H
Hellisreal
Guest
I could be wrong Steve, but I do belive it may be a rule violation to discuss the moderation activity on any poster here.
And, I know you would like to know that, as you should.
- Status
And, I know you would like to know that, as you should.
B
BrewMax
Guest
I have many relatives that are Jehovah’s witnesses and they claim to have the ONLY correctly translated Bible which we know to not be so. There are so many changes in their version.
H
Hellisreal
Guest
But, its most accurate.
This is why they need to analyze the biblical hewbrew and greek in the NWT.
I have no idea who is doing this, and neither does NWT Bible Steve.
He does not know, and that is kinda depressing really.
B
BrewMax
Guest
THE CONCEPT THAT I just cannot fathom is that JW’s do not believe that Jesus is God. How can you totally discount and ignore the several Scripture verses that clearly point to the fact that Jesus is God?? I mean, the Bibile screams it practically.
H
Hellisreal
Guest
Oh oh. They do have a script for this.
Just remember, they are sincere, I think. Most of them are anyway. The others are trapped and cant get out due to the nature of the group.
B
BibleSteve
Guest
B
BibleSteve
Guest
Hellisreal,
The answer is very simple. It’s just various indiviudal JW members who are personally interested in the topic of ancient languages. They read the detailed discussions in the WTS publication on the topic and then pick up various interlinears, word dictionaries, lexicons, etc. and do their own study. They then decide to get into discussions, analysis, and debates with other JW members.
I have done plenty of similar personal study. I don’t feel the need to debate with other JW members as this can quickly become divisive and argumentative.
T
TraditionalCath
Guest
oh yes, iam for real. it is in their own words from their own watchtower as you saw in my post. they do fear the internet. the one consolation is that biblesteve does not. for that, i must hand him credit even if we do not agree on any other issue.Are you serious? I knew they are totally against individuality but I never knew they had it in writing!
About the fear of the internet, yes it’s true. Almost in every meeting I went for over a year, the elders warned the members about the evils of the internet… of course they’re afraid of it, it contains access to the Truth!
H
Hellisreal
Guest
Yes, because if he is willing to do something his organization tells him he should do, and he is here, well- hand him credit?
I am not sure about that.
But, of course I am glad he is here so others can see that its not Okay for him to be here.
T
TraditionalCath
Guest
consider this, he is here and that is not approved by the elders. if they knew, he’d be in big trouble especially talking to ex witnesses like me. i’d be branded an apostate by their organization because i speak out and publish anti jw links and so on, yet he talks to me. at least he did in the recent past. he probably tells the elders nothing. i don’t know. iam not him. regardless, he is welcome here at CAF, and he is welcome to speak to me. iam glad he is here. maybe someday he will come to know what the REAL truth is, and that is not the society. one can only pray right?
B
BibleSteve
Guest
There is no prohibition about using the Internet…that is disinformation on the part of JW-critics. There have been many cautionary articles about dangerous aspects of the improper use of the Internet published in magazines like Time, Newsweek, and various newspapers throughout the country. Similar cautions have been written about in the WT magazine. There is nothing wrong with the technology, the issue is that of bad association and protecting yourself from online predators. Children need to be especially cautious.
There is also no prohibition against talking with people of other faiths, like Catholics, Protestants, Jews, or Muslims. We do this in the formal ministry, the informal ministry, and frankly, all day long in our secular vocations. We often talk to our neighbors informally about their religious beliefs, sharing and comparing.
I regularly talk with others of various faiths by means of the Internet because it allows for more detailed conversations than the simple “I’m not interested” which often get at the door.
As for talking with ex-JW’s, I don’t want to do that. I have proviously made comments regarding the content of their posts. And, I have mistakenly replied to certain comments without knowing they were former JW’s who have rejected our faith. I will need to be more careful in the future.
There is also no prohibition against talking with people of other faiths, like Catholics, Protestants, Jews, or Muslims. We do this in the formal ministry, the informal ministry, and frankly, all day long in our secular vocations. We often talk to our neighbors informally about their religious beliefs, sharing and comparing.
I regularly talk with others of various faiths by means of the Internet because it allows for more detailed conversations than the simple “I’m not interested” which often get at the door.
As for talking with ex-JW’s, I don’t want to do that. I have proviously made comments regarding the content of their posts. And, I have mistakenly replied to certain comments without knowing they were former JW’s who have rejected our faith. I will need to be more careful in the future.
B
BrewMax
Guest
Why is this? Forgive me here, but it looks to me like you fear that your faith may be shaken by talking to someone who has left your belief realm.
