Re: Nwt refutes: The JW bible, John 1:1

[James]

On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 08:06:29 +1100, Michael Christ
<michaelm...@outlook.com> wrote:

>On 15/02/2024 7:15 am, servant wrote:
>> John 1:1, Using the New World Translation to Refute JW Teaching
>>
>> https://carm.org/jehovahs-witnesses/using-the-new-world-translation-to-refute-the-new-world-translation-john-11/
>
>That is why I said...
>
>"It doesn't even look right, let alone sound right.
>
>So, which God made all things? The God or another a god?"
>
>The JW Sinner Version is obviously not right; it's wrong. It doesn't
>even look right, let alone sound right on the first casual pass. That,
>of course, goes right over sinner James head and he makes up some
>shallow bullshit straw man about what 'looks like and sounds like,' as
>usual.
>
>Oh that sinner James!. He has got a lot to answer for!

To Michael Christ's readers,

So your proof against the translation of the NWT of John 1:1 is that
it don't LOOK right? And it doesn't SOUND right? Well OK.

Sincerely James
Wonderful news!
Go to jw.org
2/14/2024

>
>
>
>
>
>Michael Christ

[Michael Christ]

On 15/02/2024 12:33 pm, James wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 08:06:29 +1100, Michael Christ
> <michaelm...@outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15/02/2024 7:15 am, servant wrote:
>>> John 1:1, Using the New World Translation to Refute JW Teaching
>>>
>>> https://carm.org/jehovahs-witnesses/using-the-new-world-translation-to-refute-the-new-world-translation-john-11/
>>
>> That is why I said...
>>
>> "It doesn't even look right, let alone sound right.
>>
>> So, which God made all things? The God or another a god?"
>>
>> The JW Sinner Version is obviously not right; it's wrong. It doesn't
>> even look right, let alone sound right on the first casual pass. That,
>> of course, goes right over sinner James head and he makes up some
>> shallow bullshit straw man about what 'looks like and sounds like,' as
>> usual.
>>
>> Oh that sinner James!. He has got a lot to answer for!

Sinner of constancy, James wrote:
> To Michael Christ's readers,
>
> So your proof against the translation of the NWT of John 1:1 is that
> it don't LOOK right? And it doesn't SOUND right? Well OK.

Oh be quiet, contortionist distortionist sinner James, ye filthy whore
Pharisee.

Sinner James wrote:
> I don't lie.

All sinners are liars.

Sinner James wrote:
> God hates liars.

And they are not popular with your neighbour.




Michael Christ

--
God is God

Jesus is the everlasting Father, Jesus is God, Jesus is the Lord. John
10:30  I and Father are one. If you can't see that the Lord Jesus is the
everlasting Father you are not born again and can't see the Kingdom of God.

Colossians 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

Jeremiah 10:23 O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it
is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.

Psalms 53:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt
are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

Proverbs 12:15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that
hearkeneth unto counsel is wise.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory."

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything."

"What makes the bible the truth? The resonance of God."

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul, and mind. An abomination. Therefore,
sin is not what you do; it is what you are."

"Compromise will condemn you."

"There are no sinners in Christ Jesus."

"My sons are born of Me. In them is no darkness at all."

"You can't learn righteousness. Haven't you had enough time already to
know that?"

"The way of truth is the testimony of life."

"I merely speak the truth, what is revealed to me, and the cards fall
where God intends."

"Nothing that is produced is produced without first being faith."

"You can only find proof of God through faith because that is how we all
live, by faith."

"It is not what you do that matters, it is how you treat Me."

"Keep going forward. Forget about the past. Lift up your head, look
ahead."

"You cannot be free and free indeed with guilt in your heart."

"Priority is everything."

"The truth doesn't need evidence, it is evidence."

"There is no greater possession a man has than his own will, to squander
it or to place it where it truly belongs."

"An atheist is a fool who thinks truth is found in living a lie."

"Saying "prove it" [as a foundation] is merely an ignorant straw man, to
an ignorant straw man."

