the Bible from a Jehovah's Witness perspective

[tommy]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Where in the Bible is "1914"? Answer the simple question, please.

It is there, you have to do the math. Revelation 12:6, 14 indicates that three and a half times equaly a thousand two hundred and sixty days "seven times" would therefore last twice as long or 2,520 days.

Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6 speak of a day as a year. Therefore if you start at 607 bce when Jerusalem fell and count up 2,520 days it does take you to 1914. If you count up and do not replace a day for a year there were no significant events, so therefore this does tie to 1914. I put the other stuff about 1914 up since it sounded like you really wanted info on it and the title of this thread is the Jehovah's Witness perspective. Take Care, tommy

[mee]

Jehovah’s Witnesses firmly believe, on the basis of the Bible, that God’s Kingdom is already ruling in the heavens and that it is up to us to show whether we want to continue to live on earth under God’s righteous government or not.
Two lines of evidence point to that year: (1) Bible chronology and (2) the events since 1914 in fulfillment of prophecy. but it seems that many do not want to recognize Jesus kingship , some do, some refuse,

after telling of events that would follow the establishment of the Kingdom in the hands of Jesus Christ in 1914, Revelation 12:12 adds: "Be glad, you heavens and you who reside in them! Woe for the earth and for the sea, because the Devil has come down to you, having great anger, knowing he has a short period of time." yes satan , does not want people to recognize Jesus kingship in the heavens Daniel 7;13-14 Daniel 2;44 and he is doing his best to distract people from that kingship , but the preaching about the established heavenly kingdom will be made known .

(Mark 13:10) Also, in all the nations the good news has to be preached first.
(Revelation 14:6) And I saw another angel flying in midheaven, and he had everlasting good news to declare as glad tidings to those who dwell on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people.
(Matthew 24:14) And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come................... there is no stopping bible prophecy ,it always comes true. and many people fight against it . many people say that they want peace, but when it comes down to it ,they refuse to recognize the prince of peace.Isaiah 9;6-7

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by tommy

It is there, you have to do the math. Revelation 12:6, 14 indicates that three and a half times equaly a thousand two hundred and sixty days "seven times" would therefore last twice as long or 2,520 days.

Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6 speak of a day as a year. Therefore if you start at 607 bce when Jerusalem fell and count up 2,520 days it does take you to 1914. If you count up and do not replace a day for a year there were no significant events, so therefore this does tie to 1914. I put the other stuff about 1914 up since it sounded like you really wanted info on it and the title of this thread is the Jehovah's Witness perspective. Take Care, tommy

Ok, thanks. Now I understand where you get 1914 from.

v/r

Q

[mee]

The many events in fulfillment of Bible prophecy since 1914 show that very soon God’s heavenly Kingdom will ‘crush and put an end to all other governments.’ And God wants this fact publicized, as the following important part of the sign shows: "This good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come." (Matthew 24:14) Millions of Jehovah’s Witnesses, a worldwide brotherhood, are now fulfilling this prophecy.

[mee]

With so many fulfilled prophecies already to its credit, the Bible has indeed established itself as the book "inspired of God." (2 Timothy 3:16) Accept it, then, "not as the word of men, but, just as it truthfully is, as the word of God." (1 Thessalonians 2:13) Also, since its Author, Jehovah God, is "the One telling from the beginning the finale," you can have complete confidence in prophecies whose fulfillments are yet future. (Isaiah 46:10) And what is to come is truly marvelous.

[Dor]

Originally Posted by tommy

It is there, you have to do the math. Revelation 12:6, 14 indicates that three and a half times equaly a thousand two hundred and sixty days "seven times" would therefore last twice as long or 2,520 days.

Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6 speak of a day as a year. Therefore if you start at 607 bce when Jerusalem fell and count up 2,520 days it does take you to 1914. If you count up and do not replace a day for a year there were no significant events, so therefore this does tie to 1914. I put the other stuff about 1914 up since it sounded like you really wanted info on it and the title of this thread is the Jehovah's Witness perspective. Take Care, tommy

Tommy where do you come up with 607 as when Jerusalem fell? I know the Watchtower states it but most sources do not they time the Babylonian razzing of Jerusalem as 586 or 587.

