Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 11/10/2018 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    According to the record from the Watchtower Society itself, this is about right, if you don't count some interim corrections to typos, page headings, and grammar inconsistencies. (These are minor, but there have been at least 16 additional versions if you count these minor printing updates.) For example the original NWT of Psalms in the 1963 and 1964 "Fat Boy" NWT had a big bold typo (Psalm 17 was marked as Psalm 71). The large print (bi8) printed in 1971 had some typos, such as switching the font of the verse number itself from regular to bold and back to regular --most noticeable in Hebrews 9:27 where the 2 is bold and the 7 is regular, and even a couple of subject-verb agreement errors that were fixed up until 1984, well before the 2013 Revised came out. When the 2013 came out a heading on a page 267 was wrong, Psalm 51:4 was changed, and there were still some inconsistencies with capitalization and usage. Here's one example with the capitalization of "Ark" [of the Testimony]. Exodus 25:22 still has one remaining inconsistency: (Exodus 25:16-22) 16 You will place in the Ark the Testimony that I will give you. 17 “You will make a cover of pure gold, two and a half cubits long and a cubit and a half wide. 18 You are to make two cherubs of gold; you will make them of hammered work on the two ends of the cover. 19 Make the cherubs on the two ends, one cherub on each end of the cover. 20 The cherubs are to spread out their two wings upward, overshadowing the cover with their wings, and they will face each other. The faces of the cherubs will be turned toward the cover. 21 You will put the cover on the Ark, and in the Ark you will place the Testimony that I will give you. 22 I will present myself to you there and speak with you from above the cover. From between the two cherubs that are on the ark of the Testimony, I will make known to you all that I will command you for the Israelites. (2013 NWT) Exodus 25:22 (1972 bi8) . . . the two cherubs that are upon the ark of the testimony . . . (1972-1984) Exodus 25:16 And you must place in the Ark the testimony that I shall give you. (1984) Note that in 2013 every instance of "the Ark" is capitalized except this one in verse 22. Also verse 10 does NOT capitalize it in 2013, but did capitalize it in 1984. And you can see above, in verse 16, that Ark was capitalized in 1984, but in no places was testimony ever capitalized. As far back as the 1953-1961 versions of the NWT, "Testimony" was capitalized, but "ark of the testimony" was not always, even in the same context, or sometimes just Ark and not testimony: (Numbers 7:89) he would hear the voice conversing with him from above the cover which was upon the Ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubs [upon the cover].” (1953) (Exodus 16:33,34) Moses said to Aaron: ‘Take a jar and put in it an omerful of manna and deposit it before Jehovah as something to be kept throughout your generations.’ Just as Jehovah had commanded Moses, Aaron proceeded to deposit it before the Testimony as something to be kept. (1953) (Num. 17:10) Subsequently Jehovah said to Moses: "Put Aaron’s rod back before the Testimony as something to be kept for a sign to the sons of rebelliousness, that their murmurings may cease from against me, that they may not die." (1953) Also note that in Deuteronomy, the term "ark of the testimony" is never used; it's always "ark of the covenant," (a different Hebrew word) but this doesn't ever get capitalized in any NWT of any date. (There are exceptions in quotes from the Watchtower in the 1950's, 1960, and 1976, but not in the NWT itself. ["ark of the covenant" "Ark of the covenant" or "Ark of the Covenant".] Of the hundred or so references, there has been no capitalization since the 1970's.) (Deuteronomy 31:26) “Take this book of the Law and place it at the side of the ark of the covenant of Jehovah your God. . . (2013) (Deuteronomy 31:26) “Taking this book of the Law, YOU must place it at the side of the ark of the covenant of Jehovah your God. (1960-1984) In fact, between 1961 and 1964, there were literally hundreds of pages that needed re-pagination along with the page headings, dozens of footnotes with the wrong J-references, cross-references, footnote letters skipped, wrong hyphenation breaks, a couple of misspellings, mismatched single/double quote marks, and at least a couple of grammar changes. There is some evidence of these changes in one of my "Fat Boy" Bibles where you can see that certain pages were updated, and these resulted in a brighter light-green edging on the updated pages (which includes Psalm 17, of course). See the pictures below:
  2. 3 points
    That would put most clergy, including ours, completely out of business.
  3. 2 points
    Ok. I will start new with topic about CONTEXT. greetings!
