Search results

Greetings again NWL, I appreciate your fairly thorough answer and the fact that you have read through my assessment of the JW Booklet. Yes, I read your reference to the JW explanation of why they use “Jehovah” and although it covers most of the ground, it does not spell out the fact of how the...

Greetings again NWL, I appreciate your comments and accept that there is some acknowledgement concerning Jehovah, but possibly not obvious to all of how the error occurred. The current JW booklets continue to emphasise that God’s Name is Jehovah and that the JWs are to be commended for using...

Greetings again NWL, Despite what I said in the previous Post, on reflection, I question to what extent and how many JWs agree with your position that “Jehovah” is not the correct rendition. I decided to add a few quotes from a fairly committed JW advocate of the rendition “Jehovah” and the...

Greetings again NWL, I appreciate and accept this, but the JW literature that I have read continues to state that God’s Name is “Jehovah”. The earlier booklet “What Does the Bible Really Teach?” has a similar statement page 13 “the Bible also teaches that God has a personal name: Jehovah”. It...

Greetings NWL, I appreciate that you state this as you are only the second JW that seemed to admit this, and the first was when I was 16 and I am a bit older now. You would most probably be aware of a range of JW literature that supports the “Jehovah” rendition, or at least I have encountered a...

Greetings again Trump Gurl, I appreciate the reminder. I would like to give a brief response to each of your items to state where I stand in regard to each. I do not accept that Jesus is God, nor the JW position that Jesus pre-existed, either as Michael the Archangel or similar. I believe that...

Greetings again Lon, Yes, the Gospel Record of John is definitely centred in Jesus and as you quote, this is summarised in the following: John 20:30–31 (KJV): 30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 But these are...

Greetings again Lon, I believe that The Word in John 1:1 is a personification, similar to Wisdom in Proverbs 8. To insert “Jesus” into John 1:1 is not a translation, but an interpretation, and why I objected is because it negates my understanding of this verse. The JWs believe that The Word in...

Greetings again Lon, I was reacting to some of your comments such as: I consider most of this was more bluff, than reality. Kind regards Trevor

Greetings again Lon (Lonster) and Right Divider, I agree we have covered our differences, but I have not seen much evidence of your superior scholarship, but you have been verbose and other features. I also mentioned your name (Lonster - have you had a shave? Or a change of heart?) in the JW...

Greetings again Trump Gurl, Yes, he has some interesting insights into the various translations and recommends the RSV. There are a number of books that deal with the subject of the different translations and they give various recommendations. I like the following towards the end of his...

Greetings Trump Gurl, I have heard, but not studied, that the RSV in the Psalms, and possibly elsewhere, have sometimes given a translation based on altering the Hebrew, without even mentioning this in the margin. I was reading a commentary, and he gave a good explanation of a partly difficult...

Greetings again Lonster, What you are saying then, is that your supposed “translation” is really your commentary and that you have added your own understanding of John 1:1 to the Word of God. My understanding of "The Word" in John 1:1 is a personification, and yes this is also different to the...

Greetings again Lonster, I do not endorse this view. My understanding is that Jesus did not exist before he was conceived and born. Normally when two parents have a child, we do not speak of the child being created. With Jesus he was conceived by the Holy Spirit and thus the One God, God the...

Greetings Lonster, I was interested in this thread, not because I support JWs and their teaching, but I do have some beliefs that are closer to the JWs than the Catholic Church teachings. I was also interested in what Trump Gurl would present. Could you please tell me what translation you are...

Greetings again Lonster, We could discuss many Scriptures, but I most probably have a different understanding of what you are suggesting and Colossians 1:15-20. I do not consider that these alter my perspective on the promise to David. I consider that I have a reasonable overall perspective and...

Greetings again Lonster, 2 Samuel 7:14 (KJV): I will be his father, and he shall be my son. It was not present position as the Trinitarian needs to claim. I read this passage and context as saying that David was in the future to have a son or descendant who would sit upon the Throne of...

Greetings again Lonster, The following from the promises to David indicate that it was to be a future event: 2 Samuel 7:14 (KJV): I will be his father, and he shall be my son. Yes, I am not very good at English and explanation. I am a technical person and enjoyed Maths and Physics. I am not...

Greetings again JudgeRightly, Yes, there is, Jesus is the Son of God. For a start he had so absorbed God’s words that they were completely his own thoughts and thus when he spoke they were both his words and God the Father’s thoughts and words. One example of this flow is given in the...

Greetings again Trump Gurl, I hope to answer JudgeRightly soon and he has given a thorough answer on this aspect. I am conscious of this part of the history of the Catholic Church. Perhaps the definitions found in wiki and Britannica are helpful. Quoting only two paragraphs from each: Wiki...