John 1:1

[FCEGM]

. . .Getting frustrated? Sorry if the truth wtings a bit. If you wish not to talke then you join the many other JW’s who could not continue to provide answers and left. I’m used to that… Anyway here it is. I can provide more detailed documents in a bit:
What is a Greek and Hebrew Scholar?
What is a Greek and Hebrew scholar? A Greek and Hebrew scholar is a person who has studied the Greek and Hebrew languages for many years. They understand all of the words from these languages and they know how to explain what the ancient words mean. When a scholar explains what a Hebrew or Greek word or sentence means in English, it is called translating. Bible scholars who translate are called **translators **because it’s their job to translate the Greek and Hebrew into English. The English bibles we have today were translated by scholars who read and understood the Hebrew and Greek languages. Even though he claimed to be a scholar, Charles Taze Russell was not a scholar. Court papers reveal a time when Russell was tested on his ability to translate the Greek language. They show that he didn’t have even the simplest of skills required to translate the Bible. In 1913, Christian scholars who did know Greek and Hebrew decided to challenge Russell in court. They charged him with lying to the public about being a scholar. Russell was brought into a court room where in front of a judge, jury and public audience, he was tested. In one of the tests, Russell was asked questions even the most poorly trained scholar would have been able to answer. He was asked to read from a verse in a Greek New Testament and simply give the names of Greek letters that the attorney pointed to. Below is the conversation between Russell and the court attorney
Attorney: “Do you know the Greek Alphabet?”
Russell: “Oh yes.”
Attorney: “Can you tell me the correct letters if you see them?”
Russell: “Some of them, I might make a mistake on some of them.”
Attorney: “Would you tell me the names of those on top of the page, page 447 I have got here?”
Russell: “Well, I don’t know that I would be able to.”
Attorney: “You can’t tell what those letters are, look at them and see if you know?”
Russell: “My way …” [Russell was interrupted]
Attorney: “Are you familiar with the Greek language?”
Russell: “No.”
As someone who does know the Greek Alphabet, I can tell you that it is impossible for Charles Taze Russell to have been a Greek scholar if he didn’t know the Greek alphabet. Just as you cannot read the English language without knowing the English alphabet, you cannot read and translate the Greek language unless you know the Greek alphabet. Russell was lying about being a scholar.

teach, what you present regarding Russell doesn’t give the full background of his testimony. Russell wasn’t brought to trial for his misrepresentations of himself, but, rather, he sued a Baptist pastor for defamatory libel for publishing a booklet charging that Russell “never attained the higher schools of learning; knows comparatively nothing of philosophy, systematic or historical theology, and is totally ignorant of the dead languages,” ( J. J. Ross, “Some Facts about the Self-Styled ‘Pastor’ Charles Taze Russell”, 1912). So Russell being the instigator of the suit tells us that he evaluated himself and his “scholarship” more highly than his subsequent testimony would allow.

 

[Tomster]

I would agree that it sounds like I know Greek better than did Russell, but at this point I have not seen anything from him that claims he was an expert on Greek and certainly not the insane claim that he was a native speaker of the original languages. I don’t have the time or inclination to argue against trumped up charges, particularly not in Sacred Scripture.

Are you saying that Russell understood Greek after the historical proof shows that by his own admission he did not understand any Greek AT ALL.

 

[Dan_Parker]

Are you saying that Russell understood Greek after the historical proof shows that by his own admission he did not understand any Greek AT ALL.

No, I said it sounds like I know Greek better than Russell. I said that the charge against him was trumped up. I have not seen him say he was an expert at Greek. I saw someone accuse him of that and saw him say that while he knew the alphabet he did not know it good enough to not make an occasional mistake. Also, Russell was not a translator. Anyone who knows English can read the transcript supplied on this thread and see that.

Where is the proof he claimed to be an expert at reading and translating Greek to English? I have never seen that. Can you provide it? You apparently are relying on that as a fact.

 

[JeanneH]

It is interesting that of everything I wrote that is all you came up with. Like I said, I’ve been on this dance floor before and I know the dance…teachccd

Hey Teachccd

List of the names that translated the NWT are:
Nathan Knorr, Albert Schroeder, George Ganmgas, Fred Franz, M. Henschel

 

[Dan_Parker]

teach, what you present regarding Russell doesn’t give the full background of his testimony. Russell wasn’t brought to trial for his misrepresentations of himself, but, rather, he sued a Baptist pastor for defamatory libel for publishing a booklet charging that Russell “never attained the higher schools of learning; knows comparatively nothing of philosophy, systematic or historical theology, and is totally ignorant of the dead languages,” ( J. J. Ross, “Some Facts about the Self-Styled ‘Pastor’ Charles Taze Russell”, 1912). So Russell being the instigator of the suit tells us that he evaluated himself and his “scholarship” more highly than his subsequent testimony would allow.

Where do you get your information from? It sounds like it is from an anti-JW web site. Would you expect such a site to any more unbiased that an anti-Catholic web site? I would like to see the entire transcript. Most slander is artfully contrived and interwoven with bits of truth along with misrepresentations and exaggerations. A Catholic on this site asserted dogmatically that Russell claimed to be a native speaker of the original languages. Where did that come from?

 

[John7]

List of the names that translated the NWT are:
Nathan Knorr, Albert Schroeder, George Ganmgas, Fred Franz, M. Henschel

AND
not a single PhD in Greek among them…oh what fine credentials
No wonder the NWT is so whacked

 

[FCEGM]

Where do you get your information from? It sounds like it is from an anti-JW web site. Would you expect such a site to any more unbiased that an anti-Catholic web site? I would like to see the entire transcript. Most slander is artfully contrived and interwoven with bits of truth along with misrepresentations and exaggerations. A Catholic on this site asserted dogmatically that Russell claimed to be a native speaker of the original languages. Where did that come from?