  4. 2 points
    The GB are humans. They are not inspired. they make rules. So the rules are human rules.
  5. 2 points
    Thank you for revealing more of Watchtower’s lies. In the quote above, they are comparing the WT organization to the anointed Body of Christ in the first century, where it has been made plain through scripture that there were inspired prophets designated so, by God. If the GB are not “inspired” by Holy Spirit they should not make the comparison. Since they have a 100 percent fail rate, how does this show respect for prophesy? I have yet to find a genuine heartfelt apology by the governing body or any WT leaders for misleading millions of people with their failed prophesies. They are more inclined to pass the buck onto their hearers. 1975 is a prime example. Here is another: "Some anticipated that the work would end in 1925, but the Lord did not state so. The difficulty was that the friends inflated their imaginations beyond reason; and that when their imaginations burst asunder, they were inclined to throw away everything." (Watchtower 1926 p. 232.) Let’s go back to 1925 to identify the “some”: "We have no doubt whatever in regard to the chronology relating to the dates of 1874, 1914, 1918, and 1925. It was on this line of reckoning that the dates 1874, 1914, and 1918 were located; and the Lord has placed the stamp of his seal upon 1914 and 1918 beyond any possibility of erasure. What further evidence do we need? Using this same measuring line.... it is an easy matter to locate 1925, probably in the fall, for the beginning of the antitypical jubilee. There can be no more question about 1925 than there was about 1914." (Watchtower, p. 150, May 15, 1922) Check the 1914 chronology to see its changes. Check all of the dates for changes. “Any possibility of erasure”??? They are such liars. "True, there have been those in times past who predicted an "end" to the world, even announcing a specific date. Yet nothing happened. The 'end' did not come. They were guilty of false prophesying. Why? What was missing? Missing from such people were God's truths and the evidence that He was using and guiding them.'' (Awake, Oct. 8, 1968) "God's faithful people on earth emphasized the importance of the dates 1914 and 1918 and 1925. They had much to say about these dates and what would come to pass, but all they predicted did not come to pass." (Vindication, vol. 1, 1931, p. 146) By their own definition, they are false prophets. Prophecy can not be understood until it has been fulfilled or is in the course of fulfillment. From 1874 to 1914 the prophecy concerning the Lord's coming was being fulfilled and could be understood, and was understood, by those who were faithful to the Lord and who were watching the development of events, but not by others. (Creation; 1927; p. 290) 'If these prophesies have not been fulfilled, and if all possibility of fulfillment is past, then these prophets are proven false.' (Prophecy, 1929, p 22) As I said, they are “inspired” through demonic inspiration. If they were still part of the vine of Christ, they would naturally be "inspired" with Holy Spirit. John 15:5; 1 John 2:27 THE ARE FALSE “INSPIRED” PROPHETS. Matt 12:34 They may not join the word “inspired” to prophet, but God does not need to. The dictionary makes it clear that prophets are inspired, as does the Watchtower itself. God – But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.’ 21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him. This organization is supposedly GOD'S organization. When every doctrine fails, then who is to blame? The GB do not take the blame. Is God to blame since His spirit supposedly guides it? Dictionary – Prophesy - to utter by or as if by divine inspiration, to predict with assurance or on the basis of mystic knowledge Watchtower’s Reasoning Book – Prophesy - An inspired message; a revelation of the divine will and purpose. Prophecy may be a prediction of something to come, inspired moral teaching, or an expression of a divine command or judgment. This definition just about covers all aspects of the Watchtower’s teachings within the "theocratic organization". If the GB claim they are not inspired, then they should put down their pen, stop the printing presses and leave millions alone to find truth by turning fully to Christ and the Father. When a GB members says, “This is a theocracy ruled by God, not a collection of man-made decisions. This is governed from heaven.”, how do you believe this is possible if not through an “inspired” anointed one? If God “pours out his Spirit on His organization”, where does all that spirit go? Does it magically appear in word form in a magazine? The nation of Israel was governed from heaven through an authentic prophet – Moses. Did you know the GB at times compare themselves to Moses? They expect JWs to swallow this lie and also to accept they are not inspired. On top of this, they must obey without question any doctrine doomed to fail. Where is the truth in any of this? The truth is that the GB is guilty of false prophesy. Since they are unable to receive “inspired messages” from God, even though they claim they are anointed; not only because they say they are not inspired, but because they are led by another spirit, THEY ARE FALSE PROPHETS TELLING LIES. ACTUALLY, THEY ARE FALSE PROPHETS CLAIMING AN IDOL – THE ORGANIZATION – IS THE ONE INSPIRED (since they say they are not) as GOD’S “SPIRIT-DIRECTED ORGANIZATION”. The Reasoning Book continues: False prophets - Individuals and organizations proclaiming messages that they attribute to a superhuman source but that do not originate with the true God and are not in harmony with his revealed will. Is the claim made on the front of the Wt. magazine below in harmony with the will of God? Is it that hard to recognize a lie when you see it? Can you see how firm the statement is made on the cover that was circulated to thousands - millions of people in the world? It is purely, false prophesy. Without a doubt, the Watchtower is guided by false “inspired” prophets, who have “breathed spirit” into the organization. It is a spirit that has caused great harm, oppression, confusion, depression, division of families and loss of lives; pure darkness. It is the farthest thing from a spiritual paradise that has ever existed. Rev 13:1,11,15 It is fruitless to further communicate with you on this, SM. My hope is that JWs see through the organization’s lies and turn aside to Christ.
