Simon, though the copyright page of the NWT from the year 2006 says "2006 Printing" instead of saying "Revised 2006", it is a revised edition for it includes the changes in the wording (not simply the packaging, binding, and/or layout) and in illustrations of some maps, as I mentioned. Many readers on this site know that the WT has on many occasions revised the text of some of their publications without saying in the publications that it is Revised. Examples of numerous such revisions have been documented on this site.
Disillusioned JW
JoinedPosts by Disillusioned JW
-
20
NWT Revisions
by Jeffro inthere is mention on a wikipedia article that there was a 2006 revision of the nwt.
is this true?
what differences are there?
-
-
-
540
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast inwt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!
and the end times.
a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?
-
-
Disillusioned JW
I didn't say I believe in 'psychic'/ESP powers. I don't believe in them. But I am open minded about their possible existence. I thus did not replace belief in the supernatural with belief in 'psychic'/ESP powers. Furthermore, I became open minded about the possibility of 'psychic'/ESP powers more than 10 years before I became an atheistic naturalist. I became open minded about the possibility of 'psychic'/ESP powers while I was still a believing JW, and it was largely as a result of watching documentaries on TV about such. However I think it is unlikely that any 'psychic'/ESP powers exist since their existence has never been scientifically conclusively demonstrated to exist. I have books by Victor Stenger in which he says scientific experiments attempting to demonstrate ESP have failed. But a number of scientists continue to do experiments to see if some form of ESP exists to some degree. Some scientific peer reviewed journal articles have reported positive results of certain types of ESP (including short-term precognition), but other scientists were unable to repeat the results. In some cases flaws were found in the way the experiment was done and/or in the way the data was processed. In regards to whether I want to believe in ESP, I do want to have ESP abilities.
Einstein, as represented in the block theory of the universe, said that the past, present, and future co-exist. If that scientific idea is true, then it seems that it might be possible for people know their future much the same way they remember their past. Furthermore, the scientific idea about the possibility of time travel includes the idea that the past still exists (otherwise how could someone travel to the past?) and the idea that the future always exists (otherwise how could someone travel to the future?).
-
20
NWT Revisions
by Jeffro inthere is mention on a wikipedia article that there was a 2006 revision of the nwt.
is this true?
what differences are there?
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Jeffro, why not? I thought maybe you didn't learn of the explanation that I found. No one else in the topic thread mentioned discovering the evidence which I had discovered about the "2006 Printing" edition of the NWT. To me the change (regarding the removal of the single brackets) was major and to me it was sneaky that the WT 'quietly' made the change.
A number of times I have revived old topic threads.
I found your post because I went to your profile page to see what posts you have made, in order for me to learn more about you, in order tor me understand the perspective you are coming from in some of your posts about the Bible.
-
48
"Jehovah God"
by Jeffro inthe expression "jehovah god" has always seemed strange to me.
even when i was a jw, i found the term awkward, and never used it myself.
both words are nouns intended to be synonyms of each other, unless the name "jehovah" is being used as an adjective, which is also weird.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Clarification: Some non-Sacred Name non-hyper literal Bibles, such as the New Jerusalem Bible, say "Yahweh", though they still say Jeremiah and Jesus and Joshua, instead of Yeremiah, Yeshua, and Yoshua.
-
540
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast inwt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!
and the end times.
a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Page 131 of the WT's commentary book (in the above mentioned edition) on the book of Daniel quotes The Wycliffe Bible Commentary in support of the claim the 4th kingdom in the vision of Daniel chapter two is about the Roman Empire. I own The Wycliffe Bible Commentary. Page 789 of that commentary in regards to Daniel 7:7,8 says the following. "As in chapter 2, the fourth stage of empire is Roman."
I agree that It is entirely unsurprising that Christian “faith-based commentaries” hold to traditional Christian interpretations, and it was for full disclosure that I mentioned that the commentaries were faith based.
Since I am an atheist, I don't believe that the book of Daniel is a prophecy in the since of being inspired by God. But if it was written in the 6th century B.C.E. it does meet the dictionary definition of being a prophecy. If such is the case then its writer (whether Daniel or someone else) was a prophet, in the same sense that Edgar Casey and Nostradamus were prophets - whether they were true prophets or false prophets. The writer of the book might have been a brilliant futurist, maybe even one with some 'psychic'/ESP powers to foresee the future. -
540
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast inwt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!
and the end times.
a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Jeffro, the "New American Standard Bible - Study Edition" (as published by A. J. Holman Company in 1976) in its Survey of the book of Daniel, written by G. Douglas Young, Ph.D., says the following. "But there is no evidence in history that the Jews issued under a pseudonym a book claiming to be a revelation from God and set centuries earlier than the time when it is alleged to be presented to the public. In the absence of such historic evidence, there is no scientific basis for departing from the accepted Judeo-Christian tradition of a sixth century B.C. date and authorship by Daniel." Jeffro, disprove (with documented evidence) that claim of Ph.D. scholar Young if you can.
Jeffro regarding the hypothesis that the purported visions in the book named Daniel pertain nearly exclusively to the the Seleucid period, I didn't say it is "some ‘wild theory’ " nor did I suggest it is such. I also recognize that the majority of biblical scholars of the book of (called) Daniel accept that hypothesis, but I still want to see ample evidence before I fully accept it. I don't want to rush to conclusions. Some of the faith-based Bible commentaries, which I own and hold in high regard, don't accept that hypothesis.
