Jehovah's witnesses

i was raised a jw but my family up here broke away from the religion. i didnt mind because i hated it and didnt agree with the teachings. all of my family in GA are still hardcore jehovas witnesses

 

Those aren't good commentaries, they are bad commentaries. The first article in the first link makes no sense, it says, for example. Also notable is the NWT rendering of Colossians 1:19, "because [God] saw good for all fullness to dwell in him." Here the little word "the" is omitted before "fullness." This is significant, because in the NWT rendering "all fullness" is ambiguous, whereas "all the fullness" clearly refers to the "fullness" of God's own being (cf. Col. 2:9). This is an excercise in hair splitting and straw grasping, the addition or omission of the word "the" clearly makes no difference at all. For another example take this There are several other texts where the NWT adds words without brackets which change the texts' meaning. Some of these have real doctrinal significance. In Romans 8:28 "all things" is changed to "all his works." This implies that God does not work "all things" together for good to those who love God, but only those things which He Himself does, over which He therefore has control. This allows for their belief that God does not have control over all things. You will note that the analysis here of that change by the nwt (new world translation) is almost entirely nonsense. Again the changes make no real difference. As well as nonsense analysis, the writter (Robert M. Bowman) makes up stuff, namely that the witnesses believe that God does not have controll of everything. This is a complete fabrication, the witnesses believe no such thing. The rest of the article reads like this, essentially a bunch of nonsense and lies.

The second article was clearly written with the intent of making the Witnesses look like a bunch of brain-washed morons led by senile megalomaniacal octagenarians. The hositile predisposition of it's author towards witnesses is clear in every paragraph. It is also out of date by 12 years, the changes that it discusses as necessary for the Jehova's witnesses church have now been made.

 

There are clearly cases in which the NWT inserts the definite article ("the") in order to significantly change the meaning of the original Greek text:

http://aomin.org/GRANVILL.html

As for the Watchtower Society, how has it substantively changed? Does it no longer forbid the reading of "apostate literature" (such as Raymond Franz' Crisis of Conscience) or the independent study of Scripture (any translation) without the aid of a Watchtower commentary?

 

That actually made me giggle. Not in a schoolgirl kinda way, more in a "Look, the dog has a new JW shoe!" kinda way...

 

One thing I do know for sure is that JW's DO encourage the daily reading of the bible WITHOUT any aides at all. Just reading the scriptures as they are right there in the bible. Independent study.

 

To the best of my knowledge the watchtower society is not substantially different now than it was in 1993, yet neither has this claim been made. The point of the article in question was that the watchtower society would have to make certain important changes, not that the entire organization would have to change substantially. The changes mentioned, viz., that the membership requirements for the leadship group would have to be altered and the estimated number and generation of the 144,000 left on this earth would have to be revised have been made. Of course these changes by themselves hardly constitute substantial ateration. However, said changes being both necessary for and detrimental to the survival of the watchtower organization was the whole point of the article. Now that the changes have been made with no apparent adverse effects the arguemnt in the article in question becomes moot, in this case rendering the article out of date. The purely historical portions of the article are still relevant of course, yet they never constituted any substative portion of the main thesis of the article.

As to the above linked article in it's relation to the Bowman article, it is largely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Now there certainly are cases in which the addition or ommission of the article "the" can cause significant changes in meaning. However, the previous article, by Robert M. Bowman, did not refer to instances where the addition or ommission of "the" was significant. Bowman cited examples where the addition or ommission of "the" was completely insignificant erroneously believing them to be significant. He did not, however, in any convincing way demonstrate significance.

As to the James White article itself, it is again largely irrelevant to the imediate topic, interesting though it may be. It is essentially a thorough exposition of Granville Sharpe's rule. While this rule may be necessary in understanding the significance of instances of the article "the" in translations from greek it never once mentions the NWT. We gain from this article only that the article "the" can have great significance. White does not, however, mention any specific changes made in any specific translation. It could be the case that the NWT mistranslates Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1, yet this remains to be demonstrated. Finally, these two passages while relvent to the trinitarian debate by themselves make only a very weak argument.

 

Their bible has been changed to conform to their belief system. Not the other way around. It is really more of a perversion than a translation. Hundreds if not thousands of verses have been changed. Anything dealing with hell has been removed. Charels Tazel Russel who was the founder of their faith feared Hell so he had Hell removed from their Bible. Along with many other verses.

 

The Watchtower Bible is not your Garden variety Bible. It has been condemened by scholars around the world for vast mistranslations.
I had one of their Bibles and took the time to look it over. And I can tell you right now, they messed with the Bible big time.