  6. 1 point
    Perhaps he meant; " unless I see the nail marks in his hands * (one nail would put marks in both) and put my finger where the nails have been in his hands and feet and put my hand into his side"...? *apparently the Greek word for hand also includes the wrist.
  7. 1 point
    Not in the sense that it is being claimed.
  8. 1 point
    Unless someone shows me a photograph from the actual event from the 1st Century, and I argue about it, then there is absolutely no reason for me to be worried about treading a red line or being dfd . In any case, I am not even arguing now, I am just saying we can't be sure 100%. If the GB feel like they are sure 100% then that is their prerogative, but changes nothing about how I feel. I would need a lot more proof first.
  9. 1 point
    It's a bit of a byproduct of research assignments, but mostly from working with other people who had already found such things. I got to work with some of the proofreaders for a few of the Society's books/bibles including that short-lived 1981 version, and selecting appropriate cross-refs. Also proofreaders sometimes became a part of the process for the Art Department where I worked.
  10. 1 point
    My goodness, a dictatorship. what were they frightened of ? I'm in shock !
  11. 1 point
    @JW Insider @Srecko Sostar etc.... please start new topics for your ideas.... This topic is now all over the place. Thanks.
  12. 1 point
    LITTLE Appendix for those who want presence of so called Context. Here is example how WT "scribes" manipulates with Context !!!!!! Reasoning from the Scriptures, page 89, Cross; The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·rosʹ], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. . . . Even amongst the Romans the crux(from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole.”—Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376. Text in red color is missing text in Reasoning book. Very important CONTEXT. Oh, context always problem with you:))) _____________________________________________________ The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·rosʹ], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. But a modification was introduced as the dominion and usages of Rome extended themselves through Greek speaking countries. Even amongst the Romans the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole and this always reminded the more prominent part. But from the time that it began to be used as an instrument of punishment a transverse piece of wood was commonly added; not, however, always even than..... The following text continues, describing the types of crosses and the ways in which the convicts were murdered...,others extending their arms on a patibulum. There can be no doubt, however, that the later sort was the more common and that about the period of the gospel age crucifixion was usually accomplished by suspending the criminal on a cross piece of wood. But this does not itself determine the precise form of the cross; .... the text continues to describe 3 types of crosses.—Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376.
