Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the NWT translation is a formal equivalence translation you idiot, do you know what
a formal equivalence translation is?
i dont care what your trinitarian snake commentators say, as i have stated before,
you dont know anything, all you do is give someone else's opinion, because that's
all you can do.
and seeing that you like opinion of o ...[text shortened]... ccurate of translations that he surveyed, out with it. I want to hear you say it.
the NWT translation is a formal equivalence translation you idiot,
How does it read in Matthew 5:22 ?
Originally posted by RJHindsWow...what truths would that be as I haven't heard any from you yet?
I have studied with the Jehovah's Witnesses in the past and I have been to
their churches they prefer to call "Kingdom Hall"; so I do know that you are
people just like me, who are seeking the truth. I am here to give you that
truth if you are willing to accept it.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieExactly Robbie. And it's because we haven't kept the beliefs that burden them down still to this very day. And in the case of RJ, simple truths in the Bible like using God's name Jehovah we become "Objects of hatred" just as Jesus fortold his followers would be.
i dont mind the nominal Christians themselves, they have been misled. Firstly their
religion , Protestantism was borne from Catholicism, it simply sought to reform it, but,
they also carried with it, some of the vestiges of Catholicism, and it has become like a
burden to them. They cannot escape it. Their translators, influenced by this burd ...[text shortened]... iptures from a purely objective standpoint,
without the burden of doctrine to weigh us down.
We are free from all those burdens and we are happy with our faith and beliefs and most importantly.......we are able to explain them from the Bible with clearity.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieJason David BeDuhn, Ph.D. is an historian of religion and culture, currently
just what has anonymity of translator got to do with how a clause is translated from the
ancient text? that is correct, absolutely nothing. Its simply another trinitarian fallacy,
perpetrated, not on the basis of what is actually written or how it should be translated,
but as an expression of nothing more than pure prejudice, of which you are English Translations of
the New Testament
you want credentials, read the text.
Professor of Religious Studies at Northern Arizona University.
(He is not a Linguist)
Critique by Jason Harris of Jason D. Beduhn, Truth in Translation - Accuracy
and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament
"BeDuhn develops a serious credibility leak in his dealing with several
established Greek grammar rules. Particularly, he addresses Colwell’s Rule
and the Granville Sharp rule. Instead of merely critiquing them and offering
adjustments or developments to them, in both cases he simply says they are
wrong and should be ignored. In one case, he actually argues that exceptions
to the rule prove that it is not a rule at all. The folly of such a statement
is obvious." (Jason Harris)
FROM A DISCUSSION BETWEEN ROBERT HUMMEL AND JASON BEDUHN ON
JOHN 1:1 AND THE NEW WORLD TRANSLATION:
ROBERT: I have suggested "The Word was Deity." Dr. BeDuhn agrees that this
is possible, but disagrees with the capital "D." I have offered reasons, in an
earlier post, why I believe the capital letter is warranted - to signify that
the nature pointed to is that of the true God.
JB: I understand this reason, and do not disagree that John meant to associate
the Word with the "true God." I don't think that is at issue, but rather how
far the language goes in spelling out the exact character of that association.
Not as far as we might wish, I say. Thankfully, we have the rest of the gospel
to elaborate that association for us, which I think it does quite well and
clearly. Even if that elaboration agreed in all important respects with RH's
view (I think in certain significant respects it does not), I still would
argue that we have no right to import all of that elaboration into the wording
of John 1:1. I say let John tell it his way.
Originally posted by galveston75Who is hating you, certainly not me. Why would I be trying to help
Exactly Robbie. And it's because we haven't kept the beliefs that burden them down still to this very day. And in the case of RJ, simple truths in the Bible like using God's name Jehovah we become "Objects of hatred" just as Jesus fortold his followers would be.
We are free from all those burdens and we are happy with our faith and beliefs and most importantly.......we are able to explain them from the Bible with clearity.
you understand the truth of the "Deity of Christ" if I hated you?
If I hated you I would probably not even talk to you. Or at least,
if I did talk to you, I would be cussing you out.
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsfrom his curriculum vitae
Jason David BeDuhn, Ph.D. is an historian of religion and culture, currently
Professor of Religious Studies at Northern Arizona University.
(He is not a Linguist)
Critique by Jason Harris of Jason D. Beduhn, Truth in Translation - Accuracy
and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament
"BeDuhn develops a serious credibility leak in his dealin all of that elaboration into the wording
of John 1:1. I say let John tell it his way.
LANGUAGES
Coptic, Greek, Parthian, Middle Persian, Latin, French, German
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/jdb8/jason-cv1.htm
now i will tell you truthfully i merely skimmed your post, why, because you have
single handedly produced more bull in this thread than a herd of Texan Longhorns
do in a lifetime. Have you read his book? No didn't think so. Until you do, please
keep your ignorance to yourself, who knows, in the interim, you may manage to
formulate an original thought.
Originally posted by RJHindsWell you have cussed us out or have you forgot?
Who is hating you, certainly not me. Why would I be trying to help
you understand the truth of the "Deity of Christ" if I hated you?
If I hated you I would probably not even talk to you. Or at least,
if I did talk to you, I would be cussing you out.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell the Longhorns poop does stink so I'll give you that one...Lol
from his curriculum vitae
LANGUAGES
Coptic, Greek, Parthian, Middle Persian, Latin, French, German
http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/jdb8/jason-cv1.htm
now i will tell you truthfully i merely skimmed your post, why, because you have
single handedly produced more bull in this thread than a herd of Texan Longhorns
do in a lifetime. Have you read ...[text shortened]... ance to yourself, who knows, in the interim, you may manage to
formulate an original thought.
Originally posted by galveston75Yes, I have. Maybe, your idea of cussing one out is different from mine.
Well you have cussed us out or have you forgot?
But, truthfully, I do not hate you or any of Jehovah's Witnesses. I have
never met or worked with any of Jehovah's Witnesses that I disliked for
any reason. I am not sure about what you are referring to when I cussed
you out. I do remember telling you to "get your head out of rear end" if
that is what you mean.
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75yeah but their horns look real cool on a Cadillac, when i am a real Texan, im gittin one
Well the Longhorns poop does stink so I'll give you that one...Lol
of those, i will drive up to Georgia and spank RJH around the ears with my glove, call
him a cad and say that he has dishonoured me. 🙂