"Wait, rest, be still, and know."

"No man can wash his own hands!!!"

"I find this in the Christianity religions: 'Nobody's perfect' they say,
and they use that as an excuse not to do what is perfect."

The Atheist: "They don't believe and put their faith in a Creator (the
obvious). So no evidence and proof is to be found!!"

"The world is the way it is because God can't compromise who He is."

"Man is not the centre of being."

"Man is incompatible with the natural world because of his sinful nature."

"And then the Lord said, "I see everything."

"Man has no greater idol than his own will."

"Where is God hiding? He isn't."

"If you don't keep all the scriptures, you can't keep any of them."

"You can't prove anything because everything depends on a person's
willingness to believe."

"Atheists are ultimately trying to be pointlessness, meaninglessness,
and purposelessness in their point, meaning, and purpose."

"The last day of creation will be the last day of time. God is always
full of hope."

"The veil of the temple was rent in twain, not to have a book pass
through it so that a sinner could play God."

"A phylactery does not a heart for God make. Not back then, and not today."

"No one in heaven is better (or higher) than what makes it heaven. Such
is the love of God."

"The definition of an atheist: A man full of bluster and bullshit
pretending he is the meaning of life."

"Free will is not power; it is the choice that I allow; that choice is
still according to my power," says the Lord.

What does a fool do? A fool looks for a "nothing" in a "something" in
order to explain the existence of existence.

"Unless you do all because He is who He is, all your religion is in vain."

"Every man is subject to God; He judges every man, and He is reality.
 What a gift in a fallen world!"

"Love MUST be a choice or it is nothing but a law!"

"Why were all men born sinners? So that God could reveal Himself, so
that we would behold the glory of God, and that we should bring forth
the glory of God"

"God does not and will not arbitrate for any man to love Him! If God
isn't everything to you, He is nothing to you where the rubber meets the
road."

"It is the unforgivable sin not to love God with all your heart, soul,
and mind. What do you have that is lasting? It is not so much being
punished; it is what you are left with."

"Love isn't worth anything without first a free will choice for God to
birth it in a man."

"The point of salvation: desperation. Anything less than that is
self-righteousness."

"A sinner is not a believer in God; a sinner is a believer in sin."

"A piece of dirt is not the promised land; that is only a reflection.
The promised land is knowing Me, says the Lord."

"It is all about God or it is all about idolatry."

"The Lord Jesus is coming soon. He has always come soon."

"There is no revolving door of self-worship in a son of God's life!"

"There is no such thing as random!"

"You can't truly love without it being with all your heart."

"No one can see God without their whole heart. Unless you can see God,
you know nothing."

"You can't learn God, God has to reveal Himself to you."

"No sinner is sinless in any way."

"Only God is life; only the Kingdom of God of His "Nature" is life."

[James]

On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:59:33 +1100, Michael Christ
<michaelm...@outlook.com> wrote:

To Michael Christ's readers,

>On 15/02/2024 12:33 pm, James wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 08:06:29 +1100, Michael Christ
>> <michaelm...@outlook.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/02/2024 7:15 am, servant wrote:
>>>> John 1:1, Using the New World Translation to Refute JW Teaching
>>>>
>>>> https://carm.org/jehovahs-witnesses/using-the-new-world-translation-to-refute-the-new-world-translation-john-11/
>>>
>>> That is why I said...
>>>
>>> "It doesn't even look right, let alone sound right.
>>>
>>> So, which God made all things? The God or another a god?"
>>>
>>> The JW Sinner Version is obviously not right; it's wrong. It doesn't
>>> even look right, let alone sound right on the first casual pass. That,
>>> of course, goes right over sinner James head and he makes up some
>>> shallow bullshit straw man about what 'looks like and sounds like,' as
>>> usual.
>>>
>>> Oh that sinner James!. He has got a lot to answer for!
>
>Sinner of constancy, James wrote:
>> To Michael Christ's readers,
>>
>> So your proof against the translation of the NWT of John 1:1 is that
>> it don't LOOK right? And it doesn't SOUND right? Well OK.
>
>Oh be quiet, contortionist distortionist sinner James, ye filthy whore
>Pharisee.

