also, another reason it's done is because dishonest conveniently-omitting-facts types like you GIVE THE FALSE IMPRESSION all the time that it's like ONLY the NWT that has rendered this Verse that way or that it's unique only to the NWT, and as (urrgh) "corruption." When that simply isn't true. You leave out (or obscure) that it's because John 14:14 "ask Me" DOES NOT HAVE SOLID MSS BACKING, that even some pro-Trinity Bibles have admitted. Parallel stuff is valid, get over it...and stop whining.
@sweetmuzix If the WT had any respect for MSS evidence the would not add the word "Jehovah" 200 plus times in the NWT. Not a single Mss ever uses the divine name. Do which is it? Are you going to argue mss evidence in one place and then ignore it in another?
@21crosscheck21 nice dodge....to the actual specifics of John 14:14, and your DEBACLE with that one...lol...so like a typical fallacious debater (religious fanatics like you are not deterred by facts.....the more confused you get......the more you re-double your efforts) you JUMP ONTO SOMETHING ELSE, like "aahh, but the NWT put 'Jehovah' in the NT," arf arf... EVADING the original discussion, and the MSS problems with putting "ask Me" in John 14:14. And JWs are accused of "jumping" around...lol
you show (as usual) that you miss the point. The NWT did not translate John 14:14 without the word "Me" in there SIMPLY BECAUSE a number of other Bible versions left out that word too. (Facepalm) The only reason that it's brought up to types like you is TO MAKE THE POINT THAT EVEN PRO-TRINITARIAN TRANSLATIONS KNEW THAT MANUSCRIPT EVIDENCE SHOWED A LACK OF THE WORD "ME" IN THERE. Do you finally get it now? It IS legitimate to point that out, as a side point.....Again, though, it's MSS EVIDENCE !
@sweetmuzix Actually the earliest and best manuscripts DO contain the word "me" (Including the base mss of the nwt I might add) The only reason some English versions leave it out is that they believe it to be so obviously implied in the text that it seems redundant. Get your mss information right my friend,,,, earliest and best contain it... deal with it.
So why argue Mss evidence but ignore it for the divine name?
@21crosscheck21 which "best and earliest" manuscripts? Making things up again? or just WANTING it to be that way? LOL. And no, you're wrong, the other Versions that leave out "ask Me" do it NOT because they thought it was implied anyway, cuz if that's the case, why raise the fuss against the NWT for that Verse? No, they left it out cuz of WEAK MSS SUPPORT FOR IT. And like I said, the ones that do have it, IN THE FOOTNOTES say "some MSS leave out 'Me'". Meaning that it has DOUBTFUL support.
@sweetmuzix I suggest you do a little homework my friend. "SOME" mss do not contain it... very true. MOST do including the earliest and most complete. The question is why translate from the WH as the jws do if it's corrupted? There is no possible good explanation for that.
check out the video i have in my faves called "mystery, babylon the great". tell me what you think and keep in mind that God told us to "get out of her my people", he was referring to babylonish teachings and symbols. christmas, easter and the cross are all included. hoper you enjoy the video, the music is cool too, lol.
you like to bring up the NWT and say it is corrupt but your wrong, it is actually the most accurate translation and has even reinserted Gods name Jehovah where as most other bibles have replaced Gods name with LORD or GOD in an attempt to make/force the reader to identify God as Jesus. Nevertheless when i was studying with the JW's i used a KJV, and still had no problem seeing the truth. I know how to get to the kingdom, its by imitating Jesus and remaining faithful to the end, just as he did.
K, let me ask you this. Would you at least agree that John 1:1, Titus 2:13, and Hebrews chapter 1 read different in the KJV, and that these differences are significant?
you mean where it says "in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was a god, this one was in the beginning with God"? in greek the word God and god are written in different forms. when referring to God almight it is used in the singular form of the word God, but when speaking of a god in general the plural form of the word is used. in john 1:1 the KJV ignores the differences and uses the singular form of the word God everytime. How irresponsible!