Encyclopedia.com, the Babylonian captivity, "the period from the fall of Jerusalem (586 B.C.) to the reconstruction in Palestine of a new Jewish state (after 538 B.C.)."

"...Nebuchadnezzar promptly invaded his unhappy country and besieged Jerusalem for a year and a half. In 587 Jerusalem fell and numbers of its inhabitants were carried away captive to Babylonia..." (Unger, Merrill, F., Unger's Bible Dictionary, Moody Press, Chicago, 1966, page 782).

"586, Jerusalem destroyed and burned (Jer. 52:13f.); people taken captive (52:28-30). (The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1982, page 1016)

"You will recall that the Babylonians, under Nebuchadnezzar, after twice laying siege to Jerusalem, finally captured it in 586 B.C.E. Nebuchadnezzar's army then pillaged the city, destroying the Temple and sending the inhabitants off to exile in Babylonia.("Biblical Archaeological Review, Biblical Archaelogical Review).

[FLOWERGIRL]

Hi everyone I'm new here. Just a quick question for anyone who may know something about the NWT. Why is this bible only used by Jehovah's witnesses?

[BlaznFattyz]

Originally Posted by FLOWERGIRL

Hi everyone I'm new here. Just a quick question for anyone who may know something about the NWT. Why is this bible only used by Jehovah's witnesses?

that is the watchtower organizations own intepretation of biblical scripture. mainstream christianity does not use it because it denies the diety of christ being god, pre-existing and co-exisiting with god the father as the word, before coming as the messiah, the begotten son.

[mee]

Originally Posted by FLOWERGIRL

Hi everyone I'm new here. Just a quick question for anyone who may know something about the NWT. Why is this bible only used by Jehovah's witnesses?

i think it is because many people are misled to believe that it is a bad translation they believe what their religous leaders tell them ,and then they miss out on reading a very good translation. but many people such as me , and nearly seven million others worldwide have remained openminded and not been misled by others.New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures

[mee]

[quote=Dor]Tommy where do you come up with 607 as when Jerusalem fell? I know the Watchtower states it but most sources do not they time the Babylonian razzing of Jerusalem as 586 or 587.
quote] many people rely on other sources but JW rely on the bible .
Reliable Bible chronology leads to great understanding
Finally, by early October of 607 B.C.E. the last vestige of Jewish sovereignty was gone.
the year in which the Jews returned from captivity; that is, it took place by early October of 607 B.C.E.
the counting of the "seven times" began After Zedekiah, the last king in the typical Kingdom of God, was removed from the throne in Jerusalem by the Babylonians. (Ezek. 21:25-27)
By that time the Jewish governor, Gedaliah, who had been left in charge by the Babylonians, had been assassinated, and the remaining Jews had fled to Egypt. (Jeremiah, chapters 40-43)

[kenod]

Originally Posted by mee

many people rely on other sources but JW rely on the bible .
Reliable Bible chronology leads to great understanding
Finally, by early October of 607 B.C.E. the last vestige of Jewish sovereignty was gone.
the year in which the Jews returned from captivity; that is, it took place by early October of 607 B.C.E.
the counting of the "seven times" began After Zedekiah, the last king in the typical Kingdom of God, was removed from the throne in Jerusalem by the Babylonians. (Ezek. 21:25-27)
By that time the Jewish governor, Gedaliah, who had been left in charge by the Babylonians, had been assassinated, and the remaining Jews had fled to Egypt. (Jeremiah, chapters 40-43)

Do you take into account that our present calendar is out by several years ... it is very likely that 2520 years from 607BC were up in 1910 not 1914.

[Dor]

Originally Posted by mee

i think it is because many people are misled to believe that it is a bad translation they believe what their religous leaders tell them ,and then they miss out on reading a very good translation.

WHAT TRUE SCHOLARS HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE WATCHTOWER'S "TRANSLATION"

Dr. J. A. Mantey (who is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Watchtower's own Kingdom Interlinear Translation): "A shocking mistranslation. Obsolete and incorrect. It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1, The Word was a god."