The Bible truth shall set you free from the spiritual prison you are
in.

>
>Sinner James wrote:
> > I don't lie.
>
>All sinners are liars.

The Bible truth shall set you free from the spiritual prison you are
in.

>
>Sinner James wrote:
> > God hates liars.

Sincerely James
Lonely? The
Bible can help.
Go to jw.org
2/16/2024

[Michael Christ]

JW Sinner James wrote:
> I do not lie.

All sinners are liars.

I don't take advice from liars who are trying to transform the bible
into their own image.

"What you believe is just a leaning on your own understanding; faith is
a leaning on the one you have chosen to trust."

[James]

On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 16:22:30 +1100, Michael Christ

Not this one.

>
>I don't take advice from liars who are trying to transform the bible
>into their own image.

Neither do I. (:>)

Sincerely James
Lonely? The
Bible can help.
Go to jw.org

2/18/2024

[Michael Christ]

Michael Christ wrote:
>> All sinners are liars.

JW Sinner James wrote:
> Not this one.

All sinners are liars.

[servant]

Friend james, after reading the following web page in detail to be in the
truth, what is your response?

[James]

On 19 Feb 2024 18:07:25 GMT, servant wrote:

For servant's readers,

(words between the + and _ are copied from the web page)

I have already read a couple of these 'using the NWT to refute the
NWT' in the past. I honestly don't recall what they were about. Of
course I disagreed with them. So let's look into this one:

+..............................................................................................................
"scholarly translations (such as the NASB, ESV, KJV, etc.)"
_...............................................................................................................

Talking about "scholarly translations", let's see how the NWT comes
out:

(a) "is one of the most accurate English translations of the New
Testament currently available". Jason BeDuhn (professor of religious
studies) (later changed his mind)

(b) "I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased
intent to read something into the text that it does not contain.” Dr.
Benjamin Kedar (Hebrew scholar)

(c) "The translation of the New Testament [NWT]is evidence of the
presence in the movement of scholars qualified to deal intelligently
with the many problems of Biblical translation.” The Andover Newton
Quarterly 1963.

(d) “The New Testament translation was made by a committee whose
membership has never been revealed—a committee that possessed an
unusual competence in Greek.” Andover Newton Quarterly, 1966

(e) "It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I can
testify."
Dr Edgar Goodspeed (translator of the Greek New Testament in "An
American Translation")

(f)“I am very surprised,” he said, “that there is actually one Dutch
Bible in which the different use of the three Greek words bre´phos,
pai·di´on, and pais is rightly taken into account.” Does the New World
Translation translate these verses in harmony with the original Greek
text? “Completely in agreement,” Classical Greek scholar Dr. Rijkel
ten Kate

(g)“The translation is evidently the work of skilled and clever
scholars".
Hebrew and Greek scholar Alexander Thomson.

(h) Concerning "The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek
Scriptures," by JW's, "The translation by the anonymous committee is
thoroughly up-to-date and consistently accurate" Thomas N. Winter of
the University of Nebraska, appearing in The Classical Journal,
April–May 1974

(i) Eerdman’s Handbook to the Bible lists the New World Translation
among the 14 “main 20th-century English translations.”

Now, back to the web page:

+........................................................................................................
"Virtually every English Bible ever produced by any translator or
committee in any era all read:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God,” (John 1:1)."
_.............................................................................................................

Oh really? Then these translations don't count?


"the Logos was divine." (MO);
"the Word was divine." (AT; SD);
"a god was the Word." (interlinear ED) ;
"the Word was a god" (NTIV).
"The Word was deity." (Simple English)

+....................................................................................................................
“In the beginning was the Word.” It does not say, “In the beginning
the Word came into being” or “In the beginning God created the Word.”
It says that in the beginning the Word already “was.” In the
beginning, the Word is already there. The Word does not have a
beginning. Rather, the Word is already present in the beginning."
_....................................................................................................................