K... you seem to be confused. Both the Greek words God in John 1:1 are singular. In addition, the Nwt does not translate the word God in John 1:1 as plural either, because it is not. I don't think that even the WT would agree with you on you Greek.
So would you agree or not that the differences in the verses are significant?
no buddy im not confused, infact its hilarious how narrowmindedly you keep making things up. a form of the word god is written 3 times in the scripture John 1:1 not twice. Its singular then plural then back to singular. 21crosscheck21 you are not honesthearted and you are here to make your argument no matter how wrong you are or no matter if you are proven wrong. another words your here to waste my time. peace
k- I don't see a reason to get so upset. 1:1 reads in the NWT "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. I see to forms of Theos (God) in this verse and they are both singular. The reason they are spelled different is that the first is accusative and the second is nominative. Where is the third?
I thought you were talking only about 1:1. I didn't know you were including the second verse. So which Theos do you believe to be plural.
Also, if you have an article from a wt or a web site I would be happy to check it out. But I have never heard anyone make the case before that you have made here. A source would be helpful.
How about you tell me what you believe. You like to sit there and ask question after question that gets the one answering no where since your only focus is trying to find a way to place doubt. I have no doubt in what i believe since its bible based. If you have truly studied the scripture and still cannot see the truth then you are spiritually blind. Sorry but there are those that want to listen and need the truth in there lives. peace
K, I am not trying to find your place of doubt, you made a statement and I was telling you why I disagreed. I more than willing to answer any question you have, so fire away. You asked what do I believe. Thats kind of general, can you be more specific?
Do you observer the celebrations of christmas, easter, new years, and holloween? When i say observer i mean celebrate. Do you believe wear a cross, have a cross in your home or attend a church with a cross either on it or in it? And do you believe that Jesus and Jehovah are the exact same person? Please answer all the questions. just a yes or no, not an explanation. then we can go from there.
Do you observer the celebrations of christmas YES, easter YES, new years No, and holloween? NO When i say observer i mean celebrate. Do you believe wear a cross,NO have a cross in your home or attend a church with a cross either on it or in it? YES And do you believe that Jesus and Jehovah are the exact same person? NO
if you have researched these issues then why celebrate pagan holidays and why attend a church that uses pagan idols? You cant disagree that christmas is pagan(sol invictus) and the cross is a symbol for tammuz a sun god and son of nimrod. Its not christian at all. It was adopted by christendom but not christian at all. Its a shame that you know they are wrong and yet you do it.
K- If Christians worshiped a pagan God on Christmas I would agree, but they don't, they celebrate the birth of the Christ. To condemn Christians for celebrating Christ birth is a sin according to Romans 14.
" 5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord....10You, then, why do you judge your brother?"
I regard that Day as special to the Lord. As far as the cross goes as a symbol, it is wrong to worship the cross and I know Christians who do, but as far as it being a symbol of Christ sacrifice on our behalf it goes back to the first century.
christmas is a wolve in sheeps clothing and we as christians were warned by our lord jesus christ to beware of them. Just because it is disguised as Jesus dont make it him. The word Easter and the symbols of the egg and rabbit are all pagan not related to christ whatsoever. Dont play dumb with God. The beginning of wisdom is the fear of God. Of course its a loving fear like the fear of displeasing him. Your scriptures dont support your excuses and you should do as the bible says.
K- I don't consider an admonition by scripture to be an excuse. Scripture is crystal clear on that subject. Jws wear wedding rings and go on honeymoons with a clear conscience because they do it to the Lord, even though both have pagan roots.. To think that Christians are worshiping a pagan deity on Christmas is nonsense.
okay well if you dont think that celebrating christmas and easter is wrong then you seem to pick and choose when to apply scripture that is crystal clear and when not. "Have no other gods befor me", and the scriptures are crystal clear of idol worship and or the making or having of them. Its cool, now i see crystal clear why you aint a JW. PEACE!
