Posts by moggy lover

54

Who or what "governs" the teachings of the so-called GOVERNING BODY?

by Terry in

if a person walked up to you one day and started telling you what to do, how to do it, and threatening you if you refused, wouldn't you immediately ask them by what authority they had such a right?

wouldn't you want to see a badge?

credentials?

Memorial 2012 Date

by Quendi in

not that i have any intention of attending, but would somebody be so good as to post the date for the memorial "celebration" this year?

.

quendi.

Christians have always paid deference to the Jews in the determining of the day of Passover. The date is calculated on the basis of some complex interpretive conclusions from certain crucial texts in the Pentateuch. This means that there has always been a difference of opinion over whether the Passover is to be celebrated on the night of 14 Nisan or the night of 15 Nisan.

Whereas the vast majority celebrate this on 15 Nisan, [April 6], there has been, for several centuries going back to about 120 AD, a group who believed this should be held on Nisan 14. These ones came to be known as quartodeciman believers [believers in the 14th day] and the controversy came to known as the Quartodecimanian Controversy.

While the debate has largely been resolved over the centuries in favour of 15 Nisan for the Passover, quartodecimanian believers have persisted in isolated pockets in some Middle Eastern Christian communities. When the Watchtower started, Russell, who received his once-a year observation of the Lord's Supper from his Adventist forbears such as George Storrs and others, was a regular 15 Nisan believer, and this continued into Rutherford's reign.

However, when Franz came on the scene, and rose to prominence as the chief theologian in the Watchtower stable, he soon showed himself to be a qurtrodeciman and in the late 1940s the date was moved forward one day.

16

What happened to Milton Henschel losing presidency?

by Band on the Run in

my family often spoke well of milton henschel.

i left when knorr was still president.

looking at the flimiest of personal infos for gb members, i noticed that henschel became president and then was demoted and don adams became president.

moggy lover

My understanding is similar to what sir82 said. By 2000, the GB were given legal advice to rearrange the structure of the Watchtower Organization, because of the legal cases mounting against them. They could, if it came to the crunch, be legally responsible for any doctrinal aberration that was published by the WTBTS. [Similar to the "mentally diseased" absurdity of last year].

The advice was to relegate the position of Watchtower president to a largely ceremonial one, exacting no real power, while the real power remained behind in a nebulous, hermetically sealed body that was all but impenetrable to public scrutiny. This body was to be legally removed from the WTBTS, while at the same time invisibly still controlling the whole shebang.

Thus if any such legal action was taken, these men could always say: "Who us? Don't know wha' your'e talkin' about. We didn't write that stuff".

Even Don Adams who was "kicked upstairs" to keep this position warm could say, "Sorry mate, don't ask me, I don't write this stuff".

This stratagem worked, and now, anyone suing the Watchtower for anything, finds himself in a minefield of legal ambiguities that requires a mind numbing set of complexities to unravel.

34

WT Library 2011

by Haelcer in

new watchtower library 2011 in english is available here:.

.

http://www.filestube.com/46b7d96d595f742503eb/go.html.

moggy lover

Thumbs up and thanks. This is an invaluable resource for those researching Watchtower material. It is truly ironic as another poster has said, that we have got it ahead of many in the organization!!

Thanks again

Cheers

4

Divine Wisdom from the honorable Judge Rutherford

by Terry in

i hope you will pay respect to jehovah's anointed president of the watchtower society and not mock him when you read this.. after all, jehovah was speaking through rutherford to make certain food (for thought) came at the proper time!.

as the director of the watchtower important insight was granted him of enormous importance.. it would have been blasphemous of rutherford to misuse what was entrusted to him by jehovah if he were to impose his.

own quirks and prejudices on others and pass them off as "revealed" truth or new light.. are we agreed?.

moggy lover

Of course he was inspired by the spirit when he said that.

Spirit?

As in Jack Daniels, not Holy.

53

Well, the pdf of the March 2012 WT is hot off the press!

by serenitynow! in

and it does not disappoint.

the first century brothers are on the cover, going door to door with what look like leather messenger bags.. the first article is entitled, are all "christians" christian.

and you can tell by the picture that anyone with a beard or goatee is definitely not a real christian.. the next article, remain in my word has this quote that condemns catholics but seems eerily close to what jws believe:.

moggy lover

Very becoming fashion conscious Watchtowerites of the first century.

The bloke in the green and yellow gown has got the latest business suit from the House of Claudius and Russell, haberdashers of renown. While the turban, worn at just the right rakish angle is the latest head gear from Rutherford and Ptolemy, who can find the best head coverings for any modestly abject, cringing woman.

Of course, the shoulder strap and bag is the very latest fashion accessory from the flesh pots of Rome. No snake oil salesman or door-to-door peddler should be without one.

All these and many more of the latest fashion gear are available in our Summer catalogue of 33 AD out now!

