I couldn't skip a discussion of Sept KM Question Box

by OnTheWayOut 36 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Thanks Jeff. I will mull it over. She did say "we will talk later" and she didn't mean it, but I don't
  know that for a fact. I could continue while the subject is hot. She asks for references and I get
  her some.

  I am confident that she will say, "I don't have time for this. Let me see your references and I will
  look at it later." Then she never will look at it. I could push as the spiritual head that we discuss
  it together, but that forces her into thinking I won't give her her space unless she "turns me in."

  Maybe she really will look at it later. (And deny it.)
• 

  Open mind

  OTWO,

  Here's another approach to consider.

  (Once again, you're puzzled and confused.)

  "I know there's plenty of verses that TALK about how important God's name is. I've always wondered, and still do, if God could preserve the Bible, why couldn't he preserve the proper pronunciation of his name. Would it really be that hard for the Almighty to do that? That is, if it's truly that important to him. I think that all this fuss about Jehovah vs. Yahweh vs. LORD vs. GOD is really not that big a deal after all. It's kind of like CROSS vs. STAKE. Who cares? The important thing is that we know we're talking about "THE GOD OF THE BIBLE". If his actual name was so important, we'd still know what it was. As it turns out, he picked a "name people" whose language had no written vowels. So how important could it really have been to God? But then there's all those verses talking about how important his name is? I just don't get it. And now the name JWs use, Jehovah, is something a Spanish Monk named Martini came up with. It seems to me God would have done a better job if he really cared about it that much. "

  Let that sit for a while and revisit it a couple times. Now you're beginning to take away some of the "mystical power" JWs seem to attach to the name "Jehovah".

  Somewhere in the future you could revisit the whole insertion of the tetragrammaton into the New Testament issue.

  Just a coupla cents.

  Hey, if we keep sending you all these $.02 they might eventually add up to something!

  Open Mind
• 

  truthsearcher

  I don't know if it's just me, but no matter how logical and organized I get a subject in my brain, whenever I get into a discussion with a JW family member, things go off in directions that I never would have imagined...and am usually not prepared for. I try to keep on one subject, but they're jumping around all over the place.

  No, it's not just you! Welcome to my world too.
• 

  M.J.

  While on the subject of the Divine Name in the NT, and in conjunction with AK-Jeff's EXCELLENT points, you may find this info useful, or at least mildly interesting at some point:
  
  The Insight book, under the heading of "Inspiration", makes the admission that the NT did not always quote the OT verbatim. Case-in-point, the NT often quoted the Septuagint, which in some cases altered the wording and meaning of the quoted verse CONSIDERABLY from the Hebrew.
  
  As an example, Insight cites Hebrews 10:5-6, which is a quotation of Psalms 40:6. One sentence in this quote of the psalm is totally off.
  
  But does Insight recommend in such a case that the quotation be "corrected" so that it matches what the quoted Hebrew scripture actually says?
  
  No! We are to treat the Greek text, as received, as inspired. It says that God's spirit directed "Paul" to write Hebrews 10:5-6 in the manner that he did. So even if we find that his quotation of the Hebrew scripture was not precise, it still had "divine authorization" AS WRITTEN (p. 1206).
  
  
  When they say they are "restoring" the Divine Name in NT by correcting the "misquotes" of the OT, they are
  
  1. Ignoring their own allowance that not all quotations of the OT in the NT are going to be precise.
  2. That the NT text, as received, as worded, is inspired, taking on "divine authorization" of its own in spite any imprecision in quoting the Hebrew Scriptures.
  
  So if we received the NT text without the divine name, who are we to go back and try and "correct" it? Particularly, if the ONLY evidence we can point to that it has been altered, is that the name is missing from OT quotations?
  
  In light of the above admission, shouldn't there be more evidence than this to tamper with God's word?
  
  Also helpful to this point are those WTS articles on how reliable the NT manuscripts are.
• 

  DannyHaszard

  http://www.topix.net/forum/who/jehovahs-witnesses GO to where defiant naughty dubs are posting
• 

  Black Sheep

  Hi OTWO,

  This is from the Awake! June 22, 2000, copied and pasted from their official website at http://www.watchtower.org/library/g/2000/6/22/article_03.htm

  THERE is a difference—a big difference—between education and propaganda. Education shows you how to think. Propaganda tells you what to think. Good educators present all sides of an issue and encourage discussion. Propagandists relentlessly force you to hear their view and discourage discussion.

  Perhaps your wife would like to read it?

  Read the series of articles very carefully yourself first. They give a comprehensive description of propaganda techniques and at the same time, use most of them in the articles.

  By the time a gullible reader has finished reading 'Do Not Be a Victim of Propaganda!' they will think they have an open mind, but the reality is that they have just been taught how to close it.

  There are some statements in it that are at odds with the OKM though, and they could be useful.

  Here is another..

  But it is far better for each individual personally to choose what he will feed his mind. It is said that we are what we eat, and this can apply to food for both the body and the mind. No matter what you are reading or watching or listening to, test to see whether it has propagandistic overtones or is truthful.

  Moreover, if we want to be fair-minded, we must be willing to subject our own opinions to continual testing as we take in new information. We must realize that they are, after all, opinions. Their trustworthiness depends on the validity of our facts, on the quality of our reasoning, and on the standards or values that we choose to apply.

  Cheers

  Chris
• 

  Black Sheep

  Her is another nice quote from the same series.

  Some people insult those who disagree with them by questioning character or motives instead of focusing on the facts. Name-calling slaps a negative, easy-to-remember label onto a person, a group, or an idea. The name-caller hopes that the label will stick. If people reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negative label instead of weighing the evidence for themselves, the name-caller's strategy has worked.

  http://www.watchtower.org/library/g/2000/6/22/article_02.htm

  Cheers

  Chris