  13. 1 point
    The one you had was an update of the 1969/70 version. The update included changes to the NWT modern text in the right and several other updates/corrections. Some of these had been mentioned in the Kingdom Ministry: *** km 6/70 p. 3 Announcements *** ◆ Correction: In The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures on page 1171 the date Nisan 10 should be moved down two lines so that the first event listed for that day will be “Barren fig tree cursed; second temple cleansing.” We suggest that you mark this correction in your personal copy. ◆ Also, on page 615, under the last Greek word on the top line, change the preposition “to” to read “of,” so as to make it read “of us.” Even this Interlinear was an update to the Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson. The Watch Tower Society purchased the plates and the full rights to republish and distribute this interlinear. This was available through the WTS for many years, from 1902 even up to the 1960's until the inventory ran out. Yes. But not for the public. It was created digitally and based on J.P.Green's Hebrew Interlinear. You can see a glimpse of it in the introductory video at Patterson (for tours) showing how NWT Bible translators go back to both the original Hebrew and Greek. It's an online tool, but may be too much of a derivative from a previously published work to be republished by the Watchtower. A limited number of Green's Hebrew Interlinear was made available to some Bethelites in 1979 and then effectively "forbidden" for private use in 1980 after some Bible study groups at Bethel began using it. Anyone who asked for a copy after December 1979 was thoroughly questioned until the WTS stopped making it internally available by April 1980. The brother in "Purchasing" who was in charge of procuring them (for Bethelites, the GB, and the Bethel and Gilead Library) was dismissed for growing a beard in April, and there were no more responses to the requests. [I threw in that last bit of info about the beard in case people really don't think the GB create man-made rules. The GB were actually very proud of man-made rules at this time and even highlighted them at a 1980 meeting of Bethel Elders as something that proved Jehovah's blessing on his visible organization. Brother Schroeder, in fact, counted the number of the rules in the Branch Organization book and compared them to the 617 laws of Moses to show how God has proven himself to be a God of Order/Organization.]
  14. 1 point
    Do you really want to believe it? :))
  15. 1 point
  16. 1 point
    In context. Acts 15 was written at a time when people literally drank the blood of dead gladiators. That is context. It is what was happening in their world at their time. That is why such a warning or direction was given. S.M may have information about people actually drinking blood now. If so then that same direction would prove true now. But blood is blood, chopped into a million pieces it will still be blood. So, if blood is forbidden by GOD then the GB are giving false instruction about blood fractions. Of course you are entitled to your opinion and for you to act on your own opinion is right. For what human has a right to judge you ? None. My opinion is that blood transfusions are not in opposition to God's word. I use the scripture at Matthew 12 v 9 to 12 where Jesus says it was right to break the Sabbath rule for the right reasons. In my opinion Jesus was meaning much more than the Sabbath rule here. He was talking about saving lives.
  17. 1 point
  18. 1 point
    Nor does Jehovah it would seem.
  19. 1 point
    According to former witness websites. There are 8 versions of the revised 2013 NWT. Which one is being compared to 1984 as opposed to the rest of the Bibles published by the Watchtower. Interpretation and translation are updated as new material are discovered that will aid in those revisions. Is the Watchtower the only one that has revised their bible? I can think of many. 2017-International Standard Version John 7:15 15The Jewish leaders were astonished and remarked, “How can this man be so educated when he has never gone to school?” It appears by comparing both texts in the NWT of John 7:15 it is referring to education. The revision does not imply anything else even if the wording has changed. The first thing to consider, were John works letters and a revelation? 1984, and 2013 are still correct in context. There is no conflict.
      Hello guest!
  20. 1 point
    I am answering this out of courtesy, as the point has been raised here, also, the topic can soon be lost in the proliferation of posting. Also I note you have already started a thread on this topic elsewhere, so I will limit my responses in future to that thread to avoid disorder. With respect, I have made my own decision on how to apply the words of Acts 15:20; 29, considering the context within which this instruction was given. You are at liberty to make your decision on whatever basis you choose. I have no objection to sharing the contextual setting which provides the basis for my decision, and I consider with interest the basis that others choose, should they choose to share it. But I do not seek to impose my will on others, and neither do I tolerate any attempt by others to impose their will on mine. In answer to your (and the "us" you refer to) question, the immediate context for the Christian prohibition on the misuse of blood is Acts Chapter 15. Make of it what you will. I have. ?
  21. 1 point
    Wow! Your writing skills just jumped 3-fold. It looks like the work of someone working in the writing department. If not, it was IM’d that way. To be clear. I understand the topic. Making assumptions that don’t reflect Christian values has NOTHING to do with the GB. So concentrate on the FACTS. There is only one way to interpret human rules. The GB doesn’t make human rules. They follow God’s command. Therefore, concentrate on understanding the assumption you are supplying.