I dont go out in service to argue doctrine nor do i tell people that they are being taught lies by there church, i simply show them from the bible and i encourage them to use there own copy of the bible and let them see and say for themselves if they think that they have been lied to. I teach from the bible, if you dont like what we teach take it up with God, he gave me the word of truth.
K- you do realize that the bible tells us we are to"contend for the Faith" and correct erroneous teachings don't you? Do you realize that a large part of the epistles deal with false doctrine, and leaders, and teachings and sects?
Is it unloving to warn someone that they are in danger?
no it is not unloving to tell someone that they are in danger of believing in false doctrines that will lead them to the road that leads to destruction. But it is unloving to falsely accuse someone of being a liar or as satan did, to tell someone they are being lied to by there loving God and father Jehovah. Do you believe in the trinity, celebration of christmas, and easter? If so then it is pretty foolish to not research the origins of your own doctrines. If you did you would understand.
K- I understand the origins of all these doctrines but I am not sure what any of that has to do with the content of this video. Jwapologist simply cherry picked bible versions to create the illusion that the Nwt is in harmony with mainstream bibles. The problem with that is they are not and the NWT stands alone as a corrupt version of the scriptures.
When the scribes and pharisees would listen to Jesus speak, they were always looking for him to make a mistake or trip him up, and were never interested in what he had to say, only in hoping to catch him say or do the wrong thing...wow, that sounds kinda familiar.
Its not too late crosscheck, submit to the holy spirit and allow Jesus to guide you to everlasting life in a paradise earth, dont do as man has for milleniums and oppose Jehovah. Even paul had a chance to get on God's side, U can 2
k- Unlike the wt, I impose no dress codes, I do not run an organization that claims to be the only one preaching the truth, I do not tell people only my bible is accurate. I simply point out that you are misled and beg you to repent and trust in Christ and Christ alone for your salvation. If that makes me a pharisee in youre eyes.....then you have alot to learn about the scriptures.
that is because you aint teaching nor preaching the truth. I do trust in christ and i follow him, but i dont worship him as God. Research the origin of the cross and easter, christmas and see for yourself that they are pagan. The trinity is not biblical and is also pagan. I came from christendom and i know all the hate the exists for JW's.
k- If I give you the impression that I hate Jws I am sorry. This is not true. What is true is that I believe that the Wt is preaching another gospel and I am simply warning people not to follow them. Is it unloving to do so? Doesn't the WT do the same?
Read the gospel and pay close attention to how Jesus was so focused on his kingdom. He taught us to pray for it, to seek it first, and that the good news of the kingdom would be preached in all the world befor the end would come
K... The kingdom is useless to you my friend if you do not no how to get there. The WT teaches a faith + works plan of salvation that offends God and makes null and void the sacrifice of his son, and they have altered the scriptures in order to support this false Gospel.
faith+works is scriptural, what else do you think it means when the bible says that faith without works is dead? Jesus told his disciples to seek the kingdom and said that the good news of the kingdom would be preached in all the inhabited earth, so how do you expect that would be possible unless his people go out and teach it. The first century christians were very busy teaching the good news of the kingdom and all there faith was backed up with works.
crosscheck could care less about truth or accuracy, he is far more desperate to try and find any if possible errors in the NWT or even the WT. Imperfection is abundant in this world crosscheck, so a mistake or misprint is possible in an unperfect world. You should align your focus on what Jesus was focused on and thats the Kingdom.
p, I don't know the exact count but I am sure that at least 15 other translations did not include "me." But I also realize that you do not test a translation by other translations.
21cr: "It's Déjà vu all over again." It has been obvious to me all along that you said nothing about the other 15 translations and no implication to the contrary was intented, cleverly or otherwise. However, what is obvious to me is not obvious to you, especially considering your unfounded suspicions of me. All of which I should have taken into account. Therefore, given all those circumstances, I admit and apologise for the third question's poor form.
