Posts by TTWSYF

123

Translating the NWT in the Shadows

by JuanMiguel in

note: the following is not meant to be construed as a recommendation but to demonstrate the sharp contrast between any authentic bible translation and the new world translation.

for those of us who participate and or read the threads on this board, i understand and appreciate that all here have different views on religion, the existence of god, and of the catholic church.

i believe each individuals convictions should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity.

TTWSYF

Still thinking - To answer your anti catholic ramblings. Start a blog about it and I will reply as I have no problem answering my faith and it's history. 2000 years worth and well documented. Of course not without it's faults, but there's not 'lying for the truth' in our guidlines.

Also worth mentioning that my apology for zinging you about your lack of knowledge of your previous Catholic faith was not an apology because I was wrong, but an apology because my delivery was rude. I still have the belief that you had and have no idea about the fullness of your former faith. Someone told you that prayer repitition was vain repitition. Really? How would you know? Cause you can read folks minds and hearts? Gimmi a break.

Hmmmmm...lets see, was that an enormous statue of Mary I saw people kneeling in front of and praying to....or maybe I was mistaken. Maybe it was a golden calf.

No, it was a statue of Mary that you saw people kneeling by and praying. The thing that you apparently will not understand [and I don't blame you, it's the JW judgement thing you haven't let go of yet], is that you did not see people praying to Mary. Mary is a creature. The 'Hail Mary' prayer is actually reciting holy scripture except for the part that asks her to 'pray for us sinners, now and the hour of our death', other than that, it is all scripture. All scripture is prayer to God. It honors Mary when we read scripture about her and her witnessing of Jesus's life, but that is not worship.

Of course it all makes total sense....you have convinced me.....we don't need to pray directly to Jesus, its not his name we need to call on for salvation.

Who said that? You, Still thinking?

Wonderment wrote earlier The NWT was prepared for JWs, not for Christendom.

That's not what JWs say at the door. They say how they're the only true Christians and theirs is the most accurate bible. It's more lying for the TRUTH tm.

Many of these blogs are proving the fact that you need credibility in translations.

So moving on with this blog, over 99% of reputable scholars say that the Watchtower translation of John 1;1 is amatuer translation at best. Let's look at another example, shall we?

Ego eimi = is Greek for I am. It is by far the easiest first two words of the Greek [or any other] language. I am hot, I am hungry, I am thirsty, I am, easy to translate. I am is what God called himself to Moses at the burning bush when he told Moses to take off his shoes for he was on holy land. I am - present tense, not past or future tense, but present tense. Jesus said in John 8;58 'before Abraham came to be, I am' This was Jesus asserting his divinity and the crowd of Jews around Jesus wanted to kill him for blasphemy for saying that. Jesus never corrected them and said 'no, you misunderstood me' and scripture never says that the crowd of Jews misunderstood. That in itself is proof enought that the NWT rendering is wrong. Add that very obvious and quite frankly inexcusable, deceitful mistranslation to the long list of why the Watchtower is 'Translating the NWT in the Shadows'...interesting subject matter Juan, thanks.

Biblical scholar H.H. Rowley ["So many Versions?" Expository Times, 65 {1953-1954}, 103] said that the NWT 'reminds one of nothing so much as a schoolboy's first painful beginnings in translating Latin into English...and instead of showing reverance for the Bible which the translators profess, it is an insult to the word of God'

respectfully,

dc

123

Translating the NWT in the Shadows

by JuanMiguel in

note: the following is not meant to be construed as a recommendation but to demonstrate the sharp contrast between any authentic bible translation and the new world translation.

for those of us who participate and or read the threads on this board, i understand and appreciate that all here have different views on religion, the existence of god, and of the catholic church.

i believe each individuals convictions should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity.

TTWSYF

Wow, a fired up tread to say the least.

1st, my apologies if my ranting has offended the good people here. Faith, like politics and other fiery topics has people forget their manners.....I'm of course speaking of myself.

I expect no Catholic fan club on JW.net. I know that there is a wide margin of passionate beliefs here. We are speaking of the NWT, so let's not get off topic about how many books we have. We all have access to viable info at our finger tips.

