AboutBrenton Hepburn Expertise I am one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
I can answer questions on the reliability of the NWT, the so called mind control problems, so called prophecies, and general practices and history of Jehovah’s Witnesses.....
>>>>WARNING<<<<<< ....Please be aware that there are at least ... 3 .... people here who ARE NOT practicing JWs and, (at other times there have been as many as 5.) These ones will, at times, appear to have an agenda against JWs., and will often give answers that are not correct in regard to JW teachings and practices. If you are after a answer from one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, please read some of the answers that the various experts have published before choosing someone. If you want to ask them a question that is fine, but if you want a balancing view after asking one of the NON JWs, ask a JW the same question
Experience I have been a publisher since 1964. When I first went on the internet I found a lot of negative information dealing with Jehovah’s Witnesses covering prophecy, mind control and what many said was a very bad translation of the Bible known as the NWT. It shook my faith. After may hours researching these topics I could see why some felt that way, but, I was also able to explain why there were these misleading views. I can now set matters straight for anyone that has negative information about Jehovah’s Witness to show them that such information is at best misleading and at worst dangerous lies.
Education/Credentials I have been a student of the Bible for many years, am trying to teach myself Biblical Greek.
Was a public tax accountant for many yrars untill SEP 2009 when I gave it up.
>where you base "all modern schollars" who you seem to have suggested as a result of their
> understanding consequently warrant the NWT position. Where are you basing this?
In your original response to Simons email you mentioned that .”The basic argument was that the NWT did not follow the rules of Greek Grammar. Modern critics if the NWT no longer use that as a criticism of the NWT". I would like to study this further, my question is where are you basing this? I am referring to your original response to Simon's original question.http://experts.about.com/q/Jehovah-s-Witness-1617/nwt-bible.htm
Answer Hello Michael,
Thank you for your question.
At first it had me puzzled then I carefully read my original and noticed a typo . The quote you used from my original reply to Simon should have read
“The basic argument was that the NWT did not follow the rules of Greek Grammar. Modern critics of the NWT no longer use that as a criticism of the NWT. “ Its amazing what one letter different in a word can make. Instead of “of” originally wrote “if”.
What I was trying to say is that modern scholars no longer use the grammar as a basis for criticizing the NWT of John 1:1. In my original reply to Simon I listed a few old quotes from scholars that said the NWT did not follow rules of gramma. Now the argument of informed scholars against John1:1 is based on theology. Because the NWT renders the second theos as “a god” the argument now is that Jesus can not be called “a god” as that would make more that one God when we are told at Isiah 45:21 “And there is no other god besides me, a righteous God and a Savior; “ (RSV)
I am not at my normal computer (will be back there in about a week) so if you would like to send me a private email I will send you the information I have of what scholars now say about the “rule of gramma” the NWT was supposed to have violated.