21cr: It's plain to see you have done it again- misunderstood the written word. Obviously it's not so plain to you. Read mine again. Note all three are Questions and note that all words attributed to you are carefully, as usual, within quotation marks. Obviously you have said nothing about the other 15 translations. Obviously no one is saying that you did so. B, really if you would just slow down a bit you could cut your errors by half at least.
p, let me quote you: "21cr, So would you have us believe that of the 16 translations, 15 had a good reason to "remove" the word and one had "ONLY" an ulterior motive?"
You imply that I said 15 had a good reason to remove the word. I said no such thing. Clever to disguise the misrepresentation in the form of a question, but the question is not based on anything that I actually said.
21cr: Isn't your, "These words have been removed ONLY because they contradict WT doctrine", wrong? Or would you have us believe that the other 15 translations, in fact, did the same, "...ONLY because they contradict WT doctrine"?
Let me add that in the NWT,a clear pattern of abuse is evident, and it is of great interest that these abuses occur in areas where a correct translation of the text would injure their doctrinal position. Then these altered texts are used as proof texts. In addition the NWT claims to be a literal translation.That is why it moves beyond unfortunate choices into the realm of corruption.
If you are interested in testing translation by translation perhaps you didn't see the video.
p- you have lamented a number of times that I can't follow the written word or that I misrepresent you. Its fine to accuse me of that but don't be a hypocrite. I never said that it was good that those translations removed the words, I never even hinted that it was good.
Rob, if you really would like to understand, then pick up a copy of BeDuhn's book. If you compare multiple translations, you'll note that 95%+ of the sentences are translated reasonably the same. But, when it comes to key doctrinal scriptures, the translators inadvertantly insert the bias they're predisposed to believe. It's not that they're evil, it's just natural. BeDuhn documents the specifics...
You mention Beduhn, Do you agree with what he says about the insertion of Jehovah in the NT or are you cherry picking? If he is so grand in his observations shouldn't you agree with him here as well?
It is interesting how Jws will cling to and promote the one scholar who agrees with them and discount all the others. Bias on your part?
I am sure that crosscheck does not hate God and His people :) But since you seem to think otherwise, perhaps you should personally ask him before making that assumption and posting things that are quite possibly...well to be blunt, lies. After all, I know that as a JW you must be someone greatly concerned with finding out and proclaiming the truth :)
JW- I thought JW were suppose to be caring and loving, all you do is spit out garbage and accusations. You are not a good representative for your god I bet he is ashamed, I know I would be.
also, another reason it's done is because dishonest conveniently-omitting-facts types like you GIVE THE FALSE IMPRESSION all the time that it's like ONLY the NWT that has rendered this Verse that way or that it's unique only to the NWT, and as (urrgh) "corruption." When that simply isn't true. You leave out (or obscure) that it's because John 14:14 "ask Me" DOES NOT HAVE SOLID MSS BACKING, that even some pro-Trinity Bibles have admitted. Parallel stuff is valid, get over it...and stop whining.
sweetmuzix 1 year ago
@sweetmuzix If the WT had any respect for MSS evidence the would not add the word "Jehovah" 200 plus times in the NWT. Not a single Mss ever uses the divine name. Do which is it? Are you going to argue mss evidence in one place and then ignore it in another?