Hey Terry, Thanks for your reply, you make a good point that there are no original transcripts available. Everything that we have is a copy of another. That being said, it is also noteworthy to be reminded that the Christian [and Jewish] faith and traditions were passed on orally, long before they were put to writings. When the apostles went out after the Pentecost, they did so without a new testament. They spoke the new testament orally and that was their way of teaching until the written word got confirmed. That oral tradition was the church and the written scriptures confirmed what they had already established. Right? I mean how many people were literate 2000 years ago. Hell, how many people were literate 200 years ago? Not many at all. Most were illiterate.

If you say that Mary isn't just as important why is one of the main prayers that we were taught to say repeatedly over and over the Hail Mary ? Why were we taught to pray to her? Where is the prayer to pray to Jesus?

All prayer goes to God through Jesus Christ. You know this yet you still try to convince folks [maybe yourself] that Catholics worship Mary. Of course that's not true. The Hail Mary prayer is not worship of Mary, it is asking her to pray for us. As Mary was the one who had Jesus change water to wine when Jesus didn;t want to, so can we appeal to her for her prayers on our behalf. As you are aware, the prayer of the rightous man has more weight than your average Joe. Because Mary is the most blessed woman ever, her prayers have more clout.

And while I'm on the subject of prayer...why the hell were we praying to saints?.....who says they are so holy?

We ask saints to pray for us for the same reason...prayer of the rightous man has more weight. Check Revelation and see how the angel presented the prayers of the saints with incense to God. People who knew them [saints] and witnessed their life say that they're holy by the example of their life. Catholic heirarcy will listen to the petitions and then research the subject to see what the fruits have been. Not fruits of making more Catholics, but of giving their life to the causes of charity, the poor, the sick and/or the orphaned. These same saintly subjects then must have supernatural occurances related to their interccession. Things like healings of incureable diseases, hardships, illnesses and such.

So I'm not sure who you think you are saying that I didn't check out my own faith? Since I never chose it. I was simply exposed to it.

That was so rude of me, and I'm a little embarrassed. Please accept my apologies. I thought I was talking to my own JW brother.

If you would like to compare Catholics with JW's I have a recent example for you. I asked my friend (who is catholic) the other day which bible version she used. Her reply "The Holy Bible" she didn't have the foggiest Idea that there were different bibles.

That doesn't surprise me. Catholics don't go around telling everyone that they have the most accurate bible and all others are corrupt from Satan's teachings. Also, it is up to each individual to hold on to what is true and discard what it useless.

But I would argue that you cannot speak for all JW's and make sweeping statements that most do not know about bible cannon. Otherwise, I could use the same argument about Catholics.

The point that I was making is that JWs come to the door trying to teach about the bible and how other Christians are part of Satan's organization. They tell of a great many things like 'our bible's the most accurate, Jesus died on a torture stake, there is no hell, Jesus is not God, Peter was not the 1st pope, Jesus never told Peter he was the rock to build His church, etc, etc, and when you confront them on these issues that they just told you with authority, they must retreat and say that 'these arguements have been going on for centuries'. That's not what they said at the door. At the door, they lied.....lied for the TRUTH tm , and it also went into their translation. How many times have you quoted that 'I don;lt want to believe in a three headed grotesque god'? You know that the Trinity is not a three headed monster god. jeus

meant respectfully, even if it doesn't sound that way.

dc

123

Translating the NWT in the Shadows

by JuanMiguel in

note: the following is not meant to be construed as a recommendation but to demonstrate the sharp contrast between any authentic bible translation and the new world translation.

for those of us who participate and or read the threads on this board, i understand and appreciate that all here have different views on religion, the existence of god, and of the catholic church.

i believe each individuals convictions should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity.

TTWSYF

JW's provide copious amounts of information to support their beliefs (biased? Definately, but arent all religions).

Truth- JW's provide copious amounts of misinformation to support their beliefs

Catholics simply teach you must believe and thats that. No need to explain or answer any questions. Just listen, do as you're taught, worship our Father the Pope who's image dominates the hallways and classrooms, even more dominant than Jesus in fact.

