Does anyone have the original copy of the Awake 2015 Jan before it was changed?

by jwfacts 18 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • FadingTruth

    They didn't remove the quote from most of the non-english languages. I wonder if Rama Singh knows they didn't fully retract it.

    For example, here's the german version of the Awake, with Rama Sing's quote still there (just checked today)

    The quote is still in the pdf version of the magazine as well

  • FadingTruth

    I wanted to add, in case it wasn't too known, that the other scientist mentioned by only his first name, "Gerard" is actually a JW.

    The foreign languages included his full name, Gerard Hertel. From his Wisconsin Alumni page

    So to recap: they misquote one scientist and then use a JW for their other quote.

  • bohm


    The worst bit is this is not some guys random blog on the internet; it goes through revision upon revision and apparently they must all have decided this is an okay thing to do.

  • WTS Archive
    WTS Archive

    It's also funny that they forgot to remove the quote from the audio version. Go to the article:

    And press play on the audio player below the article title. You can skip to 0:30 sec mark. The quote will still be read, even though it's absent from the article text :).

    PS. They did remove it from the polish language editions, but also - except the audio recording, which still contains it.

  • johnamos

    1-1-03 WT- [A THEATER critic for a newspaper once went to see a certain play. He did not much like it and afterward wrote: “If triviality is what you happen to be wanting, by all means go and see this play.” Later, the promoters of the play published an advertisement that featured a quote from the critic’s review. The quote was: “By all means go and see this play”! The advertisement accurately quoted the critic’s words, but it lifted them out of context and thus grossly misrepresented his view.That example illustrates how important the context of a statement can be. Taking words out of context can distort their meaning, just as Satan distorted the meaning of Scripture when he tried to mislead Jesus. (Matthew 4:1-11) On the other hand, taking the context of a statement into account helps us to get a more accurate understanding of its meaning.]

  • coalize

    In french, the same than in German, it wasn't deleted :

  • OneEyedJoe

    They probably left it in there for the other languages because someone trying to do a google search by the text in a different language is much less likely to uncover the source material and realize that it was taken out of context. A google search of the quote is also unlikely to pull up their translated versions. Revising the text in other languages would've required that all their translators be aware of the revision and because this organization is as arrogant as it is, they obviously want to limit the number of people who know about the change and might realize this embarrassing "mistake."

  • JWdaughter
    I was going to be positive that at least the WT respected the scientist and removed the quote, but from what you have all said regarding all the places they did NOT remove it, I think that the suspect nature of their honesty has been confirmed to be, not suspicious, but confirmed as dishonorable and dishonest. :(
  • OneEyedJoe


    Personally, even if they completely removed the quote I would personally be inclined to interpret it as further dishonesty. Not because they just can't do right by me, but because:

    1 most jws were out peddling hard copies with the quote still in.

    2 the removal online would make it more difficult to demonstrate their dishonesty and they make no admission of the error. They need to print a retraction.

    3 they waited long enough to fix it that most anyone who was going to read the article would've already done so. Again they need to print a retraction online and in a new awake magazine that would get equal viewing to the misquote.

    There's a reason reputable news sources often have notes at the end of a story detailing the (usually relatively minor) updates that were made after it went online. It's part of their journalistic integrity that they not go around trying to erase their mistakes, hoping they go unnoticed.

Share this