other bible jws use.

[Jane_Doe22]

Same here.
You came here on a Christian forum doing exactly that.

Actually no. See post #80.

 

[Triumph1300]

Well the BOM (Book of Mormon) Is only available within their Church

I bought one in a regular book store.

 

[djstav]

If you want me to clarify things in that regard, I'd be happy to.
If not, that's cool too. (But default I guess people aren't interested).

I'm not here to be proselytized at or to proselytize at anyone. I joined this board because I honestly greatly enjoy talking from people with all sorts of different views. I try to regularly attend churches beside my own for this reason as well, but lately scheduling has limited my IRL ability to visit people. Hence more trying to get out digitally. I find seeing these different views to greatly increase my own reflections, my understanding of other people, my love for other people, and just honestly.... *Jane struggles to find the right word here*.... watching diverse people's sing "Joy to the World" and celebrate God brings a huge smile to my face.

 

[djstav]

I bought one in a regular book store.

You did, weird. I accept that, and will correct my view's next time I talk about the BOM.

 

[OzSpen]

Probably because if they knew he was posting here for his own reasons, and not to spread watchtower dogma, he would be disfellowshiped.

He doesn't need to mention he's posting here. All he needs to ask is:

'I notice in the introduction to The New World Translation that it states the NWT was translated by the "New World Bible Translation Committee". I'd like to know, for my own interest, who was on this Committee. Did they know Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek languages of the Bible?'​

This will assist him to know if the NWT committee consists of people who knew the biblical languages and were able to translate accurately.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

no why do you need the names.

I would like to know their names and their qualifications in biblical languages to understand if they were capable of providing an accurate translation, using the original languages.

Isn't that a reasonable request?

 

[Mister Michael]

I would like to know their names and their qualifications in biblical languages to understand if they were capable of providing an accurate translation, using the original languages.

Isn't that a reasonable request?

i am sorry i don't have the names.

 

[OzSpen]

i don't question my watchtower i trust it.

Michael,

I'd like to encourage you to question whether the Watchtower can be trusted in giving the names of translators of the NWT and their qualifications in linguistics.

Could the Watchtower be trusted as an organisation, or does it need to be questioned?

This is what the NWT encourages you to do with any and all teaching:

10 Immediately by night the brothers sent both Paul and Silas to Be·roeʹa. On arriving, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thes·sa·lo·niʹca, for they accepted the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so (Acts 17:10-11 NWT, emphasis added).​

Here the Beroeans/Bereans accepted the word preached by Paul and Silas but they were 'carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so'.

The Bereans did not blindly accept what Paul and Silas preached. They compared the teaching with the Scriptures to see whether P & S were preaching the truth of the Word.

That's what I need to do and your own Bible encourages you to do the same.

Since you can trust the Watchtower, why don't you trust it to provide you with the names and linguistic qualifications of the translators of the NWT?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

i am sorry i don't have the names.

Michael,


However, you could obtain the names by asking the organisation to provide them to you, along with qualifications in the biblical languages.

This is important because if translators don't know the grammar and syntax of a language, they can lead us astray with translations that are not true to the original languages.

I've checked JW.org online and I can't locate the members of the Translation Committee. Your organisation would know their names.

Why don't you ask them and share the names with us?

Oz

 

[Mister Michael]

He doesn't need to mention he's posting here. All he needs to ask is:

'I notice in the introduction to The New World Translation that it states the NWT was translated by the "New World Bible Translation Committee". I'd like to know, for my own interest, who was on this Committee. Did they know Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek languages of the Bible?'​

This will assist him to know if the NWT committee consists of people who knew the biblical languages and were able to translate accurately.

Oz

Did the founder know greek or hebrew?

 

[Mister Michael]

Michael,

I'd like to encourage you to question whether the Watchtower can be trusted in giving the names of translators of the NWT and their qualifications in linguistics.

Could the Watchtower be trusted as an organisation, or does it need to be questioned?

This is what the NWT encourages you to do with any and all teaching:

10 Immediately by night the brothers sent both Paul and Silas to Be·roeʹa. On arriving, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thes·sa·lo·niʹca, for they accepted the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so (Acts 17:10-11 NWT, emphasis added).​

Here the Beroeans/Bereans accepted the word preached by Paul and Silas but they 'carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so'.

The Bereans did not blindly accept what Paul and Silas preached. They compared the teaching with the Scriptures to see whether P & S were preaching the truth of the Word.

That's what I need to do and your own Bible encourages you to do the same.

Oz

Its bad to ask questions

 

[OzSpen]

Itself, John 10:35, among other places, as already cited, and further.

This is what John 10:35 states: 'If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came (and the scripture cannot be broken)....'

There is not a word in this verse that says the KJV is 'the perfectly preserved word of God'. You have imposed that meaning on the text.

Do you know what that action is called?

 

[OzSpen]

Did the founder know greek or hebrew?

Michael,

My question did not relate to the founder of the JWs knowing Greek or Hebrew. However, since the JW organisation has translated a Bible, the translators need to have had an in-depth understanding of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.

Why can't you obtain their names to share here?

Oz

 

[Mister Michael]

This is what John 10:35 states: 'If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came (and the scripture cannot be broken)....'

There is not a word in this verse that says the KJV is 'the perfectly preserved word of God'. You have imposed that meaning on the text.

Do you know what that action is called?

no i don't

 

[Mister Michael]

Michael,

My question did not relate to the founder of the JWs knowing Greek or Hebrew. However, since the JW organisation has translated a Bible, the translators need to have had an in-depth understanding of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.

Why can't you obtain their names to share here?

Oz

Hey do you fully understand and speak and write in all original bible languages

 

[OzSpen]

no i don't

You were not the one to whom I was responding.

When a person adds to what the text states, that person does not get the meaning out of the text (called exegesis) but inserts meaning into the text (called eisegesis).

See these brief articles:

• What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis?

• What is good biblical exegesis?

Oz

 

[Mister Michael]

Michael,

My question did not relate to the founder of the JWs knowing Greek or Hebrew. However, since the JW organisation has translated a Bible, the translators need to have had an in-depth understanding of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.

Why can't you obtain their names to share here?

Oz

Lets say i did ask. What if they say to me "those names are classified"

You seem really eager to dig up dirt on jws

Are you part of some anti jw website.

You just want "evidence" to support your anti jw front

 

[Mister Michael]

You were not the one to whom I was responding.

When a person adds to what the text states, that person does not get the meaning out of the text (called exegesis) but inserts meaning into the text (called eisegesis).

See these brief articles:

• What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis?

okay what's the true meaning of the text to you

 

[TheHolyBookEnds]

This is what John 10:35 states: 'If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came (and the scripture cannot be broken)....'

There is not a word in this verse that says the KJV is 'the perfectly preserved word of God'. You have imposed that meaning on the text.

Do you know what that action is called?

No. This is what the scripture (KJB) states:

Joh 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;

Whatever you quoted, added to God's word, a parenthetical brackets, which if you understood why that is done, then you would understand John 10:35.

Real scripture, "cannot be broken". It self identified itself.

 

[OzSpen]

Hey do you fully understand and speak and write in all original bible languages

Michael,

That is not what I asked, so your response is a red herring logical fallacy.

A red herring also is called changing the subject, clouding the issue.

Those who use it (and it's what you did with your response) make an attempt to redirect the argument to another issue with which they are more comfortable in responding. It's a deliberate diversion from the topic being pursued.

I urge you not to do that because it makes it impossible to have a logical discussion on the topic being pursued.

Please ask your organisation for the names and linguistic qualifications of the translation committee of the NWT.

Oz