To say that 'you are to worship our Father, the Pope.' is a flat out lie. No wonder you were converted to the JW's. You had no grasp of your own faith. And who's fault is that?

I think Jesus may even come close third after Mary.

Of course that is a ridiculous statement. Catholics [like all Christians] honor the son the same as the father. Catholics believe that Jesus is God in the flesh. Not God the father, but God the son who gave up his glory to become man.

I have studied with witnesses for a number of years and must say for me the appeal was the way they liked to answer questions and research things. After the Catholic dogmatic arrogance this was truly refreshing.

Really? Have an example? You are allowed to research any Catholic doctrine and you will find an answer. Ask a JW how many books are in the bible and they'll fire off the answer. Ask a JW how we got the current cannon of the bible and most have no idea that it was the Catholics. That the current biblical cannon came from the Roman council of 381 [382 maybe]. Ask any JW why they go door to door with a Catholic book and you won't get an answer.

But the fact that ALL bibles are biased to some extent makes the argument null and void to me because, does knowing the identity of the translators make any bible more correct than another?....NO

No. There is no excuse for adding, removing, or altering the scriptural texts no matter one's belief. You want an unbiased translation. You want a qualified translator so that you know there is credibility and accountability. As a JW once told me ' you don't look for a bible that suits your mental tastes, you look for the most accurate one you can find.' Avoid the NWT. It is corrupt, that's why no one else uses it!

I asked you guys not to get me started!

DARN!,

DC

123

Translating the NWT in the Shadows

by JuanMiguel in

note: the following is not meant to be construed as a recommendation but to demonstrate the sharp contrast between any authentic bible translation and the new world translation.

for those of us who participate and or read the threads on this board, i understand and appreciate that all here have different views on religion, the existence of god, and of the catholic church.

i believe each individuals convictions should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity.

TTWSYF

Hi Curtains, Juan and everyone else,

I don't have time to address every point that you are making at this seating, gotta go off to work.

1st off- the NWT is a poor translation period. If it were anywhere near accurate, then some other reputable organization would use it. No one else uses it because it is corrupt.

John 1;1 is one of probably 100 errors intentionally put in to change the script to fit Watchtower positions. That is a fact. Check your interlinair and see instead of promoting points of view from unreliable sources [nutjobs and haters].

1% is accurate. Check the various bible translations and see. I did check your social documents network. Not too reliable.

Sure, most folks thought the world was flat, they were wrong. There are lots of theories about creation and quantum physics along with theology that I believe the majority of folks would be wrong. Translating the scriptures in this day and age is not splitting atoms son. As more and more evidence is found, it puts the NWT position in the highly unlikely category. 1% [or less] is pretty accurate.

I went through your links info and addressed it. Why don't you do the same for me? check out a very reputable source http://onlineparallelbible.com/ and check the interlinair for yourself.

You say that Mantey was a fraud. Why? Because he chastised the WTS for doing something that they constantly do, and that is to take quotes out of context. Infuriating to say the least. Then folks like you buy it hook, line and sinker. Look to good info, not WTS propaganda. Many anti trinitarian scholars translate John 1;1 as 'the word was God' How many trinitarian scholars translate it as 'the word was a god'? Probably none.

Do the math, you're obviously not an idiot.

respectfully,

dc

123

Translating the NWT in the Shadows

by JuanMiguel in

note: the following is not meant to be construed as a recommendation but to demonstrate the sharp contrast between any authentic bible translation and the new world translation.

for those of us who participate and or read the threads on this board, i understand and appreciate that all here have different views on religion, the existence of god, and of the catholic church.

i believe each individuals convictions should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity.

TTWSYF

Wonderment, thank you for the reply. Wow, you have done a lot of research, it seems you're looking in the wrong places my friend.

Juan, your subtle and gentle touch is a quality that I should try to emulate more often. Thank you.

Question Wonderment, 'are you Curtains friend that he wrote of earlier?' just curious. Let's get crackin, shall we? Wonderment wrote

I have looked into it. Thoroughly... and I believe you easily fall for misinformation.

I doubt both of these assertions from you, particularly the 1st assertion.

