-12-22..
First the letter says: Therefore, if the bodies of elders using a Kingdom Hall determine that the congregations can afford video equipment,
and if the cong cannot afford, it says:
If your congregation is not in a position to acquire the necessary equipment, be assured that the spiritual needs of the congregation will still be satisfied without such equipment, as has been the case until now.—w14 8/15 pp. 3-5.
Or in other words, do not count on the org to provide you one. OK, we own your hall, we own your faith, we own your eternal life but hey, we cannot also give you money to acquire the equipment.....
this book states in verse 8 chapter 1 that the father calls jesus god.
the nwt is very different.
i wonder which one is the most accurate?.
TTWSYF, not sure what you mean. It seems a rather acceptable translation. After all, all translations are somewhat biased.
I have not read anything negative about this person or his translation so far.
this book states in verse 8 chapter 1 that the father calls jesus god.
the nwt is very different.
i wonder which one is the most accurate?.
Interesting topic. See also here for feedback on G3588: http://studybible.info/strongs/G3588
Other translations:
hi, for over a year, i stopped attending meeting and field service.
actually, passively disassociated from the congregation.
but i did not stop reading and doing my own research.
HI, for over a year, I stopped attending meeting and field service. Actually, passively disassociated from the congregation. But I did not stop reading and doing my own research. In fact, I have read and investigated a lot more than when I was an active JW.
However, this is what I wanted to share. Since I have stopped being a(n active) JW I have had 3 different people that spontaneously said to me that I 1) seems much sweeter, softer 2) very open to approach, comfortable to speak to and 3) my eyes are friendly, 'naughty' but in a positive way. And they were not aware of my change in life.
It got me thinking. I have been an active JW for about 17 years, and add some 5 years of study, in total 22 years connected to the organization, to the education etc. Not once in that whole period has anyone (both outside and inside the org) said something similar as these 3 people. I now wonder why....because when one "comes out of the word" his/her change must be most positive, taking up a new personality with new behaviors and (improved) moral. People must notice that, right? Well, I guess people did notice a different but apparently not in a positive way.
The org claims that JW's are the happiest people, living the best life ever. Well, I sense that people do not recognize that. The org claims to be a charity and spending over a billion hours to preach to people. Still, this makes no impression at all on others as the organization is not recognized as a key charity. Its members are not known as very involved In community affairs, in other charities etc.
I never expected nor realized that others recognized a positive change in me.
Others with a similar experience?
continued from part 1 (http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5097191899136000/john-1-1-colossians-1-16-all-other-things):.
the nw translation and some of its unique renderings, like john 1.1- "a god," and colossians 1.16 - "all other things," have been consistently at the top of the most debated topics here in this forum and elsewhere from the beginning.
the anger felt by detractors of the nwt rendering of john 1.1 (a god) has diminished considerably if compared to the furious debates surrounding the verse that raged on during the 1950 thru 1970s.
You can eat ALL THINGS there are in the house OR
You can eat ALL OTHER THINGS there are in the house.
The second makes an exclusion. The first encompasses all, everything.
It bible translators believe they need to add or remove a word, for whatever reason, they should explain it with a proper footnote so the reader understands what has been done and can decide if he agrees or not.
In this particular case, I can only see that in the NWT it was done inconsistently. Therefore it looks like a bias, pushing an agenda.
Let's be aware that the true original letters do not exist. All we have to base our translations on are some 5000 manuscripts that are copies of a copy of a copy etc. In other words, it is most misleading if a translation claims it is the most accurate translation because it is very close to the original text. There are no original texts. period.
I believe that about all translations are biased, because a translator has to make choices when translating phrases or words that do not exist (anymore) in the current language etc. The choices the translator makes are bases on his knowledge and intentions. As long as choices are explained, I do not mind that much. In the end, it is the message in the bible that counts. Often the context explains what is meant.
If one is really interested in an more unnoticed bias in the NWT, read and compare John 1:4
NWT reads:by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men
From Biblehub:
New International Version
In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.
New Living Translation
The Word gave life to everything that was created, and his life brought light to everyone.
English Standard Version
In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
Berean Study Bible
In Him was life, and that life was the light of men.
Berean Literal Bible
In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
New American Standard Bible
In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.
King James Bible
In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
Holman Christian Standard Bible
Life was in Him, and that life was the light of men.
International Standard Version
In him was life, and that life brought light to humanity.
NET Bible
In him was life, and the life was the light of mankind.
Aramaic Bible in Plain English
In him was The Life and The Life is The Light of men.About all translations show that Jesus has LIFE IN HIM, that HE can give LIFE. The NWT gives the impression that life was passed through Jesus, like a delivery guy.
there was a letter sent to elders in australia on 18th november 2015 asking for details of publishers that are solicitors, barristers and accountants.
what would be their motive for these details?
the rest of the letter outlines 8 specific pieces of information to compile and send to bethel's legal department, and reiterates to collect the information only be "as you understand, without consulting the publisher.
"have you given up on organized religion?
in many countries the number of people who describe themselves as not religious is growinga trend that suggests an uncertain future for institutional religion.
some of those lands are shown here.
In harmony with those principles, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not charge for their literature or for Bible instruction
well, this is done because of tax issues in the US. Originally they sold the magazines and books and booklets. Cheap but still. SO the statement is not true
Also, not one religion charge for so-called BIBLE INSTRUCTION.... is that a new theme?
true false - 8 questions1 jehovahs witnesses are christianstrue - we are the only true christians.
however, jesus is always secondary to yhwh or yahweh, who we for some reason call jehovah.2 jehovahs witnesses are creationiststrue, we are just not young-earth creationists3 jehovahs witnesses do not believe in doctorsfalse - of course we believe in doctors.
if we can believe in an invisible sky daddy, surely we can believe in the doctor standing before us in flesh and blood.