  22. 1 point
    This is one topic that I would not be dogmatic about when @JOHN BUTLER asked about "when I go into the ministry do I tell people that I might have the truth but I might not" because as @Outta Here rightly remarked, we cannot know it's shape with absolute certainty. So when covering the cross/stake issue in the Bible teach book with a student, I just simply say that we cannot know what it was 100% either way. My personal view is there is no reason it couldn't have been a cross, since this is what the Romans traditionally used, but they may not have used it every time, so it easily could have been a stake as well. The early Bible students used the crown and cross emblem, until they decided the cross was not a suitable symbol. One reason why I think that was because as time went on they realized that they must distance themselves from counterfeit Christianity, and since Christendom used the cross and they did not want to be identified with anything that Christendom used, they dug deeper and discovered its pagan origins etc. But just because it was pagan didn't mean it couldn't have been used in Jesus' execution, after all the Romans WERE pagan! In my opinion the whole bad thing about the cross is that not only is it pagan and used by supposed Christians as a symbol of Christianity (!) but that it is used in a way which God clearly condemns. If it was a stake (or anything else for that matter) and used in the same way as a cross, it would be the same thing. To be truthful, personally I really don't think its important to know exactly what shape the instrument of Jesus' death was.
  23. 1 point
    Good example of how NWT 2013 is a reading Bible and NWT 1984 is a study Bible.The cross reference in both editions to Luke 4:16 indicates that the (literal) literacy of Jesus was not the question here. Marcus Dods (The Expositors Greek Testament p 763) has a relevant comment on this: "His teaching astonished the Jews, and they asked [the question cited] It is not His wisdom that astonishes them, for even uneducated men are often wise ; but His learning or knowledge, (Comp.Acts 26:24 where the Greek word, grammata, rendered as "knowledge of letters" at Jn.7:15, is "learning" at Acts 26:24) included the whole circle of rabbinical training, the sacred Scriptures, and the comments and traditions which were afterwards elaborated into the Mishna and Gemara " (Plumptre, Christ and Christendom). But it cannot be supposed that Jesus made Himself acquainted with these comments. His skill in interpreting Scripture and His knowledge of it is what is referred to. What the scribes considered their prerogative, He, without their teaching, excelled them in.—Ver. 16. But though not received from them, it was a derived teaching. He is not self-taught. "The teaching which I give has not its source in my knowledge but in Him that sent me." (John 7:16). Thanks for referring back to that point. ?
  24. 1 point
    No not at all. Context is everything.
  25. 1 point
    Thank you for such a constructive comment. However we still have the point that the latest NWT uses the word naked in connection to Peter when he was fishing and saw Jesus on the seashore. Why did the GB / translator use naked and not lightly clad ? Also I would be pleased if you would comment on my new topic concerning how Jesus was killed Stake or Cross. And the amount of nails in his hands and where those nails were placed. Thank you.
  26. 1 point
    I think this point showed excellent insight. I wondered if this is what you meant from the start. The very context shows that the type of leadership in this case is more like the local elders rather than the far-away GB: (Hebrews 13:7) . . .Remember those who are taking the lead among you, who have spoken the word of God to you, and as you contemplate how their conduct turns out, imitate their faith. However, I wouldn't get too hung up on variations in translations, or changes from one NWT to a newer version. As JWs, we are always happy to quote other translations that support our view of Scriptures. There are always several different ways to translate something and it doesn't mean that one is right and one is wrong. They could both be right. Often there are two ways to say the exact same thing. Often there are slight differences, and sometimes larger differences in meaning, and a translator is obligated to take an educated guess. The "nakedness" vs "lacking clothing" discussion is an example of that. The word for nakedness in the original Greek is "gymnos." (Strong's Greek #1131) It's the same word from which we get "gymnasium" because sports in the Greek/Roman world were often performed naked (and sometimes nearly so). This reminds me that I gave a funeral talk in Manhattan in 2013 on the day of the Annual Meeting, and the elder from Bethel (Patterson) who was supposed to give the talk had to leave early for his seat in Jersey City. I already had a copy of the NWT 2013 Revised on PDF, and was under strict orders not to share this fact with anyone, not even my wife. But I cheated a bit. The funeral was attended by a lot of her "worldly" neighbors in addition to brothers and sisters. She had been well-known as a Dorcas-like sister who actually had bought me a new warm coat when I first came to Bethel in 1976. I wanted to use the example in James 2:15, but I always hated the fact that it said "naked" there, and I especially didn't want to read it that way in front of non-Witnesses: (James 2:15-16) 15 If a brother or a sister is in a naked