Dr. Bruce M. Metzger of Princeton (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature): "A frightful mistranslation." "Erroneous" and pernicious" "reprehensible" "If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists."

Dr. Samuel J. Mikolaskl of Zurich, Switzerland:
"This anarthrous (used without the article) construction does not mean what the indefinite article 'a' means in English. It is monstrous to translate the phrase, the Word was a god."

Dr. Paul L. Kaufman of Portland, Oregon: "The Jehovah's Witnesses people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets at Greek grammar In their mistranslation of John 1:1."

Dr. Charles L. Feinberg of La Mirada, California: "I can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek scholar."

Dr. James L. Boyer of Winona Lake, Indiana: "I have never heard of, or read of any Greek Scholar who would agree to the interpretation of this verse insisted upon by the Jehovah's Witnesses... I have never encountered one of them who had any knowledge of the Greek language."

Dr. Walter A. Martin (who does not teach Greek but has studied the language): "The translation, 'a god' instead of 'God', is erroneous and unsupported by any good Greek scholarship, ancient or contemporary and is a translation rejected by all recognized scholars of the Greek language many of whom are not even Christians, and cannot fairly be said to be biased in favor of the orthodox contention."

Dr. Eugene A. Nida, head of Translations Department, American Bible Society: "With regard to John 1:1, there is of course a complication simply because the New World Translation was apparently done by persons who did not take seriously the syntax of the Greek." [Responsible for the Good News Bible--The committee worked under him.]

Dr. B. F. Westcott (whose Greek text--not the English part--is used in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation): "The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in iv.24. It is necessarily without the article.... No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which affirms the true deity of the Word. ...In the third clause 'the Word' is declared to be 'God.' and so included in the unity of the Godhead."

Dr. J. J. Griesbach (whose Greek text--not the English part--is used in the Emphatic Diaglott): "So numerous and clear are the arguments and testimonies of Scriptures in favor of the true Deity of Christ, that I can hardly imagine how, upon the admission of the Divine authority of Scripture, and with regard to fair rules of interpretation, this doctrine can by any man be called in doubt. Especially the passage, John 1:1-3, is so clear and so superior to all exception, that by no daring efforts of either commentators or critics can it be snatched out of the hands of the defenders of the truth."

Dr. William Barclay of the University of Glasgow, Scotland: "The deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New testament translations. John 1:1 is translated: '. . . the Word was a god,' a translation which is grammatically impossible.... it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest."
Dr. F. F. Bruce of the University of Manchester, England: "Much is made by Arian amateur grammarians of the omission of the definite article with 'God' in the phrase 'And the Word was God.' Such an omission is common with nouns in a predicative construction--'a god' would be totally indefensible."
[Barclay and Bruce are generally regarded as Great Britain's leading Greek scholars. Both have New Testament translations in print!]

Dr. Ernest C. Colwell of the University of Chicago: "A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb.. this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas. 'My Lord and my God.'--John 20:28."

Dr. J. Johnson of California State University, Long Beach: "No justification whatsoever for translating theos en ho logos as 'the Word was a god.' There is no syntactical parallel to Acts 28:6 where there is a statement in indirect discourse; John 1:1 is direct. ...I am neither a Christian nor a Trinitarian."

[FLOWERGIRL]

Originally Posted by BlaznFattyz

that is the watchtower organizations own intepretation of biblical scripture. mainstream christianity does not use it because it denies the diety of christ being god, pre-existing and co-exisiting with god the father as the word, before coming as the messiah, the begotten son.

Thank you for your reply.

I take it you are not a Jehovah's witness?

[FLOWERGIRL]

Originally Posted by mee

i think it is because many people are misled to believe that it is a bad translation they believe what their religous leaders tell them ,and then they miss out on reading a very good translation. but many people such as me , and nearly seven million others worldwide have remained openminded and not been misled by others.

Thank you also for your reply.

I agree that many people believe what their religious leaders tell them about many things. Saying this, do you not also believe what your religious leaders tell you?

Just believing in everything our leaders tell us without checking it out for ourselves is rather unwise of us wouldn't you agree?