25

A BIG change the Watchtower will have to face up to . . .

by nicolaou in

1995 drew a line of demarcation.

the doctrinal rudder of freddie franz was gone, the sacred cow of the 1914-generation had been slaughtered and the internet had arrived!.

it will take a while longer but the time is coming when pre-1995 old timers like the gentleman below will be an impotent force within the society - if that hasn't happened already.

moggy lover

I think it could be sooner that 10-15 years. We have just over two years to go to enter the crucial year of 2014, which will linger as the skunk at the proverbial party through all those 365 days. Credulity has its limits, and I am sure many will discover the irony in 100 years of empty promises, re-evaluated dogmas, and new bigotries directed toward dissenters, and will vote with their feet.

Again, I think the older ones will be largely unmoved since, having expended so much time and effort in this religious movement, and having heard so many "explanations" for theological improprieties, that they will continue to swallow this. It is the young, the curious and the creative, the ones that the Watchtower so desperately needs, who will defect in large numbers.

2

Hebraic Roots Bible (PDF and e-Sword module)

by possible-san in

http://www.coyhwh.com/en/bible.php.

http://www.coyhwh.com/en/bible/hebraicrootsbible.pdf.

http://www.coyhwh.com/en/bible/e-sword_v9_hebraicrootsbible+notes.exe.

moggy lover

Thanks for this valuable resource. I have the HRV [Hebrew Roots Version] as part of my eSword set up, but I have downloaded the pdf version, because I feel this is a better asset when attempting to gain an insight into the context of the translator, rather than just consulting isolated texts as in eSword. This is not to say that eSword is defective in any way. Far from it. It is invaluable and almost superlative in its construction and the way it presents God's Word to the people. I use it everyday.

The HRV was translated by one James Scott Trimm, a member of the Society of Nazarene Judaism. He is evidently either a Jew by ethnicity or conviction, who has accepted Jesus [whom he calls Yahshua] as the promised Messiah. A sub-text in all this, is that he is one of several Bible translators who belong to a wider community of believers who advocate the use of the Sacred Name for the God of the OT in liturgy and worship. Hence the title of this group: The Sacred Name Movement. [SNM]

Like the Watchtower Bible, the HRV uses the OT name for God in the NT, with the improvement being that it uses the more logical form of Yahweh, [in capitals] rather than the antiquated and possibly mongerlized form Jehovah used by the Watchtower. Apart from Yahweh, the HRV also personalizes the noun "Elohim" implying that it is also a name for the OT God.

John 1:1 is made to read "The word was with Elohim, and the word was Elohim", while 1 Cor 12:2 reads, "no one is able to say Yahshua is YAHWEH except by Holy Spirit". The argument against the use of Yahweh in the NT as done by the HRV is the same as that for the NW"T", and that is that no emendation of the original text is justifiable without any direct proof.

There are several other emendations which do not appear to be justified. For instance the Hebrew of Ps 40:6 has "My ears you have opened", but the Greek LXX, evidently on the basis of a different source text, has "A body you have prepared for me". The writer of Hebrews, quoting the LXX gives this Psalm a Messianic fulfillment, [Hebs 10:5] a reference which is not apparent in the Hebrew original. All Christian commentators must argue their case on an objective analysis of both texts, without slanting one or the other by emendation.

Having said that, there seems a better case for arguing that the HRV has improved on the Hebrew Masoretic text at Deut 32:8. The text reads as if referring to "the sons of Israel", but both the LXX and the Dead Sea scrolls edition of this text have "angels of God" HRV has "Cherubims of Elohim"

If one accepts the presumptions on which this translation was made, that Christianity is actually a Jewish sect that accepted Gentiles only on condition of transmuting themselves into a Jewish mould, then this translation can be considered very good.

The HRV is however not within the mainstream descent of Gentile Christianity and hence can be confusing, if not ambiguous in certain crucial places. For this reason its value lies in its ability to convey to a Gentile Christian, steeped in the Hellenic grid in which Christianity was nurtured and developed, what it must be to be both Jewish and Christian.

It is a translation that I would recommend for study, and is certainly preferable to the NW"T".

49

What are the best Bible Translations?

by Londo111 in

growing up in a jw family, my parents and my grandparents had many versions of the bible...not just the new world translation.

sometimes i read these.

but i always bought the hype that the new world translation was the most unbiased and most consistent in rendering hebrew and greek into the modern language.

moggy lover

The problem that is endemic to this question is that there is no one-sentence answer available, insofar as one can say, this or that translation is the best there is. When approaching this question we must ask ourselves whether we want:

1 A Bible that conveys as literally as possible the original language syntax so that I can see the text behind the translation

2. A translation that is readable in a modern day English idiom that conveys the flavour of what it meant to the original readers.

3. A translation that reflects the piety inherent in something that is holy.

4. A translation that does not evaluate its textual probity from a translator's pre-conceived bias.

There is no single translation that fulfills all four requirements even remotely, and that is the challenge, both for the craft of the translator, and the disposition of the reader. A translation that is more literal than periphrastic is wooden and defies easy reading. A translation that is "understandable" becomes indefinable as a clear reflection of the original.