As an example of me needing ample evidence on this toipic, consider the following. Despite me knowing since around age 10 that the majority of scientists (especially biologists and anthropologists) are convinced that evolution is true, it took me many years of research before I rejected day age special creationism and accepted biological evolution as true.
One of the most recently published books of the WT which I obtained and decided to keep (at least for now) is the First Printing of the First Edition of the Pay Attention to DANIEL'S PROPHECY! book (copyright 1999). I obtained it at a JW convention. I have kept the book, despite now being an atheist, because it references history books (and journal articles on history) in support of its claims.
-
540
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast inwt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!
and the end times.
a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Jeffro, I don't recall you providing documentation showing how the verses of Daniel accurately matter he Seleucid period, though you urge us to accept that Daniel is about the Seleucid period. Perhaps you have studied the history of the Seleucids, but I know virtually nothing about the Seleucids (though I took a college course in ancient world history, which included content about the Greeks) and I suspect that other readers (at least those who think the book was written in the 6th century or possibly written then) on this topic thread also know nearly nothing about them. Except for a few cases I thus don't see what you call "obvious references to the Seleucid period", so please document to me and others (including scholar) evidence of the alleged obviousness to the Seleucid period.
Making assertions, even repeatedly, without documentation/proof does not sway me to abandon my long held views and become convinced in the assertions. I need evidence instead. I have some evidence in some of the commentary books I own, but I it is not very detailed on a verse by verse basis. Furthermore, those same commentaries also say some of the verses do not fit well the Seleucids and they say some of the verses might refer to Rome.
I am much more familiar with the Roman empire than with the Seleucid kingdom. If you wish to convince me and others 100% that Daniel refers to the Seleucid period and that none of it refers to the Rome (or the Roman empire) or has no similarity to the Roman empire, please refer us to a commentary which interprets Daniel verse by verse as having reference to the Seleucids and no reference to Rome.
From what I learned about the Roman Empire (from movies, scholarly documentaries, and history books) the Roman Empire fits extremely well the description in Daniel 2:40 about the 4th kingdom.
-
48
"Jehovah God"
by Jeffro inthe expression "jehovah god" has always seemed strange to me.
even when i was a jw, i found the term awkward, and never used it myself.
both words are nouns intended to be synonyms of each other, unless the name "jehovah" is being used as an adjective, which is also weird.
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Jeffro, the name/expression "Jehovah God" never seemed awkward to me, just as the expression "Jesus Christ" never seemed awkward to me. While I was a JW I frequently used the expression "Jehovah God", possibly more often than I said "Jehovah" independent of the word "God".
Now I try to use the name 'Yahweh", but that name seems odd to me since for majority of my life I never used it. It probably also seems odd to me since all English Bibles (such as KJV, ASV, RSV, NKJV), except for some Sacred Name Bibles (such as ones which say 'Yeshua" instead of "Jesus") or hyper literal Bibles, have multiple names (such as "Jeremiah") in the scripture text which begin with a "J" but no names (to my knowledge) which begin with a "Y".
-
20
NWT Revisions
by Jeffro inthere is mention on a wikipedia article that there was a 2006 revision of the nwt.
is this true?
what differences are there?
-
-
Disillusioned JW
Yes it is true Jeffro. I know it because I have one (a paperback edition). In it there is no more use of single brackets, though there is still use of double brackets. The single brackets were used to indicate where the NWT included words in the translation that did not have an underlying Hebrew (or Aramaic) or Greek word in the text. Formerly the NWT said "Brackets enclose words inserted to complete the sense in the English text". Years ago I wrote a letter to WT headquarters in which one of my questions was why the WT made the NWT less literal by making such a change. I drew attention to the effect it had on the handling of the word "other" in Colossians 1:16-20. My letter was sent before the 2013 NWT was released (or if sent after the release, it was years before I realized the 2013 NWT had been released). I thus consider the 2006 printing edition to be a predecessor to the revision of 2013. The 2016 printing edition also had a revision to the Appendix and it has different maps on the inside cover of the Bible than the 1984 edition.
The WT never sent a written reply to my letter. After waiting months I called them about and the person one the phone told me he as the answers to my questions but that if want answers I should ask the elders instead of asking the WT society.
-
540
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast inwt claims that satan was thrown out of heaven in october 1914 precipitating ww!
and the end times.
a small problem with that is ww1 started on july 28th 1914 whilst satan was still in heaven picking his nose.. how did we not see this and waste years of precious life?
-
-
Disillusioned JW
When I wrote "Daniel wrote the prophecy" I don't necessarily mean it is an actual prophecy, But part of it is a prophecy in the sense it makes predictions (claiming to come from God) about the future, such as about God's kingdom becoming established and the resurrection of the dead, whether those predictions whether come true or not.] I was just referring to it as it is described. It is like saying "Spock said" or "Captain Kirk said" in reference to an episode of Star Trek. It is also like saying the "Gospel of Matthew" instead of the cumbersome wording of the "Gospel which is attributed as being according to Matthew". It also like saying "Jesus said" instead of saying "the biblical Jesus said" or "according to the Bible Jesus said".