Jehovah's Witnesses Knocked on My Door

[Super Universe]

I had a visit from a Jehovah's Witness who left me an "Awake" magazine. I told him I would not give him .25 for it and he said I did not have to.

There are twenty biblical quotes in the magazine. Five of the quotes are word for word correct from the bible, seven of the quotes are slightly changed, and eight of the quotes are greatly changed to give the Jehovah's Witness interpretation.

Some of the quotes have the biblical reference in parenthesis as if to admit that this is not the word for word version and that it is their interpretation. Some of the quotes do not have the parenthesis and are still very changed.

When you change a biblical quote on purpose and provide a bible reference for that changed quote, that is called lying.

If you want to post a biblical quote and THEN give your Jehovah's Witness interpretation of it, that is fine, but purposely changing quotes to make the bible say what you WANT it to mean is dishonest.

 

[Mister Silver]

It's not called lying. It's why there are differing denominations of a singular Christian religion.

It's all in the "interpretation" of Scripture.

It's no different than Christians who cherry pick.

 

[David1967]

I had a visit from a Jehovah's Witness who left me an "Awake" magazine. I told him I would not give him .25 for it and he said I did not have to.

There are twenty biblical quotes in the magazine. Five of the quotes are word for word correct from the bible, seven of the quotes are slightly changed, and eight of the quotes are greatly changed to give the Jehovah's Witness interpretation.

Some of the quotes have the biblical reference in parenthesis as if to admit that this is not the word for word version and that it is their interpretation. Some of the quotes do not have the parenthesis and are still very changed.

When you change a biblical quote on purpose and provide a bible reference for that changed quote, that is called lying.

If you want to post a biblical quote and THEN give your Jehovah's Witness interpretation of it, that is fine, but purposely changing quotes to make the bible say what you WANT it to mean is dishonest.

The verses you are saying are changed might just be from their New World Translation. Can you quote the verses you believe have been changed?

 

[Nakosis]

I had a visit from a Jehovah's Witness who left me an "Awake" magazine. I told him I would not give him .25 for it and he said I did not have to.

There are twenty biblical quotes in the magazine. Five of the quotes are word for word correct from the bible, seven of the quotes are slightly changed, and eight of the quotes are greatly changed to give the Jehovah's Witness interpretation.

Some of the quotes have the biblical reference in parenthesis as if to admit that this is not the word for word version and that it is their interpretation. Some of the quotes do not have the parenthesis and are still very changed.

When you change a biblical quote on purpose and provide a bible reference for that changed quote, that is called lying.

If you want to post a biblical quote and THEN give your Jehovah's Witness interpretation of it, that is fine, but purposely changing quotes to make the bible say what you WANT it to mean is dishonest.

I discovered the same thing a number of years ago. It was altered enough that I decided at the time the Watchtower was not a reliable source for scripture.

 

[Brickjectivity]

It's not called lying. It's why there are differing denominations of a singular Christian religion.

It's all in the "interpretation" of Scripture.

It's no different than Christians who cherry pick.

Pretty much. Also there are no true translations from ancient Aramaic to modern English. Its simply not possible, and what makes it worse is we're not Jewish and pretty much don't care to learn anything about Judaism which turns the whole thing into a black box.

 

[sun rise]

Of course motive is a question.

 

[blü 2]

Some of the quotes have the biblical reference in parenthesis as if to admit that this is not the word for word version and that it is their interpretation.

That doesn't sound like they intend to mislead, so I wouldn't call it a lie.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I had a visit from a Jehovah's Witness who left me an "Awake" magazine. I told him I would not give him .25 for it and he said I did not have to.

There are twenty biblical quotes in the magazine. Five of the quotes are word for word correct from the bible, seven of the quotes are slightly changed, and eight of the quotes are greatly changed to give the Jehovah's Witness interpretation.

Some of the quotes have the biblical reference in parenthesis as if to admit that this is not the word for word version and that it is their interpretation. Some of the quotes do not have the parenthesis and are still very changed.

When you change a biblical quote on purpose and provide a bible reference for that changed quote, that is called lying.

If you want to post a biblical quote and THEN give your Jehovah's Witness interpretation of it, that is fine, but purposely changing quotes to make the bible say what you WANT it to mean is dishonest.

All English bibles are interpretations to some degree.
Their interpretation is different to yours. You think theirs is wrong, fair enough. Even assuming theirs is completely wrong doesn't make them liars, though.

 

[Super Universe]

It's not called lying. It's why there are differing denominations of a singular Christian religion.

It's all in the "interpretation" of Scripture.

It's no different than Christians who cherry pick.

If they posted their beliefs, that's one thing, that is not lying. But posting that Revelations 21:4 and 5 says one thing that supports JW beliefs and I look it up and find that they changed it completely, that is lying, plain and simple.

Interpretation is fine but if I quote the bible and purposely change the quote to say what I want it to say, that's no longer interpretation, that is lying.

It's not different than Christians who cherry pick? We all cherry pick but we don't all CHANGE the bible verses to fit our beliefs.

 

[Super Universe]

The verses you are saying are changed might just be from their New World Translation. Can you quote the verses you believe have been changed?

Yes, I can. Give me 15 minutes to look them all up at Bible Gateway. The biblical quotes I will provide will be from the King James. I don't know what bible the JW's are using.

 

[DavidFirth]

I had a visit from a Jehovah's Witness who left me an "Awake" magazine. I told him I would not give him .25 for it and he said I did not have to.

