smiddy3 - "I appreciate your input on this post fts but do the examples you give really fit those that have posted here ?"
Thank you smiddy. I wasnt having a shot at you, just commenting that language is important. There are some experts who think that your language even affects the way we think. And, if language is important, translation is even more important, especially when dealing with abstract ideas
So to explain - when I saw the thread, I started thinking. As I recalled my (too many) bloody years wasted trying to be like Jesus, I also recalled guys I thought of as being a bit smarter than usual, like Dave Madzay*. (Though it wasn't very smart to get so pissed he couldn't tell the difference between petrol and kerosene and so burnt down the little place he was then living in) Dave gave a talk once in our congregation (we weren't far from the old Strathfield bethel) and he touched on this topic. Cant recall the title Dave used, but it was something like "The pure language of truth," I cant recall the exact text that thought was based on. It maybe was Zephaniah 3:9 which in the English Standard Version reads:
“For at that time I will change the speech of the peoples to a pure speech, that all of them may call upon the name of the Lord and serve him with one accord."
The KIng James Veersion reads:
"For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the LORD, to serve him with one consent."
The old Study version of the NWT reads:
"For then I shall give to peoples the change to a pure language, in order for them all to call upon the name of Jehovah, in order to serve him shoulder to shoulder."
I've quoted 3 translations to show that this wasn't just a silly idea that jumped out of old Freddy's brain.
Dave, then argued that the different words the witnesses were using, was evidence that not only were the JWs separate from the world, but the Jws wanted to be separate from christendom and Dave suggested that old YHWH had taught them to use a different language (words). We may no longer buy into that idea, but that's how JWs may think (if they think at all)
I don't give the proverbial rat's arse about either the JWs of any other stupid church, in the end they are all try to sell the same rubbish. But for me. when trying to understand anything I try to see why people are doing or thinking something, I guess in the end, that's how I finally escaped from YHWH/Jesus and they no longer own my mind. When the JWs df'd me, I was removed physically, but not entirely mentally. I then started an attempt to clean all that shit out of my mind. And, just going to another church wont do it. The same shit will still be in your mind, it just wears different clothes (or words). And that's probably my main reason for taking so many study units at university that dealt with xhristianity.
I understand you're likely doing the same thing, just in a different way,
So instead of being specific I decided to write a bit more generally and with two different examples. Your absolutely correct in most cases. but two words that jumped out at in your list were Organization and Sovereignty. If we were talking to a knowledgeable JW, they might see a flaw in the argument
Let's examine 'organisation' first.
In English, when you form a little football club in a little town, you have a meeting and elect a Chairman (or President) and maybe a Secretary and surely a Treasurer. What are you doing, we describe the process as getting organised. And what have you created, its an organisation.
It doesn't seem that Jesus had any formal rules in his little group of disciples. Though he did have a guy looking after the money they were given (collected) - that was Judas. So Judas was treasurer in English. But what happened at Pentecost and they started meeting regularly in the temple? And soon they formed what the NT called an ἐκκλησίᾳ (ekklesia). Most translations to English translate it as 'church' though 'congregation,' is perfectly OK. There were leaders in that ecclesia, so they were organised and from the perspective of English they had formed an 'organisation.'
Strong's Concordance defines this word as "an assembly, congregation, church; the Church, the whole body of Christian believers." In total, this word is found 114 times in the NT.
So if the English word organisation is not in any bible translation, the concept is,
Now let's think about the word 'sovereign.'
A sovereign is a king, so sovereignty is his power to rule his people.The word may not be used in any English translation, but the concept is certainly in the bible and christians of other denominations do use the word, as this extract from a Wikipedia entry
Easton's Bible Dictionary defines God's Sovereignty as His "absolute right to do all things according to his own good pleasure."[7]
Nave's Topical Bible lists well over 100 verses in the Christian Bible under the entry "Sovereign"
I think the Nave's entry possibly means 100 verses in the NT where the word sovereign could have translated the Greek word.
So yup! technically your comment on the word is correct, but a more thorough examination of the words meaning and usage indicates otherwise.
But what the hell, its only words - and the only reason they have any importance is because we wasted bloody years thinking we serving the sovereign (King or owner) of the universe because he had sovereignty over us.
I hope you may now see where I was going in my first post.
--------------------
Footnote: I placed an asterisk against Dave Madzay's name, because he was supposedly killed when he put petrol into his kerosene heater at homeand the thing blew-up. A burnt body was found in the burnt out ruin and everyone thought it was Dave. Naturally!
But a few years ago, I was at Circular Quay in Sydney, and suddenly I came face to face (about 2 metres away).with Dave, He looked at me, as I looked at him. I thought I saw recognition cross his face, There was a faint smile and he quickly disappeared. Was it Dave? I'm thinking now, that just possibly, he was much smarter than we possibly imagined. But if it was Dave Madzay, whose body was it, in the burnt out shack?