Citing Julius Mantey for support is poor scholarship.

The Watchtower cited Julius Mantey for supporting it's own version of translation, not me.

The argument that u posed on John 1:1, is not true.

It is true. Over 99% of translators render the John 1;1 as 'the word was God [or Divine]. Less than 1% as 'a god'

Harner, Wallace, Dixon, BeDuhn and others do not support your argumentation .

Honestly, I do not know those names, could you be more specific please so that I may research their positions?

See all articles below where your arguments are dealt with.

I did see those arguments, so let me answer as briefly as possible. 1st off, www.scribd.com is not a scholarly resource. It is a social publishing site. As I stated in my other post, if you were to search for an 'online parallel bible, you would then have access to the hebrew, greek, aramaic, etc etc interlinairs and see for yourself how accurate the NWT is.

Be that as it may, I did look up and view your link of John 1;1. On the surface, I could see how someone would believe seeing that documentation that 'the word was a god'. Especially when it says 'the correct translation of John 1;1' If only it came from a known reputable source... For the record, I know that there are translations that render John 1;1 incorrectly, that is not proof of accuracy in their translation. These folks are listed as supportors of 'a god' instead of 'God'

Jeremias Felbinger died 1690 - held many unitarian beliefs and was a strong anti trinitarian

Reijnier Rooleeuw MD - couldn't find out much about his beliefs, but to think that the word was a god infers some kind of polytheism, doesn't it?

Edward Harwood His early training was as a hand-loom weaver, but he subsequently became a professional musician in Liverpool. 1 His first collection of psalmody, A set of hymns and psalm tunes, was published in London in 1781, 2 and a second collection, entitled A Second Set of Hymns and Psalm Tunes was published at Chester in 1786. 3 He died in 1787. 4

I noticed no info about his academic credentials and his translation is listed as ' A Liberal Translation of the new testament; being an attempt to translate the sacred writtings with the same freedom, spirit and elogance with which other English translations from the Greek classics have lately been executed'

Thomas Belsham -an English Unitarian minister was an American evangelist and theologeon who had several views [religious and social] that were considered extremely radical for his day. He died in 1844

John Samuel Thompson -another Unitarian minister who claimed that spirit beings helped him with his translations...how appropriate

Check out below the distortion brought about Colwell and Mantey.

What distortion? Did you know that Mantey threatened the Watchtower with a law suit if they didn't retract their position that he supported their position. You can't write this stuff... Of course the WTS would try to discredit his work after he corrected them.

Mantey's objection proves little as to the wrongness of WT quoting its work.

True, but put that with the rest of the evidence and it is quite overwhelming against the Watchtower position.

We all should strive to be less gullible!

Amen to that!

respectfully

dc

123

Translating the NWT in the Shadows

by JuanMiguel in

note: the following is not meant to be construed as a recommendation but to demonstrate the sharp contrast between any authentic bible translation and the new world translation.

for those of us who participate and or read the threads on this board, i understand and appreciate that all here have different views on religion, the existence of god, and of the catholic church.

i believe each individuals convictions should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity.

TTWSYF

Curtains. You asked a friend and you went through the verses and found that you disagree with my information, right? Tell me, is your friend an ancient languages scholar?

Instead of asking your friend, why not look into the vast resources that you have at your finger tips. I am not a scholar [by any stretch], I do however have access to scholarly material....just like you. Search for 'online bible comparisons' and you will find the scholarly resources that will give you true interpretations of the scriptures in Greek, Aramaic, Latin, Hebrew, etc. You can see exactly how each word is translated and compare them to other translations.

Wonderment- ditto. Of course these arguements hold up. Look it up yourself. Whether it is an old arguement or not doesn't matter. What matters is what's true. The Watchtower wil assert that the NWT is the most accurate translation in the world and will tell of scholars who support their positions, right?

In the KIT, the Watchtower uses the work of biblical scholar Julius Mantey to support it's translation of John 1;1. When Mantey found out he wrote a letter to the Watchtower [letter dated July 11, 1974] goes as follows.

