Ten men out of ... the nations ... will take firm hold of the robe of a Jewish man

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Hmmm... could it be that the Scripture should read Google of My Google?

[JW Insider]

8 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Hmmm... could it be that the Scripture should read Google of My Google?

I think I already had some fun with that idea in this post from 6 months ago when I discovered that Gog is spelled the same way in Hebrew as one would spell GOOG and that it appears as EL-GOOG in Hebrew which is read from Right to Left instead of Left to Right. 

אֶל־גֹּוג means when transliterated EL-GOG.

But the O between the two G's is actually a 'vav' which when used as a vowel (as it is here) is not just used for O, but also for U, pronounced OO. Therefore:

אֶל־גֹּוג can also be transliterated as EL-GOOG.

Transliterated left to right as it appears on paper, this is אֶל־גֹּוג or GOOG-LE.

 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Now THAT is a GREAT piece of work!   Next time the Brothers have a talent show, do that as a routine....

... don't hold your breath.

[JOHN BUTLER]

@JW Insider Quote "But there is another thing about this particular verse in Revelation 17:14. It's not translated correctly in the NWT."

I can't remember the scripture that says something about 'Anyone that adds to or subtracts from the scriptures, will suffer for it '. I know that is not exactly what it says but .......

Now, are you saying that the GB / Writing dept' deliberately mis-translate scripture, even adding in words, to suit their own purposes ?  Because that is what it looks like to me.  

( Reminds me of 'torture stake' which I believe is not a true translation. )

Is that why the GB say not to get educated. Educated people can use Greek and Hebrew to English translations, and not just stick to the one NWT Bible. 

It gets worse. Even the JW Bible cannot be trusted to tell the truth. Your words JWI  "It's not translated correctly in the NWT." 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Translation is an ART ... not a science ... and some are very good at it ... and some are very bad at it ... and most are somewhere in the middle.

The 2013 NWT ( Silver Sword)  began using the term "brazen conduct" for the first time, to conform to the 2010 Super Secret (NOT!) Elder's handbook, which FIRST used that term, without any scriptural basis, referencing the OLD NWT ... or any (repeat ANY) other Bible translation in existence.

It's not in "The Emphatic Diaglott" by Benjamin Wilson ... and it's not in the "Kingdom Interlinear Translation" by the Society.

The Scriptures in the dumbed down 2013 "Silver Sword" NWT were changed to conform to the Elder's handbook, published THREE YEARS EARLIER.

Since I cannot comprehend Greek, I have to trust those two interlinear translation  books ... BOTH now published by the WTB&TS, by the way.

When I go out in Field Service, I take the "American Standard" version of the Bible, ALSO now published by the WTB&TS ... NOT the NWT.

( From Wikipedia ...)

" The ASV has also been used for many years by Jehovah's Witnesses. The reasons for their choosing of the ASV were twofold: its usage of "Jehovah" as the Divine Name, which was a translation of the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) into English as some early Bible scholars had done before (i.e. Tyndale at Ps. 83:18^[9]). They also derived their name from Isaiah 43.10, 12, both of which contain the phrase, "Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah." Also, there was a perception that the ASV had improved the translation of some verses in the King James Version, and in other places it reduced the verses that they found to be erroneously translated in the KJV to mere footnotes, removed from the main text altogether.^[10]

Jehovah's Witnesses' publishing organization, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, had printed its own edition of the King James Version since 1926, but did not obtain the rights to print ASV until 1944. From 1944 to 1992, they printed and distributed over a million copies of the ASV. By the 1960s, the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, made by members of their group and the rights to which they controlled, had largely replaced ASV as the Bible used most by Witnesses.^[11] Though now preferring the NWT, Jehovah's Witnesses' publications frequently quote from other translations, including ASV."

 

 

[Witness]

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

It could also be interpreted, based on this and Revelation, that these ones causing tribulation will temporarily conquer all the chosen ones through death, but the verses about the "harpazo" (rapture) show that not all would die

We can be physically alive, but spiritually dead, or spiritually alive.   We "conquer" death by turning to Christ and his light.  If we refuse the light, we remain "dead" and face the "second death".  James 1:12;  John 8:12; 1:4; 12:46; 1 John 5:11 (2 Cor 4:3,4; Eph 4:18)   (Rev 20:15)
 

 

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

had largely replaced ASV as the Bible used most by Witnesses.

So you were the one holdout that kept Wikipedia from being able to say " . . . used by all Witnesses"

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

I used the old NWT, since about 1962 to 2015 ... then I took a Brother (tm) label maker, and on the binder of my ASV wrote on yellow tape, in black  "AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION", so that when I was ACCUSED by a householder of using the NWT, I could show them that I was NOT.