There is a sense in which every translation can be accused of being a product of a translator's "bias". For instance, if I translate Jo 1:1c as "The Word was God", am I reflecting the original [because that is what it says] or am I being biased by Trinitarian leanings [because one may argue that this not what it means]. If I translate Acts 20:28 "The Church of God which He purchased with His own blood" am I being Trinitarian in my bias, or am I being Unitarian biased if I say, "The Church of God which He purchased with the blood of His own [Son]"?

If I transliterate the word "Hades" rather than translate it, am I being faithful to my function as a translator? Hades is in fact a personal name of the Greek God of the Underworld, so am I being "understandable" or ambiguous? What will the reader be left with? Am I reflecting some pagan mythical infusion into Christian protocol? Will the reader "understand" what I am translating? A single minded reader, reared in the closed conduit of Watchtower learning may have no difficulty, but then this supposes that one is translating the Bible merely for the purpose of reinforcing a pre-conceived doctrinal imperative.

If I were indeed to translate "Hades" into an English equivalent, what should I say? "Abode of the dead"? "The Underworld"? "The place where the dead are consigned"? If I do this, I have on the one hand made, what I believe the Bible is saying, clear, but if I am suggesting to a non receptive reader such as a Watchtower follower that this implies some form of life after death, then I will be accused of a translator's bias.

Thus one needs to be realistic, and accept the impossibility of attaining to the "most perfect" translation of the Bible. Does this mean that there is no answer? Not really. The best one can do is to invest in what is called a "Study Bible". There are several on the market today which reflect various scholastic opinions, from the Harper Collins NRSV Study Bible which incorporates extreme liberalism, while on the other hand The NASV is the product of the best conservative learning. And there are several in between. [ESV Study Bible, NLT Study Bible, HCSB Study Bible, NKJV Study Bible, NIV Study Bible etc] The Jewish Study bible is unique in that it provides several critical OT passages with a Jewish perspective [Ex Isa 9:6]

These translations incorporate several footnotes which attempt to unravel the intricacies of the original. Probably the best Study Bible available today is free and available for download at the www.bible.org web site. The NET Bile that they produce has more than 80,000 footnotes on several passages that may cause difficulty.

Then there are devotional Study Bibles that help one to see that one is not indulging simply in an intellectual pursuit, but that one is approaching something that is Holy. The are various "Life Application" Study Bibles, [ESV, NKJV, NIV etc] as well as "Spirit Filled" Study Bible [same as before].

Cheers

33

Yet another Watchtower Lie

by jwfacts in

the watchtower website is currently highlighting the article "are jehovah's witnesses a protestant religion?

" from the the watchtower november 1, 2009. it makes the following comment:.

"third, unlike the protestant movement, which has splintered into hundreds of denominations, jehovahs witnesses have maintained a united global brotherhood.".

moggy lover

As ScenicViewer has pointed out, the currently structured Watchtower sect of Jehovah's Witnesses is itself a splinter group from a more antiquarian religion set up by CT Russell. After their founder's death, his followers assiduously attempted to carry on his teachings in an organized, thematic way conditioned on his teachings, including the jargon he invented.

But this was irksome to the then "President" of the "Watchtower Society" who inherited all the physical panoply that CTR had left behind, including all the cash, the landed properties, and the Watchtower subscription list. So, whereas he controlled the purse strings and all the aura of CTR, the original BS groups had to start off from scratch.

They were expected to die out and fold up, especially in view of the fact that they themselves were careening off into several sub groups. The fact that they have survived today, and are more tranquil than the current Watchtower stable, with its ever increasing rate of defectors, is a testament to the continuing influence that CTR has on his readers.

It is truly ironic that the man who set up the Watchtower publishing empire, and who invented this religion, would be disfellowshipped from the very movement he himself set up! He would however be at place, and peace, in any one of the BS groups that exist today.

When JF Rutherford, a man more at home with larceny and debauchery than religious authority, invented the "Jehovah's Witnesses" moniker, he effectively set up a completely new religion, crafted in his own image, and bearing no resemblance to the original set up, either religiously or emotionally.

Thus the current Watchtower religion only dates from 1931 and has been in existence for only 70 years. It is thus not old enough to have generated its own organized dissenters, but hang on till 2014, when something like "The Reorganized Worshipers of the True Jehovah" are expected to be formed!

There are, however several "Sacred Name Groups" out there, such as the "Assemblies of Yahweh" which might have been set up by former Watchtower followers since 1931.

The Watchtower's own antiquarian pretensions are at least inflated or even preposterous. For better or worse, the current religion that we know as "Jehovah's Witnesses" is the legacy of a man, JFR, who according to author Edmund Gruss, "maintained a process of governing that defied all Scriptural logic, and instituted a leadership that was a rejection of everything that Jesus taught". - [The Four Presidents of the Watchtower, E Gruss page 52]