Do you check everything out for yourself about things your religious leaders tell you? I believe you will answer yes to this question. So do you not believe that others may also checkout that which they are being taught? Surely not everyone is so blind as to just go long and believe everything they are told by their leaders. Personally I don't believe they are.

What evidence does the NWT accusers have?

Thanks again.

[FLOWERGIRL]

Originally Posted by Dor

WHAT TRUE SCHOLARS HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THE WATCHTOWER'S "TRANSLATION"

Dr. J. A. Mantey (who is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Watchtower's own Kingdom Interlinear Translation): "A shocking mistranslation. Obsolete and incorrect. It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1, The Word was a god."

Dr. Bruce M. Metzger of Princeton (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature): "A frightful mistranslation." "Erroneous" and pernicious" "reprehensible" "If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists."

Dr. Samuel J. Mikolaskl of Zurich, Switzerland:
"This anarthrous (used without the article) construction does not mean what the indefinite article 'a' means in English. It is monstrous to translate the phrase, the Word was a god."

Dr. Paul L. Kaufman of Portland, Oregon: "The Jehovah's Witnesses people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets at Greek grammar In their mistranslation of John 1:1."

Dr. Charles L. Feinberg of La Mirada, California: "I can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek scholar."

Dr. James L. Boyer of Winona Lake, Indiana: "I have never heard of, or read of any Greek Scholar who would agree to the interpretation of this verse insisted upon by the Jehovah's Witnesses... I have never encountered one of them who had any knowledge of the Greek language."

Dr. Walter A. Martin (who does not teach Greek but has studied the language): "The translation, 'a god' instead of 'God', is erroneous and unsupported by any good Greek scholarship, ancient or contemporary and is a translation rejected by all recognized scholars of the Greek language many of whom are not even Christians, and cannot fairly be said to be biased in favor of the orthodox contention."

Dr. Eugene A. Nida, head of Translations Department, American Bible Society: "With regard to John 1:1, there is of course a complication simply because the New World Translation was apparently done by persons who did not take seriously the syntax of the Greek." [Responsible for the Good News Bible--The committee worked under him.]

Dr. B. F. Westcott (whose Greek text--not the English part--is used in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation): "The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in iv.24. It is necessarily without the article.... No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which affirms the true deity of the Word. ...In the third clause 'the Word' is declared to be 'God.' and so included in the unity of the Godhead."

Dr. J. J. Griesbach (whose Greek text--not the English part--is used in the Emphatic Diaglott): "So numerous and clear are the arguments and testimonies of Scriptures in favor of the true Deity of Christ, that I can hardly imagine how, upon the admission of the Divine authority of Scripture, and with regard to fair rules of interpretation, this doctrine can by any man be called in doubt. Especially the passage, John 1:1-3, is so clear and so superior to all exception, that by no daring efforts of either commentators or critics can it be snatched out of the hands of the defenders of the truth."

Dr. William Barclay of the University of Glasgow, Scotland: "The deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New testament translations. John 1:1 is translated: '. . . the Word was a god,' a translation which is grammatically impossible.... it is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest."
Dr. F. F. Bruce of the University of Manchester, England: "Much is made by Arian amateur grammarians of the omission of the definite article with 'God' in the phrase 'And the Word was God.' Such an omission is common with nouns in a predicative construction--'a god' would be totally indefensible."
[Barclay and Bruce are generally regarded as Great Britain's leading Greek scholars. Both have New Testament translations in print!]

Dr. Ernest C. Colwell of the University of Chicago: "A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb.. this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas. 'My Lord and my God.'--John 20:28."

Dr. J. Johnson of California State University, Long Beach: "No justification whatsoever for translating theos en ho logos as 'the Word was a god.' There is no syntactical parallel to Acts 28:6 where there is a statement in indirect discourse; John 1:1 is direct. ...I am neither a Christian nor a Trinitarian."

I see some very strong statments have been made against the NWT. However, what is the NWT translators argument in reply to these people?

How about the Watchtower? Why would they quote someone who argues so strongly against their translation?