I can’t speak where teachccd got his information about Russell. Mine is from Jason Evert’s Answering Jehovah’s Witnesses and he got his information from the original source material footnoted in his book. Russell certainly considered the charges about his scholarly background libelous enough to sue; the case is from the High Court of Ontario and recorded “Russell vs. Ross” and not vice-versa. Also brought out in the trial were facts regarding Russell’s divorce which he earlier denied under oath.

 

[Tomster]

I can’t speak where teachccd got his information about Russell. Mine is from Jason Evert’s Answering Jehovah’s Witnesses and he got his information from the original source material footnoted in his book. Russell certainly considered the charges about his scholarly background libelous enough to sue; the case is from the High Court of Ontario and recorded “Russell vs. Ross” and not vice-versa. Also brought out in the trial were facts regarding Russell’s divorce which he earlier denied under oath.

A real class act that C.T. Russell.

 

[Tomster]

I don’t know if any one on this thread would be interested in this?

bible.ca/Jw-NWT.htm

I don’t know how legitimate this site is,. I am not familiar with it.

Thanks JeanneH. Section “E” is very revealing.

 

[FCEGM]

A real class act that C.T. Russell.

indeed.

 

[JeanneH]

Thanks JeanneH. Section “E” is very revealing.

I found it interesting too.
You are welcome.

 

[FCEGM]

Thanks JeanneH. Section “E” is very revealing.

I also found this little tidbit interesting: "He [Fred Franz] was further asked to explain how ‘translations and interpretations of the Bible were made’ Franz replied that they emanated from God: “passed to the Holy Spirit who, invisible, communicates with Jehovah’s Witnesses - and the publicity department.”

 

[Tomster]

I also found this little tidbit interesting: "He [Fred Franz] was further asked to explain how ‘translations and interpretations of the Bible were made’ Franz replied that they emanated from God: “passed to the Holy Spirit who, invisible, communicates with Jehovah’s Witnesses - and the publicity department.”

Ah-ha ! Just as I thought. The JW version of Sacred Tradition and an infallible teaching magisterium.

 

[Dan_Parker]

I can’t speak where teachccd got his information about Russell. Mine is from Jason Evert’s Answering Jehovah’s Witnesses and he got his information from the original source material footnoted in his book. Russell certainly considered the charges about his scholarly background libelous enough to sue; the case is from the High Court of Ontario and recorded “Russell vs. Ross” and not vice-versa. Also brought out in the trial were facts regarding Russell’s divorce which he earlier denied under oath.

Perhaps, but if there are a combination of accusations, some that are lies, some that are half truths and some that are exaggerations, I would expect something similar to the little snippet of that transcript to be presented by opposes of Jehovah’s Witnesses. I would like to see the entire transcript.

 

[teachccd]

What does a Jehovah’s Witness do when he/she can no longer have the upper hand? He/ she puts you on the “ignore” list. I guess when the truth hurts there is no other means of remaining in their monologue. I hope that the other Catholics out there will take over in showing Dan Parker the truth about Jesus Christ and His true Church. Imagine a JW coming on a Catholic forum and when he cannot continue to monologue with his rules then he ignores the Catholic. He never squarely answered any of my questions, ever. I’m leaving this thread with the hopes and prayers that you all will continue to point Dan in the right direction and I will continue to pray for him as I have been. This post is not meant to derail the thread. Please do not respond to it. I posted so much here to try to speak with a JW and, as usual, I got spoken to. And then, as usual, when he would not answer most of my questions, he ignores me. God bless all of you here… teachccd

 

[FCEGM]

Perhaps, but if there are a combination of accusations, some that are lies, some that are half truths and some that are exaggerations, I would expect something similar to the little snippet of that transcript to be presented by opposes of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

IF being the operative word.

 

[Dan_Parker]

IF being the operative word.

The one making the accusation bears the burden of proof. Would you expect a snippet carefully selected from a much longer court case, presented by opponents of JWs to be unbiased? What if it was about Catholics?

 

[teachccd]

**Dan Parke **As I promised, you are now on ignore.

Only on CAF can a Jehovah’s Witness disfellowship a Catholic. Sorry, I couldn’t resist…teachccd

 

[JeanneH]

Let us get back to the original topic:

John1:1 In the beginning was the Word ( can we all agree that the Word is Jesus?) and the Word was with God ( so in the beginning Jesus was with God. Not created just there. How can one separate God from His word? Take man. How can one separate man from his word. Man IS his word. If man isn’t his word then he is nothing) and the Word was God.
To me it is so simple to know that Jesus is God.
Just my thoughts.

As a side thought. JW’s are taught how to try and tear down what makes us Catholics/Christians. I have a copy of the Reasoning from Scriptures. They give them talking points when they knock on your door. If you say one thing they have a scripted answer. If you say something else they have a second scripted answer. ever notice that they don’t announce themselves as JW’s?

God Bless
Jeanne

 

[Tomster]

Perhaps, but if there are a combination of accusations, some that are lies, some that are half truths and some that are exaggerations, I would expect something similar to the little snippet of that transcript to be presented by opposes of Jehovah’s Witnesses. I would like to see the entire transcript.

I think the logical place to start would be the J.W. archives, don’t you?