 

Yes reading the Bible, as long as it is their translation of the Bible, and no other translation. The Watchtower society on purpose messed with the translation because the Bible did not agree with what they believe, so they found it easier to rewrite the Bible. WOW

 

I am open to the idea that the witnesses intentionally mistranslated parts of the Bible for their own ends. However, no such instances have yet been presented in this thread. The only attempt was the presentation of an article outlining insignificant differences between the NWT and an unnamed translation. Between any two translations there will be certain descrepancies. What must be demonstared is that the NWT contains intentional mistranslations which significantly alter the original meaning, not merely that it is is some passages different from other translations.

 

Try this out for starters. The Bible speaks of Hell as a place of eternal punishment. The founder of the Watchtower Society Charels Tazel Rusell did not believe in Hell so he had Hell removed out of their bible. Tell me how many times you find the word Hell in a Watchertower Bible.
Also the Watch Tower does not believe in the Trinity, so all verses that speak of it have either been removed or dishonestly changed. In my King James Bible John 1:1 reads, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.
In the Watch Tower Bible this same verse reads, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was (a) God.
The Word of coarse is Jesus Christ. Yet by placeing the letter (a) dishonestly between word and God, they reduce Christ to a created being. Another words He is not part of the Godhead.
As you get into their Bible, you really find out that this group is not part of the Christian faith at all, but a very strange cult that likes to play with the wording of the Word of God.
The Bible gives a stern warning to people like this and it is found in Revelation 22:19. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
The Watchtower Society has butchered the Bible. Anyone who reads their translation well quickly learn this for themselves. That is why you can only believe what they believe, if you believe all other world translations were wrong, and only their translation is right.

 

One of the many factions of sadly deluded christians.
I've had close contact therapeutically with survivors of JW.
Imagine this ~ a little girl aged 3 so terrified because she's born in sin and will go to hell (yes, they preach damnation in hell), wetting herself from fright only to be told she's dirty and unclean (for wetting herself! = certain hell!!). The little girl also has to do missionary work by saving souls with her parents, because if she doesn't do this, other people will go to hell or she will too for not helping them.
The damage they do beggars belief.

There's enough christian religious insanity in this world without JW's, let alone with them so thoroughly adding to it!
Check out the second last column on the right at this page Register of patients transported to the State Insane Asylum, 1883 for admissions where religion was the causative factor of insanity ~ it's nothing new! http://nutrias.org/inv/civilsheriff/1883.htm
Also ~ http://www.disabilitymuseum.org/lib/docs/1239.htm?page=3
In view of contemporary "religious right" politics and evangelism in USA, it may well be worth remembering the past! ~
(From "Millerism and Madness: A Study of ‘Religious Insanity’ in Nineteenth-Century American" by Ronald L. Numbers, Ph.D., and Janet Numbers, Ph.D., published in The Disappointed, pp. 97-101, (Knoxville, 1993))
http://www.ellenwhite.org/egw64.htm

 

through my screen door, usually...

 

This is very interesting since they teach that hell is reserved for Satan and the fallen angels alone and that no human will ever go there. They don't believe that bodily functions are sin so that story about the girl wetting herself is right out. Neither do they make 3 years go uot and do missionary work. Adults do this, not children. How did a 3 years old apparently all alone make it to this supposed therapy meeting? I don't meen to sound rude, but you obviously made that all up. While you're at it why not go ahead and accuse them of cannibalism or human sacrifice?

An insane asylum register from 1883 is proof that the JW's are an evil cult!? In that same register there are some other interesting "causes" of insanity besides religion, which appears several times. "softening of the brain" is listed as a cause. We know now that there is no such thing. "Infancy" is listed as a cause. "Change of life" is in there. We also have "disappointment", "over study", "brain fever", and "stupidity". In 1883 they thought that masturbation was a mental disorder and that it would make you go blind.

Here is a quote from the second link that you posted, it sums up quite the view that mid 19th century folks had of religion as regards insanity. Essentially it was that lack of religion, or belief in a non-standard religion was itself a cause of insanity. "Irreligion, and the abuse of religion, are frequently the cause of insanity and suicide. Pure religion, more than any other power, tends to arrest, and assists to cure insanity. Of this fact there is constant evidence and illustration abroad in society, and within the limits of every well-organized asylum." It is was also a commonly held belief that disagreeing with the government was also evidence of insanity. As to that article about Millerism, it demonstrates that folks were considered to be defacto insane merely by virtue of belonging ot a particular non-standard religion.

In short, if folks didn't toe the line and do as they were told they were classified as insane and shipped off to the asylum. The Soviets had asylums like this too, but they called them "re-education camps".

