There is no profit in a long protracted war OR in a conflict in which WOMD are a very high possibility.
There is no reason for China to start a war with anyone.
PSacramento
JoinedPosts by PSacramento
-
88
Are we on the brink of another world war?
by slimboyfat ini don't want to be an alarmist or anything... .
but i read this article in the economist today that argued it is only a matter of time until china and japan exchange shots over some small islands in between the two countries, it could escalate to full scale war, and the united states is treaty bound to come to aid of japan.
on top of that the united states is making diplomatic visits to various countries borderning china in a move that is viewed extremely negatively in beijing.
-
-
-
6
Can You Discern a True Christian?
by The Searcher inmore and more we are getting "true christians" mentioned in the literature, or comments such as the following from the april 1st 2013 watchtower, "today, jesus genuine followers help people to understand what the bible teaches about god.".
this sanctimonious and self-righteous attitude is being embedded in minds, just like the "new scrolls" fairy story.
when such terms are used at the meetings, i cringe because of the "interested ones" sitting there.
-
-
PSacramento
How does one disconcern a true Christian?
Well, first one must define "true Christian".
The WT, as a publishing house, defines it by those that preach the gospel the way the WT says it is to be preached, no matter how ineffective of course.
How did Christ define a "true Christian" ?
First hint is in the parable of the sheeps and goats, then there is Christ saying that by Love will people know that "they" are His followers.
James states that the works by which a believer will be known is to take care of those in the most need ( in his time, widows and orphans).
Paul speaks also fo charitable works and of proclaiming openly that Christ is Lord.
John states that true believers will be know for their love for each other and their neighbour.
What you won't find in the NT is a "true believer" being defined by going door-to-door and filling in a time sheet to make quota.
-
69
New World Translation
by MsD init may seem like a stupid question but who was responsible for translating their version of the bible?
i heard it was ray franz, several governing body members.
does anybody have any legitimate info that can prove who exactly translated it?
-
-
PSacramento
As Jgnat said, the issue is not (in of itself) that they translate proskueno as "obeisance", but thay they do it base don their doctrine and nOT how it was used by the writer.
They pick and choose when to translate it worship ( when applied to God or satan for example) or obeisance ( when applied to Jesus), disregarding the pattern set forth by the actual writer.
It is the same thing when they insert Jehovah in a NT verse that does NOT have it from the original manuscript on the "excuse' that it is a verse from the OT what has YHWH written, which in theory is fine except that they do NOT follow their own "rule" in that regard.
IMO, the most blatant and gross misuse of this is in Romans 10:13.
-
69
New World Translation
by MsD init may seem like a stupid question but who was responsible for translating their version of the bible?
i heard it was ray franz, several governing body members.
does anybody have any legitimate info that can prove who exactly translated it?
-
-
PSacramento
I meant "fresh" in the sense that the translator(s) had to make hundreds, yes, thousands of decisions in the translation process throughout, that were made requiring sufficient knowledge of biblical languages and grammar, to stamp the work as unique in its field. It was not made by someone with little biblical knowledge.
I used to think that, untill it was shown to me how easy it is to take a "difficult" passage ( Difficult in regards to conforming to a preconceived doctrine) and with a little "interpretative work", change the meaning of even just one word to make it "fit in".
EX: changing proskueno from worship to "obsience" ( or whatever they call it) to circumvent that difficulty that Jesus was worshipped by His apostles and 1st generation converts.
-
26
Fascinating 1914 exchange between CT Russell and a colporteur
by cedars ini'm just doing some research for my book, and i uncovered a real gem from the watch tower of july 1st 1914 - published three months before the "gentile times" were due to end climaxing (as they thought back then) in armageddon.. a rather brave "colporteur" (pioneer) wrote in to the magazine asking whether the studies in the scriptures series of books advocating 1914 to be the end of the world should cease to be circulated after october.
not only does the question itself prove that the expectations of publishers back then were entirely contrary to what the society repeatedly implies them to be, but the answer given by russell shows the same arrogance and evasiveness that we see in modern literature from the society, showing how little has changed since those days.. here is the clipping.... .
notice how russell falls back on the same line of argumentation used by the society, namely "we have not attempted to say these views are infallible.".
-
-
PSacramento
I often wonder if Russel knew what would become of his beloved bible students, if and what he would do differently.
