Expert: Brenda Martin - 2/23/2006

Question
-------------------------
Followup To
Question -
My question is similar to one you've answered before in reference to a wife not being a JW and her husband and his family being JW.  

In addition to that question, my question is this.  We have three children together and I would do anything for them.  I'm not a JW and therefore have no problem with blood transfusions.  My wife on the other hand would if she becomes a devout JW.

How would you suggest we handle this sort of issue in our household should, heaven forbid, it ever arise?

Also, I'm in the military and I'm not a concientious objector and never will be. I guess you can say I'm stubborn, but also, I'm not an expert on the bible.  I look at the bible as a guide for mankind.  I also, look at what different religions say about the contents of the bible as man's interpretations and not fact.  Because we didn't write it and only God can tell us what the bible means.  And that means as individuals we have to ask God for his guideance in deciphering what the bible means.  Which applies to my original question.

Thanks.

Interested in what you have to say.
Answer -
HI there Walter, you asked--" BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS--HOW WOULD YOU SUGGEST WE HANDLE THIS SORT OF ISSUE IN OUR HOUSEHOLD?"

For Bible-based reasons, Jehovah's Witnesses refuse blood transfusions. But they do accept—and vigorously pursue—medical alternatives to blood. “Jehovah's Witnesses actively seek the best in medical treatment,” said Dr. Richard K. Spence, when director of surgery at a New York hospital. “As a group, they are the best educated consumers the surgeon will ever encounter.”

I became a Witness 3 years into our marriage (30 years ago) and l often wondered what I would do if that situation ever arose, thankfully it never. My husband & I discussed it and of course he said” if his kids need blood they will be getting it” If the situation had arose I would have made my feelings known regarding one of our kids receiving blood, obviously I would not want that,1. Because of what the bible says and 2. Because it is filthy and dangerous and full of disease, but at the end of the day my husband would have the last say in the matter. He is the father and thus the “head of the house” and so has to be respected for his decision.

However your wife will be teaching the kids the bible and what it has to say on the subject of blood, so what has often happened is, the child is adamant they don't want blood and depending on the age of the child of course, the Drs have upheld the child's decision.—

One case involved Dan, a 15-year-old Witness who died of leukemia. In this case doctors respected Dan's brave decision to reject a blood transfusion. The minister of health for Denmark stated that the doctors had done the right thing in respecting Dan's mature decision and well-founded faith.

It may interest you to know, worldwide, there are currently more than 90,000 doctors who have made it known that they are willing to treat Jehovah's Witnesses without blood.

I'M NOT A CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR AND NEVER WILL BE.

No-one is asking you to become one, :¬) your wife is the one who has decided to change her life and bring it in line with God's standards. She is not expecting you to change your life, that is your choice.

I LOOK AT THE BIBLE AS A GUIDE FOR MANKIND.

Many do--Mohandas K. Gandhi reportedly told a British official: “When your country and mine shall get together on the teachings laid down by Christ in this Sermon on the Mount, we shall have solved the problems not only of our countries but those of the whole world.”

“I believe the Bible is the best gift God has ever given to man.” That statement was made by Abraham Lincoln, the 16th president of the United States.

So practical is its counsel that one educator was moved to say: “Although being a high-school counselor with bachelor's and master's degrees and having read a large number of books on mental health and psychology, I discovered that the Bible's counsel on such things as having a successful marriage, preventing juvenile delinquency and how to gain and keep friends is far superior to anything I had read or studied in college.” In addition to being practical and up-to-date, the Bible is dependable.

RELIGIONS SAY ABOUT THE CONTENTS OF THE BIBLE AS MAN'S INTERPRETATIONS AND NOT FACT.  

‘Everyone has his own interpretation of the Bible' true, and obviously not all of them are right.' ‘Twisting the Scriptures to fit our own ideas can result in lasting harm. (2 Pet. 3:15, 16)' ‘Two things can help us to understand the Bible correctly. First, consider the context (surrounding verses) of any statement. Next, compare texts with other statements in the Bible that deal with the same subject. In that way we are letting God's own Word guide our thinking, and the interpretation is not ours but his. That is the approach taken in the Watch Tower publications.'

ONLY GOD CAN TELL US WHAT THE BIBLE MEANS.

Well it is true we need his holy spirit however, God had the bible written for us to read and understand, it is his letter to mankind, so don't you think he would make it understandable, or else what would be the point of giving us the letter?