You quoted me out of context...{I}t is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1;1 'The word was a god.' Word order has made obsolete and incorrect such a rendering. Your quotations of Colwells's rule [of Greek grammar] is inadequate because it quotes only part of his findings. You did not write this strong assertion: "A predicate nominative which procedes the verb cannot be translated as an indefinite or a 'qualitative' noun soley because the absence of the article." Colwell and Harner have stated that theos in John 1;1 is not indefinite and should not be translated as 'a god'. Watchtower writers appear to be the only ones advocating such a translation now. The evidence appears to be 99% against them.

respectfully,

dc

123

Translating the NWT in the Shadows

by JuanMiguel in

note: the following is not meant to be construed as a recommendation but to demonstrate the sharp contrast between any authentic bible translation and the new world translation.

for those of us who participate and or read the threads on this board, i understand and appreciate that all here have different views on religion, the existence of god, and of the catholic church.

i believe each individuals convictions should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity.

TTWSYF

wonderment the NWT is a good translation from Curtains.

I beg to differ Curtains. There are numerous examples of changed texts in the NWT. Words added and changed to give the impression that things are different than they really are.

In the first 2 sentences the corruption begins when the NWT reads that God's active force was hovering over the water. please....

John 1;1 reads the word was God, not a god. The watchtower would have you believe that, in Greek, if you have a singular noun appearing without the article 'the' before the verb, the indefinite article 'a' is required. Making the translation 'a god' rather instead of God.

When you study the the 1st section of John [a john? ;) ] 1;1-18. Theos occurs 8 times in versed 1,2,6,12,12 & 18. The NWT translated God as God 6 times, translated 'the God' once and 'a god' once.

That's poor to say the least. That is deceptive corruption of the true word of God.

In other words, that is an example of scripture not suiting the Watchtower's mental taste, so they changed it.

oh, boy. Don't get me started!

dc

6

Ever been preached to on Facebook? By a non-JW?

by Mad Sweeney in

jw
friends

i recently was.

.

it was awkward.. friendly enough but weird..

TTWSYF

I'm guessing this was more than the scripture of the day? I have lots of friends that I guess feel we all need ot be saved and thier godly posts will do the job. But they are my friends so I put up with it. I don't read it, though.

Why not read the scripture of the day? You don't need a watchtower to tell you what it means, do you?

just joking...lol..

46

The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament.

by whereami in

the victors not only write the history, they also reproduce the texts.

in a study that explores the close relationship between the social history of early christianity and the textual tradition of the emerging new testament, ehrman examines how early struggles between christian "heresy" and "orthodoxy" affected the transmission of the documents over which, in part, the debates were waged.

his thesis is that proto-orthodox scribes of the second and third centuries occasionally altered their sacred texts for polemical reasons--for example, to oppose adoptionists like the ebionites, who claimed that christ was a man but not god, or docetists like marcion, who claimed that he was god but not a man, or gnostics like the ptolemaeans, who claimed that he was two beings, one divine and one human.

TTWSYF

What is interesting to me [that no one has addressed yet] is that the early church did not have much in the way of written scriptures. Most evidence will suggest that the oral tradition was the big thing in the early Judaism and the Catholic church. That is why the bible was not totally confirmed until 381ad.[by the Catholics]

For those who believe that the 'great apostasy' happened in the 1st couple of centuries. my question would be

How could you think the bible is the word of God? I mean there are good things written in the Mormon bible and the Koran, but most Christians do not believe they are God's inspired word. Why would God give his word to fakers?

dc

39

using the name "jehovah"

by finallyfree! in

i find it to be frankly disrespectful.

im a father, if my kids were to call me by my first name id find that wierd.

we address judges with "your honor" and various other titles, so why on earth would we call the almighty god by his first name?

TTWSYF

Like PSac said- Jehovah is not God's real name.

It is a nick name that is a hybrid of the unpronounceable name of God merged with the word adonai [which means lord]. The Watchtower would have you believe that they are restoring God's true name and giving it to the world. The reality is that they are glorifiying a nick name that no Jew [including Jesus and the apostles] ever used.

I agree with many of the posts on this subject, because the majority of these bloggers are educated on the truth [not to be confused with 'The Truth" tm.

dc