Jehovah`s Witness/What we have here is a failure to communicate
QUESTION: "Sister T",
I highly doubt you will post this comment but there are a couple of things I'd like to point out.
You say I fail to understand what is said. I think your definition of 'to understand' is 'to agree'. If I don't agree with you, then it's obvious to you that I just don't understand.
Read the following exerpts from our dialogue and tell me who it is that fails to understand:
You said: "But you do know you are free to go to the Kingdom Hall and find out for yourself what our meetings are like or about"
~I had already said: "I ATTENDED KINGDOM HALL with a dear acquaintance one Sunday morning."
You ask: "why don't you ask her all the questions you have regarding JWs. That's very weird and odd that you have to come on here when you could go to her if she is truly a JW."
~I had said: "I ask questions because I VALUE A RELATIONSHIP I have with a JW. NOT WISHING THE TWO OF US TO BECOME ALIENATED, this forum is an opportunity to find out what my acquaintance believes and why."
You also said: "And if she is a JW, why would she have a problem with the study of the Watchtower?"
~Again, I did say: "Yes, MY ACQUAINTANCE IS A JW."
So who is it who lacks understanding?
You said: "I put a lot of scriptures into my reply from the Bible".
~~~ What, pray tell, is there in scripture to prove anything about scholars and the translation of the NWT? (The subject up for discussion)
I didn't ask for scriptures or comments supporting JW doctrine or negating doctrines of "Christendom". Did I? No, but you went off on a lengthy diatribe about the name of Jehovah. Which I did not respond to because that has nothing to do with the topic.
You wanted to change the subject and compare JW 'truth' with that of 'Christendom'. To provide links to JW.org such as 'name in new testament' 'false teachings christ'. You also mention 'the Trinity lie', 'the hellfire lie' and 'the everyone has an immortal soul lie'.
If someone asks you how to make cookies, are you going to tell them how to mow the lawn? Same difference. And when you're through they still don't know how to make cookies.
I stuck to the topic. You must not have understood what that was, because you certanly did not. Or maybe you did and it wasn't a topic you wanted to try to defend.
So to end this dialogue, you ridicule the questioner and insult his intelligence, leaving that picture in the mind of anyone who reading this forum.
I'm reminded of something by Saul Alinsky called "Rules for Radicals".
Have a happy Thanksgiving holiday. I plan to.
ANSWER: Hello again Jay,
No the meaning of to understand and to agree are two different things. A person can understand what someone says and not agree with what is said. I already know you don't agree with JW beliefs, but what I was trying to explain to you is that you do not understand my answers to your questions, you come away with something completely different and twisted all around and you just are not connecting the dots. Your replies shows this.
Just your comment regarding the scriptures I showed you tells me you just aren't making the connection of why I even gave those scriptures in the first place.
So in order to not confuse you further, I'll leave it alone, because you claim I'm ridiculing you, when that is not the case at all. And is the very reason why I said you are not understanding.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: "Sister T"
Let's start at ground zero. This is how this long, drawn out dialogue started:
Jay said: You say the NWT has been rated one of the highest regarding accuracy. Could you give me the source of that statement? Names, credentials? I'm like the Bereans, I like to examine things to see if they are so. (Acts 17:11)
Sister T replied:
Here is a quote:
"BeDuhn points out that the general public and many Bible scholars assume that the differences in the New World Translation (NW) are due to religious bias on the part of its translators. However, he states: “Most of the differences are due to the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal, conservative translation.” While BeDuhn disagrees with certain renderings of the New World Translation, he says that this version “emerges as the most accurate of the translations compared.” He calls it a “remarkably good” translation.
Dr. Benjamin Kedar, a Hebrew scholar in Israel, made a similar comment concerning the New World Translation. In 1989 he said: “This work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. . . . I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain.”
Dr. Jason BeDuhn is a professor of Religious Studies at Northern Arizona University. Dr. Benjamin Kedar is a Professor of History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. That qualifies them to understand & translate ancient biblical languages? I don't see them as being very strong references.
Now if you will look at just the small portion of our dialogue above you will see that I asked for credentials of translators of the NWT. You supplied me with two names. I researched those names and found that one is a professor of history and the other a professor of religious studies. I then commented that their titles/positions/studies do not mean they are able to understand & translate ancient bibllical languages. I also indicated I did not feel either of these two men were very strong references regarding the accuracy of the NWT.
THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE END OF THIS DIALOGUE. While the name 'Jehovah' was in BeDuhn's quote I made no comment about it because that was not what I asked about.
"Yet Dr. BeDuhn makes note, "I am sure you are aware of historical objections to the (re)insertion of `Jehovah' into the translation. Of course, no Greek Gospel manuscripts support this, but I will not quibble with you about that"10 (emphasis added)."
Also from: http://en.allexperts.com/q/Jehovah-s-Witness-1617/2014/11/bible-tools-translatio
When I asked what all the scriptures you provided had to do with scholars, translators, credentials you failed to realize that was the topic in question... scholars & translators & credentials. NOT whether or not "Jehovah' should or should not be in the Bible.
I realize you are accustomed to defending that position, but in this case you were so eager to do so that you assumed that is what I wanted to discuss.
I hope this puts this issue to bed because I'm ready to go to bed myself. Besides, I'm have a lot more questions to ask.
Hello again Jay,
Again, this is really pointless. But I will point out just ONE thing again, where you do exactly what I said about you either don't understand or you take what I say wrong. Whether it's on purpose or you just don't get it, I have no clue.
Now I'm going to use the very quotes you just posted:
You state: "Now if you will look at just the small portion of our dialogue above you will see that I asked for credentials of translators of the NWT. You supplied me with two names."
No Jay, no...this is completely false and completely incorrect. I did not supply you with two names regarding any credentials of translators of the NWT. If you read what you yourself posted above that I said, you will see that.
I'll show you
See you posted this above as you asking me this question:
Jay said: "You say the NWT has been rated one of the highest regarding accuracy. Could you give me the source of that statement? Names, credentials?"
See that Jay? You CLEARLY asked me for the source
of that statement, Names, credentials?
That's why I gave you the two people who were "the source of that statement".
There's more people who I didn't put who stated that the NWT was accurate.
I did not give you those two names as the credentials of translators of the NWT. If something is "rated", it obviously can't be "rated" by the very ones who did the translating Jay. So that should also tell you that those two names were not me giving you credentials of the translators of the NWT as you seem to incorrectly think, but me giving you the source of that statement.
Then you say the Dialogue should have ended, well Jay, if you write to me, and I see that you obviously, as I've just showed you just ONE instance, do not understand what I am saying or whatever is going on here, then I tried to help you to understand. But obviously you can't see that. I don't know if you will even see what I'm talking about now.
But again, this back and forth is futile. But if you write me, I have to reply, that's the way this forum is set up, so either ask me a Bible question or I'm going to reject any further discussion regarding your misunderstandings of my responses, which I have clearly shown you.
You say you have many questions, how do you expect me to answer your questions when you are not able to understand my responses correctly, again, misunderstanding and not agreeing is two different things...it's fine if you don't agree with JW's beliefs Jay. You are free to believe whatever you want to. That's your choice. I am not ridiculing you or any of that.
Take care Jay,