MPH Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 They did worse than that!!! Because the Greek translation of the New Testament came to different conclusions as their perverted interpretations, they found themselves up the creek without paddles on the major issues of mainstream Christianity. So what did they do? They wrote their own Bible....called The New Translation. Its called the new world translation. and yes, they have changed so much of it. its really the 2nd most corrupt cult in the world -the Mormon's just have their noses in front...
l444ry Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 Its called the new world translation. and yes, they have changed so much of it.its really the 2nd most corrupt cult in the world -the Mormon's just have their noses in front... Missed out the "World" bit by mistake. Interesting point about the Mormons though. They claim that the Book of Mormon and the Bible are both the irrefutable word of God and both of equal importance. So next time they come knocking on your door looking like Randall and Hopkirk deceased ask them this-: The Bible clearly says that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, so how come Book of Mormon says He was born in Nazareth?
Fez of Mahrez Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 I'm nice to anyone who comes to our door. If that's the best they can do with their lives then the order of the day is pity dressed up as politeness in my book.
AoWW Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 Don't forgot those foreign fruits Daggers... the 'silent nuisance'... the 'unseen irritant'.Bastards. Ugli Fruit - were they just 'invented' to make people feel better about themselves? Are they part of a covert 'raising national esteem' campaign? I'm nice to anyone who comes to our door. If that's the best they can do with their lives then the order of the day is pity dressed up as politeness in my book. That's just evil... shocking!
craigadams22 Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 Missed out the "World" bit by mistake. Interesting point about the Mormons though. They claim that the Book of Mormon and the Bible are both the irrefutable word of God and both of equal importance. So next time they come knocking on your door looking like Randall and Hopkirk deceased ask them this-: The Bible clearly says that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, so how come Book of Mormon says He was born in Nazareth? This post has been edited by l444ry: Today, 02:39 PM I love Randall and Hopkirk decased series from 1960's, it's a real cult classic and so to is The Champions.. Regards Craig Adams 22
Head Honcho Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 JW's are not allowed to read any literature that anyone might give them as their elders dont want them to be brainwashed into evil ways.How ironic and hypocritical is that? . they are not a religion, they are not Christians, they are a CULT. they have predicted the end of the world a few times and were clearly wrong about that!! they have changed the bible and altered verses to suit their veiws. ( my boss is a JW) Who's bible exactly? There are thousands of interpretations of the bible. Reinterpretating it isn't exclusive to the JW's. There have been over 450 translations of the current bible in English alone.
l444ry Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 Who's bible exactly?There are thousands of interpretations of the bible. Reinterpretating it isn't exclusive to the JW's. There have been over 450 translations of the current bible in English alone. You miss the point Honcho. The Bible text today is exactly the same as the original manuscripts. It is more accurate than the handed down original works of Shakespeare. What we are saying here is that the Jehovah's Witnesses have changed the original words in the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts so as to make them mean something else completely.
Guest Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 Did Shakespeare write the bible? I thought it was King James.
Daggers Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 The Bible text today is exactly the same as the original manuscripts. It is more accurate than the handed down original works of Shakespeare.
l444ry Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 Let me elaborate Daggers. Homer's Iliad, the most renowned book of ancient Greece, comes a very distant second to the New Testament in manuscript support, with only 643 copies. Of these copies, there are 764 disputed lines, compared to only 40 lines in the New Testament. The New Testament even fares better than the 37 plays written by William Shakespeare in the 17th century. Every play contains various gaps in the printed text, forcing scholars in many cases to "fill in the blanks". With the 24,000 copies of the New Testament, it's a fair assumption that nothing has been lost. It is also very impressive to note that scholars can recreate all but 11 verses of the New Testament by simply piecing together quotations by the so-called early church fathers of the second and third centuries!
Daggers Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 Let me elaborate Daggers.Homer's Iliad, the most renowned book of ancient Greece, comes a very distant second to the New Testament in manuscript support, with only 643 copies. Of these copies, there are 764 disputed lines, compared to only 40 lines in the New Testament. The New Testament even fares better than the 37 plays written by William Shakespeare in the 17th century. Every play contains various gaps in the printed text, forcing scholars in many cases to "fill in the blanks". With the 24,000 copies of the New Testament, it's a fair assumption that nothing has been lost. It is also very impressive to note that scholars can recreate all but 11 verses of the New Testament by simply piecing together quotations by the so-called early church fathers of the second and third centuries! Source? I'm not questioning your veracity, but fancy reading more.
l444ry Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 Source?I'm not questioning your veracity, but fancy reading more. http://www.bibleevidences.com/transmission.htm
Daggers Posted 26 June 2007 Posted 26 June 2007 http://www.bibleevidences.com/transmission.htm Thanks. Interesting but suspect.
Zingari Posted 27 June 2007 Posted 27 June 2007 Thanks.Interesting but suspect. agreed , and regardless of any accuracy or otherwise in translation ,it still depends on the accuracy and truthfulness of the original .
Guest Posted 27 June 2007 Posted 27 June 2007 Homer's Iliad, the most renowned book of ancient Greece I preferred Herodotus' Histories.
l444ry Posted 27 June 2007 Posted 27 June 2007 agreed , and regardless of any accuracy or otherwise in translation ,it still depends on the accuracy and truthfulness of the original . That goes without saying but has nothing to do wth the original point. The manuscript evidence for the original texts are so overwhelming that to oppose their accuracy is just plain stupid. However, I'm not talking about matters of faith here - just the Jehovah's Witnesses reasons for their sinister translation. After all, there are many kids being brought up in bondage to this hideous cult.
Zingari Posted 27 June 2007 Posted 27 June 2007 That goes without saying but has nothing to do wth the original point. The manuscript evidence for the original texts are so overwhelming that to oppose their accuracy is just plain stupid. However, I'm not talking about matters of faith here - just the Jehovah's Witnesses reasons for their sinister translation. After all, there are many kids being brought up in bondage to this hideous cult. I agree and sorry I missed the first point ; Surely there are more hideous and dangerous cults ( or religions )in britain today than the JW's though; holding far more extreme views on how its followers behave ; By this i mean more dangerous if only by virtue of the number of adherents willing to adopt the extreme lifestyle of some of the fundamentalist teaching. At worst , most view JWs as a harmless bunch of cranks whereas this cannot be said of some of the "mainstream " faiths.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.