 

In the NWT version of the Old Testament, the Hebrew word "She'ol" is used instead of "hell". "She'ol" is in fact the word that gets translated into "hell". That is to say that if you read the Old Testament in Hebrew you would read "she'ol" where English versions say "hell". So you see, hell has not been removed at all. The NWT merely keeps the original word instead of changing it into "hell". Here is a link to the NWT online http://www.watchtower.org/bible/ and here is a link to instances of the word "hell" in the KJ version http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?section=0&sr=0&translation=kjv&query=hell&st=1&pn=1&l=en
You can go though as I did and compare. Here is a link to the Hebrew meaning of "she'ol" http://fp.thebeers.f9.co.uk/heaven_hell.htm
It means, essentially the realm of the dead or the grave or pit, it is not a place of punishment, but merely the place where departed spirits go.

In the NWT version of the New Testament whatever the original greek word was is kept. Sometimes it was "hades" sometimes it was "gehenna". So again, the NWT uses the original word instead of changing it into "hell". You can do the same comparison as was done with the Old Testament. Unlike "she'ol", "hades" and "gehenna" can but do not always mean a plae or time of punishment and/or torment.

Now maybe you think that keeping the original text when possible consititues changing the Bible, but I don't see how that position makes any sense at all. You're not one of those people who thinks that the prophets and Gospel writters spoke English are you?

Have you read your original greek lately? [size=+1] [/size][size=+1] The first instance of "God" in John 1:1 is translated from the greek "theon" the second from "theos". Now the first instance is more appropriately translated as "the God" as "theon" is preceeded by "ton", the greek definite article "the". Greek does not have a separarte indefintie article, or "a". Instead the indefinite article is contained in the word that it modifies. The word "theon" or "God" becomes "theos" when indefinitly modified. In short, the greek "theos" means "a god". Go check it out for yourself, or find a Classics professor at a nearby collegeor university and ask. So if you were going to translate John 1:1 from the original greek into English maintaining word order it would read "In the beginning the word was with the God, and a god was the word".

Now how about this for starters, find me one instance of the word "trinity" in the bible. [/size][size=+1]
[/size]

 

NO, JW do not preach damnation. The preach non existance, or eternal sleep.
They donot believe in any existance of hell or daamnation. If you are not a JW you die and that is it.

 

Yes that would be correct.

"if you are not a JW you die and that is it"

Well they don't necessarily believe that you must be a JW to be "saved". They believe that God can read hearts and whether you call yourself a JW or not, he will read your heart and will ultimatley make the judgement on you. But yes, they believe that when any person dies, they are simply.....dead. Mind, body, and spirit are no longer.

 

I really want to respond to the Hell thing but time is short so let me just touch on the John 1:1 . You asked me if I had read the original greek lately. Well I must confess to you that my Greek is not very good, but there are three scholars that I'm going to quote that have, and will adress the John 1:1 issue.

Dr. William Barclay A leading Greek Scholar of the University of Glasgow Scotland: '' The deliberate distortion of truth by this sect seen in John 1:1 is grammatically impossible... It is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest.

Dr. James L. Boyer of Winona Lake, Ind.: "I have never heard of, or read of any Greek scholar who would have agreed to the interpretation of this verse insisted upon by the Jehovah's Witnesses...I have never encountered one of them who had any knowledge of the Greek language.

Dr. Charles L. Feinberg of La Mirada, California: "I can assure you that the rendering which Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek Scholar"

The list of Greek scholars could of gone on and on but the point I am trying to make is that this group plays foot lose and fancy free with the Bible. You can only be a Jehovah's Witnesses if you take everything they tell you at face value. The Witnesses are told they can not read anything that would oppose their belief system. Charles Taze Russel who was the founder of their faith claimed that the Bible could only be understood throught his interpretations.

 

The JWs can read whatever they like. The thought that they are "not allowed" to read anything that goes against the teachings of the bible is simply not true. Are they encouraged to seek out other forms of biblical teachings? Well, no. What would be the point in that? They only teach what is in the NWT bible.

And I dont believe that Charles Taze Russell founded the faith. ( i think he founded the watchtower society, but not the JW fath. there is a difference) Infact there is a whole article on the JW's website (that jumbo provided a link to earlier) that talks about Russell and any invovlement with the witnesses.

edit: infact on the site they point out some "negative" things about russell. One being that he "supported erroneous, elaborate and detailed dates, charts, figures and prophecies"
Another being "name calling and imputing wrong motives of those who disagree."

infact, in one of the articles they call Mr. Russells reasoning "warped".

 

I have had JWs come to my door many times, and I always invite them into my house. I am a Christian and they always pass their written material on to me. Yet every time I try to give them Christian material, they refuse to accept it. Every time, mind you.
The Watchtower is like no other group I have seen. They can condem the one who got the ball rolling, yet without taking a breath, still embrace many of his teachings. It's like having your cake, and eating it to.