JW's Approach To Bible Interpretaion

by JW_Rogue 13 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  JW_Rogue

  It will come as no surprise to many here that the JW approach to interpreting the Bible is greatly flawed. The reason that it is so flawed is that before anything is examined there are already some false assumptions that are made. JWs believe the following about the Bible without evidence:

  1. The Bible is always true and accurate
  2. The Bible is harmonious and has no contradictions
  3. Bible accounts are literal unless clearly shown to be figurative or prophetic
  4. The Bible has a clear theme running throughout

  Since many of these assumptions aren't true JWs must come up with convoluted and complex explanations for Biblical doctrines. Many times just outright ignoring more obvious simple explanations. One instance that comes to mind is Gen 3:15. The book of Revelation speaks about a woman who bears a child whom Satan tries to devour, because of this Gen 3:15 gets interpreted as a prophecy regarding Satan and Jesus. By assuming that the Bible is harmonious and has a clear theme the obvious explanation of Gen 3:15 is missed. God was talking to Adam and Eve about the relationship mankind would have with snakes. When God says "The Woman" he is talking about Eve, "The Seed" is all her offspring.
• 

  freemindfade

  Its called eisegesis vs. exegesis

  While exegesis is the process of drawing out the meaning from a text in accordance with the context and discoverable meaning of its author, eisegesis occurs when a reader imposes his or her interpretation into and onto the text.

  Most religious people actually commit eisegesis. The witnesses are pros at it. All thought they try to soften it. They still say Job was real, the flood was real, and on and on and on. They take them as true stories because it lends to their idea of what the bible is.
  
  
• 

  Viviane

  A lot of whacko cults do that... Methodists, Catholics, baptists, JW, Mormons, Muslims, Buddhists, jainists, etc.
• 

  JW_Rogue

  I still remember a public talk where the Brother made a big deal about how the Catholic Bible in the foreword talked about how the Genesis accounts where figurative. Everyone in the hall just shook there heads in disbelief but really either it is figurative or it is false. At least the Catholics know when to give in to reason and science.
• 

  OneEyedJoe

  JW method of interpreting the bible:

  1. Decide what you want the bible to say.
  2. Take scriptures out of context to support your claim of what the bible says.
  3. ???
  4. Profit.
• 

  Mephis

  They approach any piece of writing in the same way as Calvin solves a crossword. They always have the right answer and so everything supports that, no matter what it actually says.

  
• 

  Ding

  As we all know, JWs don't interpret the Bible. The GB interprets it for them, and JWs believe whatever the GB tells them.

  The GB often gets its doctrines from isolated verses or parts of verses. Then every verse that doesn't match either gets twisted or ignored. An example is that their teaching about what happens after death comes from interpreting literally the first half of Ecclesiastes 9:5 while simultaneously ignoring the second half of that verse as well as verse 6.

  Sometimes they tie together two passages that have nothing to do with each other, such as equating the "little flock" of Luke 12 with the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation 7 and 14, ignoring the fact that those books were written decades apart in two different genres by two different authors.
  
• 

  JW_Rogue

  Some interpretations they have just inherited and would be too hard to change after teaching it for so long. Things like 1914, 144,000 and not celebrating any holidays. They could easily be changed and make more sense but they aren't going to do that.
• 

  umbertoecho

  I was shown a book written by supposed scholar known as Dr Jason Be'Duhn, as a means of showing how "perfect" the NWT is in comparison to other bibles.

  I went looking for any information as to this man's credentials as a scholar of biblical texts and his knowledge of languages and linguistics.

  I found some interesting refutations of Be'Duhn's apparent neutrality and knowledge base.

  One of these interesting refutations was by a Dr Thomas A. Howes who delved into the credentials and found them lacking......very good read.

  The other was by Trevor R. Allen who wrote. A Review of "Truth in Translation". (Be'Duhns book)

  This book "Truth in Translation" is not recognized by any scholar, by any University, including the one he teaches at and is not used as a valid source of trustworthy research. Jehovah's Witnesses cite Be'Duhn as a highly credible source of verifiable information when supporting their own particular bible. However his leanings are highly biased in favour of the WTBTS. He is used frequently to point out the uses of the name of Jehovah in the NWT and it would be easy for someone to take this as an established and highly respected and neutral position. Be'Duhn, does not stand up to scrutiny though and the few that have decided to take him to task over this misleading statements as to his credentials, have trouble in finding anything of substance to his "boastful" claims.

  So, next time you are confronted with this so called scholarly proof of the Silver Sword or the older NWT, remember that you are being shown a very biased opinion that is not based upon deep knowledge of linguistics, historic texts taken in the context with which they were written, and even a lack of true knowledge of the Greek Koine language. I think I may have spelled that one incorrectly.
• 

  Diogenesister

  Mephis I meant that to be a 👍but by mistake its done a 👎!!!!