H
Hellisreal
Guest
Interestingly Catholic statement you make here.
I dont know if we use the same language so I need to know what you mean by vocation.
Peaked my interest, seeing you are all ministers anyway right? Female and male? Or wrong?
H
Hellisreal
Guest
He does not have a choice. He can not. And we must believe him and give him the benefit of the doubt he did not know about TC.
I happened to be on some threads with them both, so I doubt his long or short term memory on this one.
In fact, I think TC put me on ignore that day.
B
BibleSteve
Guest
There’s no fear there at all. I’m very likely more well-read on the anti-JW arguments than the vast majority of JW critics. I haven’t seen a new anti-JW argument or line of thinking in many years. The vast majority of anti-JW critics simple copy and paste information off the websites… they’ve never gone and checked the literature for accuracy, nor read books that explore both sides of the issue. Take for example, all the arguments about the accuracy of the NWT. Critics will copy and paste all sorts of quotes from other JWcritics, but how many will actually go and read the book: tinyurl.com/2hs6ho I’ve shown an open mind to read dozens of books critical of JW’s and the NWT. Will you pick up a book or two to understand the other side of the discussion?
Consider the process of excommunication in the Catholic Church. If someone has been excommunicated by the Church, will you associate with them? What is the guidance or request of your Church? As far as I understand, you are not supposed to associate with someone who has been excommunicated from your Church. Is this because you fear they will weaken your faith?
B
BrewMax
Guest
Maybe it’s possible. In all fairness, I have read much literature from JW’s. Many of my relatives are JW’s. I attended some of their Kingdom Hall meetings and a memorial service one year. I fathomed your views honestly and with a full hearted effort. Still though, there are many truths that I believe are being distorted, ignored or disguised in the NWT and muh of your literature. Is it your position that the NWT is the ONLY correctly translated version of Scripture??
B
BibleSteve
Guest
I was using the word vocation to indicate our secular employment, i.e. our jobs we go to each day to work and support our families financially.
During the course of the work day, during breaks, lunches, and informal chatting, the topic of religion, the Bible, our various faiths come up. I’ve had many very interesting discussions with Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Budhists, etc.
I’m not preaching to them about the JW faith during these conversations. I’m usually curious to learn what they believe, why they believe as they do, and if they have always held those beliefs. I do however answer any questions they have, and correct them regarding any disinformation they have heard from the JW-critics.
Whether I do this face to face, or over the Internet, it’s just a different medium for the same type of discussion.
Does that make sense?
B
BibleSteve
Guest
I own about 50 translations/versions. I think each has it’s own particular strength and weakness. I think it’s useful to compare how translators from various backgrounds choose to translate certain key scriptures. The book, tinyurl.com/2hs6ho is particularly interesting in analyzing the inherent bias that has been introduced in all of the traditional translations from Catholic and Protestant translators. The book is far more than a NWT discussion.
The NWT has various strengths. I have diligently compared it sentence by sentence against dozen’s of other translations, and against various Hebrew and Greek Interlinears, Word Dictionaries, etc. Based on my analysis, it is more accurate than others. It is not perfect, but no translation is perfect. Is it the “only correct” translation? I wouldn’t use that phrase. I have no problem using multiple translations. When it comes to a important doctrinal scripture, I think it’s best to look at 50-100 other translations before making your own personal decision about what the original text said.
I do think that a translation at the vary least should not eliminate the Divine Name (YHWH) and replace it with LORD. I think that is a travesty.
Once again, the book tinyurl.com/2hs6ho goes through the bias that has been introduced into 8 of the most popular translations. Most Christians are clueless about the level of bias that has been introduced into their favorite translation.
They simply want to argue that the NWT said something different than their own (biased) translation, thus the NWT must be wrong.
Check out the book; tinyurl.com/2hs6ho
It’s a good one.
B
BrewMax
Guest
Oh, I haven’t ever used that analogy, but I have been very objective in comparing the NWT with others I must admit. The very first chapter of John’s gospel does come right to mind though and I do want to address this to you if I may. In all translations I have ever read, they all say that the Word (Jesus) was with God (in the beginning) and the Word was God. The NWT however states that the Word was A god. This totally changes everything! I can’t help but think ‘how clever’, only one letter different and the meaning is metamorphasized. Can you tell me why this is?
T
TraditionalCath
Guest
you know jeff, and you have spoken to him as well as me in posts. that is a true fact. i don’t share your faith and i never will, so please, do not equate me with those have rejected"our faith". it is your faith my friend, not mine. i regret it ever had been mine at one point, but that is another story.
- Status