SHOCKING Fred Franz Talk

by brotherdan 31 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Farkel

  Fred was lying through his false teeth about being "scheduled to go attend Oxford." Firstly, he dropped out of College in his Junior year, so he didn't even graduate from a regular college. Also, he never took a single credit class in Bible (koine) Greek. He did take a class in Classical Greek, but that bears little resemblance to Biblical Greek. He was self-taught in all those vaunted "languages" he claimed to speak/understand.

  Fred was a fraud from the get-go.

  More importantly, he was NEVER selected to be a student at Oxford. He was only selected to be a candidate for the actual selection of students process, which involves several steps. Fred only made it to the first step. He may not have been selected at all, but neither he nor the mighty WTS ever tells the membership this.

  Several years back, someone actually wrote Oxford University and got all the documentation verifying this. Perhaps some will re-post it should anyone want to see it.

  Farkel
• 

  brotherdan

  Farkel is right. He ALWAYS claimed to be the candidate chossen to be the recipeiant of the Rhodes Scholorship award. But that is not true either. He was chosen to COMPETE to get the Scholorship. There could have been 50 people chosen for all we know.

  The truth is, he was an uneducated man that was so full of himself that he thought he was Christs own brother and in charge of ALL his people. Not much different than Jim Jones and David Koresh (IMO). He just didn't PHYSICALLY kill anyone with his bare hands.
• 

  thetrueone

  F. Franz was certainly the man to embellish stories through manipulation and exploitation that the WTS used to the fullest

  in propagating its literature for quite a few years as history dictates.

  Just a good old fashion religious charlatan out to sell books.
• 

  sabastious

  He did take a class in Classical Greek, but that bears little resemblance to Biblical Greek. He was self-taught in all those vaunted "languages" he claimed to speak/understand.

  How did he manage to create the NWT if he was so inept? Did he have help from real linguists?

  -Sab
• 

  Ding

  Johannes Greber, Sab.
• 

  agonus

  Ha ha, yep, ol' Freddy CHANNELED the NWT!
• 

  Billen76

  They probably looked up in the various bibletranslations on the marked, and picked out the renderings that suited the watchtower doctrine the most (among those renderings from Grebers translation). With a few alterings and nonsense-explanations to justify them, they send out a "better" translation (for jw's).

  The NWT is a fraud especially the NT part. The OT in NWT is actually a fine work, if weren't for the alterings that The Society later made (but this was made by hired scholars prior to "the commitee").

  Since the first edition, later revisions have changed passages that was "controversial" to WTS doctrine...still with no sound justification in Greek or Hebrew gramma.
• 

  agonus

  I bet more than a couple of the folks on this board, given enough time, could produce a translation at least as competent as the NWT. I mean, if that's all you did with your whole life - especially if you had a few underlings who shared your own peculiar theology and could fairly well reproduce your writing style. You, me, any one of us could, if we were driven enough and had enough time and resources.
• 

  yadda yadda 2

  lol at Ding.
• 

  Farkel

  :How did he manage to create the NWT if he was so inept? Did he have help from real linguists?

  It's been described as more of a transliteration than a translation. That's sort of like someone who doesn't understand Spanish and is faced with a sentence in Spanish. So the person gets a Spanish/English dictionary and looks up every word in the dictionary and cobbles all the equivalent English words together to form an English sentence.

  This leads to hilarious results at times. Whereas the King James version speaks of "anointeth his head with oil", the NWT speaks of "greased his hiead."

  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  It's no different than taking a Wescott and Hort to justify parousia as "presence" rather than "coming." Many words have multiple and varying definitions which is why mainly using a dictionary to translate from one language to another is a very shoddy and lame approach.

  Farkel