The dumbed down, paraphrased version of 2013 embarrasses me for a variety of reasons.

In Dodge City, Kansas, I suspect the new NWT would not have been the preferred version of Marshal Matt Dillon, or that Long Branch Saloon BRAZEN HUSSY, Miss Kitty.

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Now, are you saying that the GB / Writing dept' deliberately mis-translate scripture, even adding in words, to suit their own purposes ?  Because that is what it looks like to me.  

I don't think it falls under the same issue as adding and taking away from the scroll of Revelation. Bias in translation is a well known feature of the "art" of translation. It's not a science as JTR says. Scholarly JWs have admitted that it's a common problem to include bias (as to meaning/interpretation) within the supposed confines of accurate translation. If a word can mean both during or at, and you believe the Parousia is 105+ years long, then you would say something happens during the parousia/presence. If you believe it is a future event that might only last a day or a few days, then you would translate "at" the parousia/presence. If you really believe that the meaning can only be conveyed by adding a bit of the previous verse into the next verse, then this could also be from "bias" as to interpretation.

[JOHN BUTLER]

It seems to be like I've said before. The way some folks stay in the JW Org is 'by not actually being part of the JW Org'.

Not using the NWT, not believing all the GB says, not obeying all the GB / W/t / JW Org rules.

So um why actually stay in ? ah yes, well I've given the reasons for that already. Too much to lose. 

Now if all of those congregants earthwide that didn't, use the NWT, believe all the GB say, obey all the GB rules, were to leave the JW Org, I'm quite sure the 8.5million would decrease rapidly. 

When the GB use the expression "brazen conduct" I think they are referring to themselves.

But now JTR Jr is saying that 'brazen conduct' is not from the original scriptures.

Is any of the NWT from the original scriptures ?

And what does God and Jesus Christ think of people that deliberately alter or add to the scriptures ? 

This seems to show that the NWT was not written / translated with direction by God's Holy Spirit. 

 

[JW Insider]

46 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Oh! So you accept scholarly works with interpretation. Then what was all that garbage about me posting scholarly commentaries that are NOT reflective of the Watchtower interpretation.

Of course, I accept scholarly works where they provide good, interesting and useful information. In fact, if you may recall, it was one of the reasons I defended Allen Smith. I said that very often he includes scholarly works that are very good, interesting and useful.

In fact, I appreciated the scholarly works you added here in this very thread. No one gave you any garbage about posting them. In my case, I only pointed out that you mixed up a couple of different references interspersed with a sentence or two of your own, but you didn't tell anyone here where you were copying and pasting from. There have been times when you have done this while giving the impression that even scholars agree with the WTS. There have been times when you have done this while giving the impression that scholars are not in agreement. And there have been at least two times when Allen Smith provided some very old scholarship in order to show where the chronology arguments of the Watchtower might be "improved" with respect to Nebuchadnezzar, his father, and a couple references in "apocrypha"/"pseudepigrapha". (Even on those ones, Allen, only included page images and copied text, no source reference, so I had to look up and point out where the source was, which I found on Google Books.)

So I hope you see the difference. You have long known that I accept some scholarly works with interpretation. The Watchtower publications also accept scholarly works with interpretation. And they sometimes quote them just to show the differences when they are not reflective of WT interpretation.

20 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

This is the same person that scoffed at the word academia. 😁

If you are referring to me again, you should know that I have never scoffed at the word academia. There is good, mediocre, and bad in most fields of study.

[JOHN BUTLER]

33 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I don't think it falls under the same issue as adding and taking away from the scroll of Revelation. Bias in translation is a well known feature of the "art" of translation. It's not a science as JTR says. Scholarly JWs have admitted that it's a common problem to include bias (as to meaning/interpretation) within the supposed confines of accurate translation. If a word can mean both during or at, and you believe the Parousia is 105+ years long, then you would say something happens during the parousia/presence. If you believe it is a future event that might only last a day or a few days, then you would translate "at" the parousia/presence. If you really believe that the meaning can only be conveyed by adding a bit of the previous verse into the next verse, then this could also be from "bias" as to interpretation.

Scholarly JWs have admitted that it's a common problem to include bias. 

But this means that the NWT was NOT guided by God, Jesus Christ, or Holy Spirit. 

And basically proves the whole embodiment of JW / Wt orgs are not guided by any of them. 

So where is there any reason for trusting the GB, the Watchtower, the JW Org, the Writing department or any JW at all ? 

It all falls apart if their own Bible is not dependable. How can anyone give a BIBLE STUDY using FALSE information ?