state and lacking the food sufficient for the day, 16 yet a certain one of YOU says to them: “Go in peace, keep warm and well fed,” but YOU do not give them the necessities for [their] body, of what benefit is it? So I used the 2013 NWT Revised, against orders, but no one called me out on it. Because no one else should have known anyway. Besides, the new Bible was to be released in just a few hours: (James 2:15, 16) 15 If a brother or a sister is lacking clothing and enough food for the day, 16 yet one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but you do not give them what they need for their body, of what benefit is it? The first is actually a little more accurate from a literal point of view. But the second is probably more accurate from a practical point of view, as it's hard to imagine someone coming into the KH completely naked. The word "torture stake" vs "stake" is a good point. One is for understanding and the other more literal. A better example might be the word "impaled" which was completely wrong in its most common connotations. That was fixed in 2013. Some other points are still questionable, and the translators might still wonder whether they may have had a better choice in the old version of the NWT. Here's an example, I wanted to share earlier when discussion the term "illiterate" with @Outta Here so I'll use this excuse to bring it up now: (John 7:15) 15 Therefore the Jews fell to wondering, saying: “How does this man have a knowledge of letters, when he has not studied at the schools?” (pre-2013 NWT) (John 7:15) 15 And the Jews were astonished, saying: “How does this man have such a knowledge of the Scriptures when he has not studied at the schools?” (2013 NWT) The older version could be saying something specific about literacy, where the second is referring to knowledge of Scripture itself.
  27. 1 point
    I should dig deep in my pile of books really before writing this but :- The GB of the JW Org make known that Jesus was put to death on a Stake. In the NWT (JW Bible) they use the expression 'torture stake'. Which is probably not a direct translation from the Greek. In one of their publications they use a picture that shows Jesus hanging on a stake. His hands / wrists are crossed over and he has one nail through the both wrists. In God's word we read about Thomas who doubted the resurrection of Jesus. Thomas said But he said to them: “Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails and stick my finger into the print of the nails and stick my hand into his side, I will never believe it.” Jesus Appears to Thomas 24 Now Thomas called Didymus, one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he replied, “Unless I see the nail marks in His hands, and put my finger where the nails have been, and put my hand into His side, I will never believe.” 26 Eight days later, His disciples were once again inside with the doors locked, and Thomas was with them. Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.”… Berean Study Bible · Obviously there are many different translation of this scripture but it would appear that the word hands means hands, not wrists. And in some translations it uses the word nails = plural. In the NWT it uses both, hands = plural, and nails = plural. This refers to the hands only, not the feet. I wrote to the UK bethal and the reply i received was not good. Basically they told me not to bother them, but to ask the elders. If I can find the letter I would try to upload it but i may have binned it in disgust. So I am asking for people's opinions on this matter. Was Jesus killed on a stake or a cross and how would you prove your point ?
  28. 1 point
    But unfortunately you don't want to relate it to the Jehovah's Witnesses. It seems you wish to talk about the Bible from a general viewpoint. My point is that JW's 'learn' at their meetings. They use the NWT and are taught from that. The leaders of the JW Org are the Governing Body. The 'ones taking the lead' are the Elders and others that do the ministry regularly. I'm sure you can understand that difference. This whole forum is about Jehovah's Witnesses but you still want to bring in other issues. As with the word nakedness which you didn't want to understand my viewpoint on. The GB either wrote the word or approved of the word nakedness, but why ? If the original meaning was lightly clad or wearing underclothes then why say naked ? To a JW reading that scripture from the NWT it mens naked. You don't agree, that's up to you. There is another phrase in the NWT 'torture stake', which is used in place of cross. Now the word, i think would be stake. But the GB has used 'torture stake'. I can understand it is to show what type of stake, but, is it true to translation ? You see the whole point of this is not about a general meaning, not about what every religion thinks of it. It is about how JW's view it through the NWT. Because as I've said many times this is a JW Forum.
  29. 0 points
    It depends on the context of what is being discussed. That is a philosophical aphorism which is true in a general case, for most things, most of the time. There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth: not going all the way, and not starting. I cannot teach anybody anything; I can only make them think. You can ask me to look for the truth, but you cannot ask me to find it.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
    • Most Online

    Newest Member
    Vivek Valvi
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.