He doesn't answer the question, 'The BEGINNING of what?' The beginning
of creations? Or the beginning of the "Word"? The Scriptures support
the second one. The Word (Jesus) was CREATED.

-- King James
Colossians 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn
of every creature:
(the context here shows things being created. Of which, Jesus was the
first)

Yes, Jesus was the very first miracle of creation God performed:

-- New Revised Standard with Apocrypha
Revelation 3:14 "And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The
words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the origin {Or
[beginning]} of God's creation:

Notice verse 2:

-- New American Standard
John 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.

If you are WITH someone, there are two persons present, not one with a
split personality.

Notice vs 3:

(John 1:3) All things came into existence through him, and apart from
him not even one thing came into existence. What has come into
existence (NWT)

To get the real sense of vs 3, you have to add verses 1 and 2. But
first let's begin with Rev 3:14. So let's do that.

The scene opens up with just God. (Gen1:1) He now starts to create. He
creates the Word (Jesus) (Rev 3:14; Col 1:15) Now there are two of
them. (John 1:2) Next God starts all kinds of creating THROUGH the
Word. (Jesus)
Thus Jesus was involved in all the rest of the creations in some
undescribed way.

+................................................................................................................
"Note that all things came into existence through Him. Indeed, not
even one thing came into existence except through Him. If The Word
were Himself a creation, this would be utter nonsense!"
_..................................................................................................................

As shown above, not when you read it in chronological order.

The author also fails to give the reason the JW's say they translate
John 1:1 as "a god" and not "God".

In Greek grammar, at John 1:1 the word "theos" (god) occurs twice. The
1st "theos" has the word "the" (Greek ho) before it. For the Greeks
that points to Almighty God. (ho theos) The 2nd "theos" has nothing
before it, thus it just means "god". The NWT shows that distinction.
Most other popular Bibles do not.


+...................................................................................................................
"“He came to his own home, but his own people did not accept him,”
(John 1:11, NWT).

To whom did “The Word” (i.e., Jesus) come? Who were His own people
that did not accept Him? They were the Jewish people, of course. Jesus
is the God whose people are the Jews. How many gods are there that can
claim the Jewish people as their own people? Only one. The Jews had
but one God. Jehovah did not share His covenant people with some other
lesser god. No other god could call them “his own people.” So, if
Jesus is “a god.” Which god?"
_.....................................................................................................................

Again, he is ignoring some verses before it. Notice Vss 6,7:

"6 There came a man who was sent as a representative of God; his name
was John. 7 This man came as a witness, in order to bear witness about
the light, so that people of all sorts might believe through him."

There, John the Baptist just introduced Jesus to the Jewish people. He
was to become a LIGHT to the JEWS. So he was destined to be for the
Jewish people in the beginning of his ministry.


The rest of his web page doesn't deal with John 1:1, which was the
theme of the web page, and the reason I am looking at it. So I am
going to stop it here.

Sincerely James
Lonely? The
Bible can help.
Go to jw.org

2/20/2024

[servant]

>>Friend james, after reading the following web page in detail to be in the
>>truth, what is your response?
>>
>>John 1:1, Using the New World Translation to Refute JW Teaching
>>https://carm.org/jehovahs-witnesses/using-the-new-world-translation-to-refute-the-new-world-translation-john-11/
>

Friend james did not read in dteal why the nwt refutes. He merely tries to
justify jw vatican excuses for not haveing *any* greek/hebrew scholars who
did the "translation".

>"scholarly translations (such as the NASB, ESV, KJV, etc.)"
>_...............................................................................................................
>
>Talking about "scholarly translations", let's see how the NWT comes

Nope, we are not speaking of/questioing the point at all. Read the
question above again about the details of their analysis,ie. the nwt
refutes the John 1:1 jw vatican claim.