There are twenty biblical quotes in the magazine. Five of the quotes are word for word correct from the bible, seven of the quotes are slightly changed, and eight of the quotes are greatly changed to give the Jehovah's Witness interpretation.

Some of the quotes have the biblical reference in parenthesis as if to admit that this is not the word for word version and that it is their interpretation. Some of the quotes do not have the parenthesis and are still very changed.

When you change a biblical quote on purpose and provide a bible reference for that changed quote, that is called lying.

If you want to post a biblical quote and THEN give your Jehovah's Witness interpretation of it, that is fine, but purposely changing quotes to make the bible say what you WANT it to mean is dishonest.

People do it every day, nevertheless.

 

[Super Universe]

Pretty much. Also there are no true translations from ancient Aramaic to modern English. Its simply not possible, and what makes it worse is we're not Jewish and pretty much don't care to learn anything about Judaism which turns the whole thing into a black box.

I'm not condeming an incorrect translation. I grew up a Jehovah's Witness and JW's don't translate ancient texts, they don't learn Greek or Aramaic or whatever language to interpret the originals. They use the King James bible, they just change take things out of context and change some things to fit their interpretations.

When the bible says "Lord" they change it to "Jehovah" because they think they are the only ones who use the correct name for God.

 

[Katzpur]

I had a visit from a Jehovah's Witness who left me an "Awake" magazine. I told him I would not give him .25 for it and he said I did not have to.

There are twenty biblical quotes in the magazine. Five of the quotes are word for word correct from the bible, seven of the quotes are slightly changed, and eight of the quotes are greatly changed to give the Jehovah's Witness interpretation.

Some of the quotes have the biblical reference in parenthesis as if to admit that this is not the word for word version and that it is their interpretation. Some of the quotes do not have the parenthesis and are still very changed.

When you change a biblical quote on purpose and provide a bible reference for that changed quote, that is called lying.

If you want to post a biblical quote and THEN give your Jehovah's Witness interpretation of it, that is fine, but purposely changing quotes to make the bible say what you WANT it to mean is dishonest.

I stopped sticking up for the Jehovah's Witnesses quite some time ago when every one of them that I came in contact with turned argumentative, condescending and judgmental. Still, there are numerous different translations of scripture, so when you say that several of the quotes were "slightly changed" and that others were "greatly changed," it's really a meaningless statement. In other words, what were they changed from? The translation you personally use? Every translation out there is subject to error and we have none of the original documents. When it gets right down to is that most translations are colored to some degree by what the translators believed the original writers were trying to say.

 

[Eliab ben Benjamin]

I used to enjoy inviting them and the Latter days in to enmesh them in correct Torah ...

nowadays at the door i point to my Mezuzah, and send them away ....

 

[DavidFirth]

I had a JW come into my house once and tried to tell my wife that each day of creation in Genesis was actually a billion years long. I told the JW to get out of my house and tell the rest of her fellows to stay out.

It has been 8 years and I haven't seen one since. If you know the Bible and what it says people can't deceive you about it.

I have friends who are Mormons who used to visit but one day 6 of them came over and I showed them how the Book of Mormon and what they believe directly contradicts what Jesus taught in the Bible. I showed them the verses and proved to them that they were wrong. They haven't been back since though we still are friends with one of them.

Oh, forgot to mention that at least one of them became a Baptist because she couldn't cope with the differences in what Mormons believe and what the NT actually teaches.

 

[Milton Platt]

It's not called lying. It's why there are differing denominations of a singular Christian religion.

It's all in the "interpretation" of Scripture.

It's no different than Christians who cherry pick.

You cannot at the same time say that Christianity is "singular" and at the same time say it is splintered into factions. If scripture is open to interpretation, then who decides what the correct interpretation is for everybody else on the planet?

 

[Mister Silver]

You cannot at the same time say that Christianity is "singular" and at the same time say it is splintered into factions.

I can, because it's a fact. It's called denominations within christianity.

If scripture is open to interpretation, then who decides what the correct interpretation is for everybody else on the planet?

No single denomination can agree on a single interpretation, which is why christianity has split into denominations. Each "thinks" it alone has the correct interpretation, which is the overall problem of religion.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I'm not condeming an incorrect translation. I grew up a Jehovah's Witness and JW's don't translate ancient texts, they don't learn Greek or Aramaic or whatever language to interpret the originals. They use the King James bible, they just change take things out of context and change some things to fit their interpretations.

When the bible says "Lord" they change it to "Jehovah" because they think they are the only ones who use the correct name for God.

They use the NWT, not the KJV. The KJV also has Jehovah in it but that's just an attempt at an English-Latin YHWH tetragrammaton, which does not mean Lord. Rather Lord was a substitution word used instead of the personal name.

 

[YmirGF]

For me, my treatment of JW's, live, in the flesh, is pretty much a mood thing. Sometimes, I'll entertain their primitive thinking other times I'll practically turn the Rotties on them.

* screams... "Release the hounds!" *
(It's always a bit surprising how fast the old folks can run back down my long driveway.)

More often than not, I'll just toy with them until they realize they are wasting their time. Oddly, it doesn't normally take too long.

In regards to the OP, one cannot expect too much from a door to door salesperson religion. Most of the time I start laughing simply reading the cover, then my bizarre sense of humor takes over and well... things go downhill rapidly from there.

 

[DavidFirth]

They use the NWT, not the KJV. The KJV also has Jehovah in it but that's just an attempt at an English-Latin YHWH tetragrammaton, which does not mean Lord. Rather Lord was a substitution word used instead of the personal name.

Hello, what does NWT stand for?