You would be pleasantly surprised how plain and simple the bible's message is, I do agree however some of these old versions with their; “thee thou and art” make it difficult to understand, but there are many modern versions like the one your wife will be using, that make it easy reading.

God wants us to know and understand his letter, that's why he had it written he has left a book of instruction that he wants mankind to follow, why? “to benefit themselves” the bible says.

Your wife will be learning what God's purpose is for the earth and all on it, honestly it is fantastic, you don't know what your missing :¬) God promises to rid the earth of all wickedness very shortly, and those who listen and apply what he has said ,can look forward to everlasting life on a Paradise earth, just think ,no war, no death, no sickness, never having to worry about your kids, or lock the door. It may sound all to good, but it is the most logical thing I have ever heard, if you were God would you not do the same?

Anyway we Witnesses can talk till the cows come home, I wish you all the best.

Brenda (Scotland)

Thanks for your quick response Brenda.  I have some further questions:

You said:

You would be pleasantly surprised how plain and simple the bible's message is, I do agree however some of these old versions with their; “thee thou and art” make it difficult to understand, but there are many modern versions like the one your wife will be using, that make it easy reading.

I feel that most religions that use their own version of the Bible tend to ensure that the translations of the scriptures reflect their beliefs.  What do you think?  Because it is still man's translation of an ancient text.

You said:

‘Twisting the Scriptures to fit our own ideas can result in lasting harm. (2 Pet. 3:15, 16)' ‘Two things can help us to understand the Bible correctly. First, consider the context (surrounding verses) of any statement. Next, compare texts with other statements in the Bible that deal with the same subject. In that way we are letting God's own Word guide our thinking, and the interpretation is not ours but his. That is the approach taken in the Watch Tower publications.'

Which Bible do the JWs use?  Do the JWs have their own Bible? Is it the NWT translation?  I remember reading something is some publication from the JWs that stated that if your Bible doesn't have Jehovah in that verse (Psalms 83.18) then it is the wrong version.  Don't you really mean that if it isn't a NWT version, then it is the wrong version?

You said to use the context of the surrounding verses, but in Watch Towers and Awake magazines, as well as other published readings by JWs, you constently refer to single scriptures in the Bible, that support your beliefs. Why is it that the JWs only use the NWT version?  Do you know who translated the NWT?  Supposedly the translators were Nathan Knorr, Albert Schroeder, George Gangas, Fred Franz, M. Henschel.  Of which only Franz had any knowledge of Greek languages and was self-taught any Hebrew at all.  So how is it that these individuals could translate the Bible from ancient Greek and Hebrew texts without any knowledge of the languages?  I have found that the context of the surrounding scriptures doesn't always support what is being discussed.  You reference above was good though (2 Pet. 3:15, 16).

I'm not trying to say that JWs are wrong, just trying to understand them.  I mean, what made the translators mentioned above think that they could translate the Bible into a new version that was the only correct version, when they couldn't even speak or write the language?  I could go on and on on different subjects of discussion, but will leave more for later.  

Again, I look forward to your response.  

Answer
HI Walter, you said--“MOST RELIGIONS THAT USE THEIR OWN VERSION OF THE BIBLE TEND TO ENSURE THAT THE TRANSLATIONS OF THE SCRIPTURES REFLECT THEIR BELIEFS.”

I used to think that about JW's and the NWT, you see I was a Protestant and attended church for 19 years using the KJV, so when the Witnesses called at my home, I had no intention of using, what I saw as; “their” bible, during my study with them I used my KJV and they used the NWT, I became a Witness studying the KJV, not the NWT. Which proves ALL bibles carry the same message.

Whichever bible you choose to look at, it will tell you the same thing, the wording may be slightly different, but the message is the same.

MAN'S TRANSLATION OF AN ANCIENT TEXT.

How can we be sure the Bible has not been changed?

“In the number of ancient MSS. [manuscripts] attesting a writing, and in the number of years that had elapsed between the original and the attesting MSS., the Bible enjoys a decided advantage over classical writings [those of Homer, Plato, and others]. . . . Altogether classical MSS. are but a handful compared with Biblical. No ancient book is so well attested as the Bible.”—The Bible From the Beginning (New York, 1929), P. Marion Simms, pp. 74, 76.