21crosscheck21 1 year ago
Comment removed
sweetmuzix 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@21crosscheck21 nice dodge....to the actual specifics of John 14:14, and your DEBACLE with that one...lol...so like a typical fallacious debater (religious fanatics like you are not deterred by facts.....the more confused you get......the more you re-double your efforts) you JUMP ONTO SOMETHING ELSE, like "aahh, but the NWT put 'Jehovah' in the NT," arf arf... EVADING the original discussion, and the MSS problems with putting "ask Me" in John 14:14. And JWs are accused of "jumping" around...lol
sweetmuzix 1 year ago
Comment removed
sweetmuzix 1 year ago
you show (as usual) that you miss the point. The NWT did not translate John 14:14 without the word "Me" in there SIMPLY BECAUSE a number of other Bible versions left out that word too. (Facepalm) The only reason that it's brought up to types like you is TO MAKE THE POINT THAT EVEN PRO-TRINITARIAN TRANSLATIONS KNEW THAT MANUSCRIPT EVIDENCE SHOWED A LACK OF THE WORD "ME" IN THERE. Do you finally get it now? It IS legitimate to point that out, as a side point.....Again, though, it's MSS EVIDENCE !
sweetmuzix 1 year ago
@sweetmuzix Actually the earliest and best manuscripts DO contain the word "me" (Including the base mss of the nwt I might add) The only reason some English versions leave it out is that they believe it to be so obviously implied in the text that it seems redundant. Get your mss information right my friend,,,, earliest and best contain it... deal with it.
So why argue Mss evidence but ignore it for the divine name?
21crosscheck21 1 year ago
@21crosscheck21 which "best and earliest" manuscripts? Making things up again? or just WANTING it to be that way? LOL. And no, you're wrong, the other Versions that leave out "ask Me" do it NOT because they thought it was implied anyway, cuz if that's the case, why raise the fuss against the NWT for that Verse? No, they left it out cuz of WEAK MSS SUPPORT FOR IT. And like I said, the ones that do have it, IN THE FOOTNOTES say "some MSS leave out 'Me'". Meaning that it has DOUBTFUL support.
sweetmuzix 1 year ago
@sweetmuzix I suggest you do a little homework my friend. "SOME" mss do not contain it... very true. MOST do including the earliest and most complete. The question is why translate from the WH as the jws do if it's corrupted? There is no possible good explanation for that.
21crosscheck21 1 year ago
Comment removed
sweetmuzix 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
lets face it we came from No where and idenity
came about first miricle and it seems an infinite amount of beings can appear from nowhere
then that identity disapears into no where again but in between it needs to believe because identity cannot see itself as not to be.
The act of believing is part of our make up.
Think about it why are people trying to interpret the Bible surely God all knowing would ensure the correct interpretation of his own word
riciard55 3 years ago
check out the video i have in my faves called "mystery, babylon the great". tell me what you think and keep in mind that God told us to "get out of her my people", he was referring to babylonish teachings and symbols. christmas, easter and the cross are all included. hoper you enjoy the video, the music is cool too, lol.
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
Hope you will enjoy video response regarding John 1:1.
PhaqtebiDaBiblia 3 years ago
you like to bring up the NWT and say it is corrupt but your wrong, it is actually the most accurate translation and has even reinserted Gods name Jehovah where as most other bibles have replaced Gods name with LORD or GOD in an attempt to make/force the reader to identify God as Jesus. Nevertheless when i was studying with the JW's i used a KJV, and still had no problem seeing the truth. I know how to get to the kingdom, its by imitating Jesus and remaining faithful to the end, just as he did.
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
K, let me ask you this. Would you at least agree that John 1:1, Titus 2:13, and Hebrews chapter 1 read different in the KJV, and that these differences are significant?
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
you mean where it says "in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was a god, this one was in the beginning with God"? in greek the word God and god are written in different forms. when referring to God almight it is used in the singular form of the word God, but when speaking of a god in general the plural form of the word is used. in john 1:1 the KJV ignores the differences and uses the singular form of the word God everytime. How irresponsible!
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
K... you seem to be confused. Both the Greek words God in John 1:1 are singular. In addition, the Nwt does not translate the word God in John 1:1 as plural either, because it is not. I don't think that even the WT would agree with you on you Greek.
So would you agree or not that the differences in the verses are significant?