-
69
New World Translation
by MsD init may seem like a stupid question but who was responsible for translating their version of the bible?
i heard it was ray franz, several governing body members.
does anybody have any legitimate info that can prove who exactly translated it?
-
-
PSacramento
Anonymity does not add credibility to the translation. Anonymity closes itself off from criticism.
From wikipedia:
The master text used for translating the Old Testament into English was Kittel's Biblia Hebraica. The Hebrew text, Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (1977), was used for updating the footnotes in the 1984 version of the New World Translation. Other works consulted in preparing the translation include Aramaic Targums, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Torah, the Greek Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, the Masoretic Text, the Cairo Codex, the Codex Petropolitanus [disambiguation needed] , the Aleppo Codex, Christian David Ginsburg's Hebrew Text, and the Leningrad Codex. [30]
The Greek master text by the Cambridge University scholars B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort (1881) was used as the basis for translating the New Testament into English. The committee also referred to the Novum Testamentum Graece (18th edition, 1948) and to works by Catholic Jesuit scholars José M. Bover (1943) and Augustinus Merk (1948). The United Bible Societies' text (1975) and the Nestle-Aland text (1979) were used to update the footnotes in the 1984 version. Additional works consulted in preparing the New World Translation include the Armenian Version, Coptic Versions, the Latin Vulgate, Sixtine and Clementine Revised Latin Texts, Textus Receptus, the Johann Jakob Griesbach's Greek text, the Emphatic Diaglott, and various papyri. [30]
It should be noted that with that information, almost anyone with the time and desire and basic understanding of the bible, could "create" a "new and fresh" translation of the bible.
-
69
New World Translation
by MsD init may seem like a stupid question but who was responsible for translating their version of the bible?
i heard it was ray franz, several governing body members.
does anybody have any legitimate info that can prove who exactly translated it?
-
-
PSacramento
I can see influences of the ASV, Rotherham, Concordant, Goodspeed and Moffatt versions in the translation work of the NWT. However, the NWT is distinct to all of them. It is a fresh translation, not a re-work of ASV or other. The translation process was obviously different than that of the KJV line of versions.
Yes, the process was based on taking established and credible translations and editing them to conform to JW doctrine.
Nothing wrong in of itself mind you.
It's the inconsistencies and the incoherant parts due to trying to twist scripture to doctrine that make it a mess at times.
Sure you can look at it as a "fresh" translation, but thatis giving it far more credit than it deserves.
It is stale, boring and passionless.
The portuguese and spanish translations are far better than the english.
-
69
New World Translation
by MsD init may seem like a stupid question but who was responsible for translating their version of the bible?
i heard it was ray franz, several governing body members.
does anybody have any legitimate info that can prove who exactly translated it?
-
-
PSacramento
The KJV was based on the received text ( Textus receptus) and that was based on the Majorial texts at the time and it was argued already that older manuscripts were available and not used.
The oldest texts we have today that can give us as complete a bibel as we can are the Codexes Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, both of which were found AFTER the KJV.
Modern translations have taken these and many other manuscripts into account and made "changes" accordingly.
As for the WBTS not stating who writes their articles or any of their publications:
While humility is a beautiful thing, there is a fine line between being humble ( or the pretense there of) and unqualified.
-
69
New World Translation
by MsD init may seem like a stupid question but who was responsible for translating their version of the bible?
i heard it was ray franz, several governing body members.
does anybody have any legitimate info that can prove who exactly translated it?
-
-
PSacramento
I like the NRSV, NASB, NJB but it is important to understand the biasis that ALL translations have.
Honestly, for the layperson I don't know how much it really matters.
-
69
New World Translation
by MsD init may seem like a stupid question but who was responsible for translating their version of the bible?
i heard it was ray franz, several governing body members.
does anybody have any legitimate info that can prove who exactly translated it?
-
-
PSacramento
Every single bible translation has the list of th ename sof those people involved in the translation process.
Except the NWT of course.
As stated before, the NWT is NOT a horrible translation, it is simply an "ok" one at best with quite obvious doctrinal biasis.
Of course that may be said of other translations as well.
The NWT is a re-work of the ASV that the JW's used to use before they came out with the NWT, it is basically the ASV with additions and re-translations to be more in-line with JW doctrine.