A report published in 1971 shows that there are possibly 6,000 handwritten copies containing all or part of the Hebrew Scriptures; the oldest dates back to the third century B.C.E. Of the Christian Greek Scriptures, there are some 5,000 in Greek, the oldest dating back to the beginning of the second century C.E. There are also many copies of early translations into other languages.

In the introduction to his seven volumes on The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri, Sir Frederic Kenyon wrote: “The first and most important conclusion derived from the examination of them [the papyri] is the satisfactory one that they confirm the essential soundness of the existing texts. No striking or fundamental variation is shown either in the Old or the New Testament. There are no important omissions or additions of passages, and no variations which affect vital facts or doctrines. The variations of text affect minor matters, such as the order of words or the precise words used . . . But their essential importance is their confirmation, by evidence of an earlier date than was hitherto available, of the integrity of our existing texts.”—(London, 1933), p. 15.

WHICH BIBLE DO THE JWS USE?  DO THE JWS HAVE THEIR OWN BIBLE? IS IT THE NWT TRANSLATION?

At our meetings we use the NWT, however in our personal study and on the doors we use many different translations, for instance one woman I called on was a Catholic and would not use anything but her massive family catholic bible, so that is what we used in her study. The only problem, it was very heavy:¬)

The reason JW's had the NWT printed was to put God's name back in its original 7,000 places, you see the original manuscripts of the bible had God's name in it, but the churches took the liberty of removing it and in its it place they put LORD or GOD in capitals.

BIBLE DOESN'T HAVE JEHOVAH IN THAT VERSE (PSALMS 83.18) THEN IT IS THE WRONG VERSION.

No such thing as a wrong version, it is true that some translations of the Bible adhere more closely to what is in the original languages than others do. Modern paraphrase Bibles have taken liberties that at times alter the original meaning. Some translators have allowed personal beliefs to color their renderings. But these weaknesses can be identified by comparison of a variety of translations.

That verse in Psalms is one we often use to show people from their own version of the bible that God has a name.

JWS CONSTANTLY REFER TO SINGLE SCRIPTURES IN THE BIBLE, THAT SUPPORT YOUR BELIEFS.

If you are reading one of our articles you will notice a scripture being inserted every few lines dealing with the point under discussion, the fact maybe only one is mentioned doesn't mean there arent hundreds.

For instance if someone on the doors asks me, lets say; “why does God permit wickedness?” I will perhaps only show them one scripture, maybe two, to answer their question, but it is not because there are only two, it is just not to bombard the person with loads of scriptures.

All scripture supports our beliefs, it is what our religion is based on, so you will not find a single scripture that doesn't support our beliefs. I will give you an instance of that happening though to someone I met on the doors—

I had many discussions with a girl who was a born again Christian, she and I discussed all the many scriptures that support her beliefs, I agreed with her that there is such a thing as “born again” Christians she was correct and her beliefs were bible based. However then I went on to show her other scriptures, these scriptures discussed another class of people who are NOT born again and therefore do not go to heaven when they die. She said “I will just stick with the ones I know” in other words, she will choose to believe ONLY the scriptures that “support her beliefs”

JW's take the entire bible as the basis for their beliefs obviously, if we didn't we would have left out the one about the blood don't you think:¬)

DO YOU KNOW WHO TRANSLATED THE NWT?

I know they were Jehovah's Witnesses, here is what some have had to say regarding this translation—

Regarding the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, Edgar J. Goodspeed, translator of the Greek “New Testament” in An American Translation, wrote: “I am interested in the mission work of your people, and its world wide scope, and much pleased with the free, frank and vigorous translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I can testify.”

Hebrew and Greek scholar Alexander Thomson wrote: “The translation is evidently the work of skilled and clever scholars, who have sought to bring out as much of the true sense of the Greek text as the English language is capable of expressing.”—The Differentiator, April 1952, pages 52-7.

Professor Benjamin Kedar, a Hebrew scholar in Israel, said : “In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translations, I often refer to the English edition of what is known as the New World Translation. In so doing, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible.”

Jason BeDuhn, associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff, Arizona, U.S.A., examined and compared for accuracy eight major translations, including the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, published by Jehovah's Witnesses. The result?

BeDuhn called the New World Translation a “remarkably good” translation, “better by far” and “consistently better” than some of the others considered. Overall, concluded BeDuhn, the New World Translation “is one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available” and “the most accurate of the translations compared.”

I look forward to hearing from you again.

Brenda