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
no buddy im not confused, infact its hilarious how narrowmindedly you keep making things up. a form of the word god is written 3 times in the scripture John 1:1 not twice. Its singular then plural then back to singular. 21crosscheck21 you are not honesthearted and you are here to make your argument no matter how wrong you are or no matter if you are proven wrong. another words your here to waste my time. peace
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
k- I don't see a reason to get so upset. 1:1 reads in the NWT "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. I see to forms of Theos (God) in this verse and they are both singular. The reason they are spelled different is that the first is accusative and the second is nominative. Where is the third?
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2He was with God in the beginning.
the third is in the second verse. it starts with God the almight, then a god jesus, then back to God the almighty
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
I thought you were talking only about 1:1. I didn't know you were including the second verse. So which Theos do you believe to be plural.
Also, if you have an article from a wt or a web site I would be happy to check it out. But I have never heard anyone make the case before that you have made here. A source would be helpful.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
How about you tell me what you believe. You like to sit there and ask question after question that gets the one answering no where since your only focus is trying to find a way to place doubt. I have no doubt in what i believe since its bible based. If you have truly studied the scripture and still cannot see the truth then you are spiritually blind. Sorry but there are those that want to listen and need the truth in there lives. peace
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
K, I am not trying to find your place of doubt, you made a statement and I was telling you why I disagreed. I more than willing to answer any question you have, so fire away. You asked what do I believe. Thats kind of general, can you be more specific?
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
Do you observer the celebrations of christmas, easter, new years, and holloween? When i say observer i mean celebrate. Do you believe wear a cross, have a cross in your home or attend a church with a cross either on it or in it? And do you believe that Jesus and Jehovah are the exact same person? Please answer all the questions. just a yes or no, not an explanation. then we can go from there.
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
Do you observer the celebrations of christmas YES, easter YES, new years No, and holloween? NO When i say observer i mean celebrate. Do you believe wear a cross,NO have a cross in your home or attend a church with a cross either on it or in it? YES And do you believe that Jesus and Jehovah are the exact same person? NO
Have I researched these issues... YES
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
if you have researched these issues then why celebrate pagan holidays and why attend a church that uses pagan idols? You cant disagree that christmas is pagan(sol invictus) and the cross is a symbol for tammuz a sun god and son of nimrod. Its not christian at all. It was adopted by christendom but not christian at all. Its a shame that you know they are wrong and yet you do it.
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
K- If Christians worshiped a pagan God on Christmas I would agree, but they don't, they celebrate the birth of the Christ. To condemn Christians for celebrating Christ birth is a sin according to Romans 14.
" 5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord....10You, then, why do you judge your brother?"
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
I regard that Day as special to the Lord. As far as the cross goes as a symbol, it is wrong to worship the cross and I know Christians who do, but as far as it being a symbol of Christ sacrifice on our behalf it goes back to the first century.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
christmas is a wolve in sheeps clothing and we as christians were warned by our lord jesus christ to beware of them. Just because it is disguised as Jesus dont make it him. The word Easter and the symbols of the egg and rabbit are all pagan not related to christ whatsoever. Dont play dumb with God. The beginning of wisdom is the fear of God. Of course its a loving fear like the fear of displeasing him. Your scriptures dont support your excuses and you should do as the bible says.
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
K- I don't consider an admonition by scripture to be an excuse. Scripture is crystal clear on that subject. Jws wear wedding rings and go on honeymoons with a clear conscience because they do it to the Lord, even though both have pagan roots.. To think that Christians are worshiping a pagan deity on Christmas is nonsense.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
okay well if you dont think that celebrating christmas and easter is wrong then you seem to pick and choose when to apply scripture that is crystal clear and when not. "Have no other gods befor me", and the scriptures are crystal clear of idol worship and or the making or having of them. Its cool, now i see crystal clear why you aint a JW. PEACE!
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
I dont go out in service to argue doctrine nor do i tell people that they are being taught lies by there church, i simply show them from the bible and i encourage them to use there own copy of the bible and let them see and say for themselves if they think that they have been lied to. I teach from the bible, if you dont like what we teach take it up with God, he gave me the word of truth.
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
K- you do realize that the bible tells us we are to"contend for the Faith" and correct erroneous teachings don't you? Do you realize that a large part of the epistles deal with false doctrine, and leaders, and teachings and sects?
Is it unloving to warn someone that they are in danger?
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
no it is not unloving to tell someone that they are in danger of believing in false doctrines that will lead them to the road that leads to destruction. But it is unloving to falsely accuse someone of being a liar or as satan did, to tell someone they are being lied to by there loving God and father Jehovah. Do you believe in the trinity, celebration of christmas, and easter? If so then it is pretty foolish to not research the origins of your own doctrines. If you did you would understand.
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
K- I understand the origins of all these doctrines but I am not sure what any of that has to do with the content of this video. Jwapologist simply cherry picked bible versions to create the illusion that the Nwt is in harmony with mainstream bibles. The problem with that is they are not and the NWT stands alone as a corrupt version of the scriptures.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
When the scribes and pharisees would listen to Jesus speak, they were always looking for him to make a mistake or trip him up, and were never interested in what he had to say, only in hoping to catch him say or do the wrong thing...wow, that sounds kinda familiar.
Its not too late crosscheck, submit to the holy spirit and allow Jesus to guide you to everlasting life in a paradise earth, dont do as man has for milleniums and oppose Jehovah. Even paul had a chance to get on God's side, U can 2
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
k- Unlike the wt, I impose no dress codes, I do not run an organization that claims to be the only one preaching the truth, I do not tell people only my bible is accurate. I simply point out that you are misled and beg you to repent and trust in Christ and Christ alone for your salvation. If that makes me a pharisee in youre eyes.....then you have alot to learn about the scriptures.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
that is because you aint teaching nor preaching the truth. I do trust in christ and i follow him, but i dont worship him as God. Research the origin of the cross and easter, christmas and see for yourself that they are pagan. The trinity is not biblical and is also pagan. I came from christendom and i know all the hate the exists for JW's.
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
k- If I give you the impression that I hate Jws I am sorry. This is not true. What is true is that I believe that the Wt is preaching another gospel and I am simply warning people not to follow them. Is it unloving to do so? Doesn't the WT do the same?
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
Read the gospel and pay close attention to how Jesus was so focused on his kingdom. He taught us to pray for it, to seek it first, and that the good news of the kingdom would be preached in all the world befor the end would come
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
K... The kingdom is useless to you my friend if you do not no how to get there. The WT teaches a faith + works plan of salvation that offends God and makes null and void the sacrifice of his son, and they have altered the scriptures in order to support this false Gospel.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
faith+works is scriptural, what else do you think it means when the bible says that faith without works is dead? Jesus told his disciples to seek the kingdom and said that the good news of the kingdom would be preached in all the inhabited earth, so how do you expect that would be possible unless his people go out and teach it. The first century christians were very busy teaching the good news of the kingdom and all there faith was backed up with works.
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
crosscheck could care less about truth or accuracy, he is far more desperate to try and find any if possible errors in the NWT or even the WT. Imperfection is abundant in this world crosscheck, so a mistake or misprint is possible in an unperfect world. You should align your focus on what Jesus was focused on and thats the Kingdom.
k4pbizerk 3 years ago
k, are you saying that Jesus was not interested in spending time to correct error?
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
p, I don't know the exact count but I am sure that at least 15 other translations did not include "me." But I also realize that you do not test a translation by other translations.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
21cr: Do you agree that not less than 15 other translations, after studying the John 14:14 Greek, also decided not to include "me"?
anarthrousPNs 3 years ago
21cr: "It's Déjà vu all over again." It has been obvious to me all along that you said nothing about the other 15 translations and no implication to the contrary was intented, cleverly or otherwise. However, what is obvious to me is not obvious to you, especially considering your unfounded suspicions of me. All of which I should have taken into account. Therefore, given all those circumstances, I admit and apologise for the third question's poor form.
anarthrousPNs 3 years ago
21cr: It's plain to see you have done it again- misunderstood the written word. Obviously it's not so plain to you. Read mine again. Note all three are Questions and note that all words attributed to you are carefully, as usual, within quotation marks. Obviously you have said nothing about the other 15 translations. Obviously no one is saying that you did so. B, really if you would just slow down a bit you could cut your errors by half at least.
anarthrousPNs 3 years ago
p, let me quote you: "21cr, So would you have us believe that of the 16 translations, 15 had a good reason to "remove" the word and one had "ONLY" an ulterior motive?"
You imply that I said 15 had a good reason to remove the word. I said no such thing. Clever to disguise the misrepresentation in the form of a question, but the question is not based on anything that I actually said.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
21cr: Isn't your, "These words have been removed ONLY because they contradict WT doctrine", wrong? Or would you have us believe that the other 15 translations, in fact, did the same, "...ONLY because they contradict WT doctrine"?
anarthrousPNs 3 years ago
The WT had the motive.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
4/26/08
21cr, So would you have us believe that of the 16 translations, 15 had a good reason to "remove" the word and one had "ONLY" an ulterior motive?
anarthrousPNs 3 years ago
Let me add that in the NWT,a clear pattern of abuse is evident, and it is of great interest that these abuses occur in areas where a correct translation of the text would injure their doctrinal position. Then these altered texts are used as proof texts. In addition the NWT claims to be a literal translation.That is why it moves beyond unfortunate choices into the realm of corruption.
If you are interested in testing translation by translation perhaps you didn't see the video.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
p- you have lamented a number of times that I can't follow the written word or that I misrepresent you. Its fine to accuse me of that but don't be a hypocrite. I never said that it was good that those translations removed the words, I never even hinted that it was good.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
when you said how these scholars twisted these words that sounds familiar jws have also twisted the words of justin martyr and others
Cephas112 3 years ago
very true, biblebill1 has made great videos abut that subject.
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
Wow! Excellent information on translations!!!
You're very correct in the matter that the KIT english side differs from the actual Greek.
This was one of the most revealing vids I've seen.
BibleBill1 3 years ago 2
"I can't understand...."
Rob, if you really would like to understand, then pick up a copy of BeDuhn's book. If you compare multiple translations, you'll note that 95%+ of the sentences are translated reasonably the same. But, when it comes to key doctrinal scriptures, the translators inadvertantly insert the bias they're predisposed to believe. It's not that they're evil, it's just natural. BeDuhn documents the specifics...
biblestudentSteve 3 years ago
You mention Beduhn, Do you agree with what he says about the insertion of Jehovah in the NT or are you cherry picking? If he is so grand in his observations shouldn't you agree with him here as well?
It is interesting how Jws will cling to and promote the one scholar who agrees with them and discount all the others. Bias on your part?
21crosscheck21 3 years ago
More hate-spewing venom from a hater of God.
JWinCT 3 years ago
nope some one just speaking the truth in love.
Cephas112 3 years ago 2
No, we're not talking about me.........I'm talking about Crosscheck....who hates God and His people!
JWinCT 3 years ago
no if he hated you he wouldnt be doing this. the fact that that he is doing this shows that he is a child of god.
Jn 1:12 we become children of god by receiving christ not by fabricating him
Cephas112 3 years ago 3
I am sure that crosscheck does not hate God and His people :) But since you seem to think otherwise, perhaps you should personally ask him before making that assumption and posting things that are quite possibly...well to be blunt, lies. After all, I know that as a JW you must be someone greatly concerned with finding out and proclaiming the truth :)
God bless!
fairwhether1 3 years ago 5
JW- I thought JW were suppose to be caring and loving, all you do is spit out garbage and accusations. You are not a good representative for your god I bet he is ashamed, I know I would be.
meadow040807 3 years ago 3