Questions I Would like Jehovah's Witnesses To Answer
@BroRando, since you're the only current JW on CD, I think it's reasonable to ask you to answer the questions below. If you cannot do so concisely, please send the questions to someone who can or invite a JW who will do so with accuracy. We know your website exists. Please avoid long labors quotes in attempting to answer the questions. They are not to stump you. CM
1. How do you prove from the Bible that 1935 was the year for the selection to heaven stopped due to being filled? What is the difference between a Catholic appealing to "what the organization tells him " about December 25 being the date of Jesus' birthday and a JW appealing to "what the organization tells him" about 1935? Is it not hypocritical when you scold the "poor deluded Catholic" that his faith cannot find a Bible passage to support it when the same goes for you and 1935?
2. In the NWT, every time the Greek word "proskuneo" is used about God, it is translated as "worship" (Rev 5:14, 7:11, 11:16, 19:4, John 4:20, etc.). Every time "proskuneo" is used about Jesus, it is translated as "obeisance" (Matt 14:33, 28:9, 28:17, Lk 24:52, Heb 1:6, etc.), even though it is the same word in Greek (see Greek-English Interlinear). Especially compare the Greek word "prosekunhsan" used about God in Rev. 5:14, 7:11, 11:16, and 19:4 and used with reference to Christ in Matt. 14:33, 28:9, and 28:17. What is the reason for this inconsistency? If the NWT was consistent in translating "proskuneo" as "worship," how would the verses above referring to Christ read?
3. The NWT translates the Greek word "kyrios" as "Jehovah" more than 25 times in the New Testament (Matt. 3:3, Lk 2:9, John 1:23, Acts 21:14, Rom. 12:19, Col 1:10, 1 Thess. 5:2, 1 Pet 1:25, Rev 4:8, etc.). Why is the word "Jehovah" translated when it does not appear in the Greek text? Why is the NWT not consistent in translating kyrios (kurion) as "Jehovah" in Rom. 10:9, 1 Cor. 12:3, Phil. 2:11, 2 Thess. 2:1, and Rev. 22:21 (see Greek-English Interlinear)?
4. The NWT translates the Greek words "ego eimi" as "I am" every time it appears (John 6:34, 6:41, 8:24, 13:19, 15:5, etc.), except in John 8:58 where it is translated as "I have been." What is the reason for the inconsistency in this translation? If "ego eimi" was translated in John 8:58, the same way it is translated in every other verse in which it appears, how would John 8:58 read?
5. The NWT translates John 1:1 as "... and the Word was WITH God, and the Word was a god". How can the Word (Jesus) be "a god" if God says in Deut. 32:39, "See now that I-I am he, and there are NO gods together WITH me ..."?
6. Jesus uses the phrase "Truly I say to you, ..." over 50 times in the Bible. In the NWT, the comma is placed after the word "you" every time except in Lk 23:43, where the comma is placed after the word "today." Why is the comma placed after "today" instead of after "you" in this verse? If the translation of this phrase in Lk 23:43 was consistent with the translation of this phrase in all the other verses in which it appears (see concordance), and the comma was placed after the word "you", how would it read?
7. The NWT translates the Greek word "esti" as "is" in almost every instance in the New Testament (Matt 26:18, 38, Mk 14:44, Lk 22:38, etc.). See Greek-English Interlinear. Why does the NWT translate this Greek word as "means" in Mt 26:26-28, Mk 14:22-24, and Lk 22:19? Why the inconsistency in the translation of the word "esti"? What would these verses say if the NWT was consistent and translated the Greek word "esti" as "is" in these verses?
8. In Phil. 2:9, the NWT inserts the word "other," even though it doesn't appear in the original Greek (see Greek-English Interlinear). What is the reason for inserting this word? Is the word "Jehovah" a name? See Ex 6:3, Ps 83:18, and Isa. 42:8. How would the verse read if the word "other" had not been inserted? What does scripture say about adding words to the Bible? See Prov. 30:5-6.
9. In Col 1:15-17, the NWT inserts the word "other" 4 times even though it is not in the original Greek (see Greek-English interlinear). Why is the word "other" inserted? How would these verses read if the word "other" had not been inserted?
10. In 2 Pet 1:1, the NWT inserts the word "the." Why is it inserted? How would the verse read if the word "the" was not inserted? What does scripture say about adding words to the Bible? (See Prov 30:5-6).
11. In Lk 4:12, the NWT translates "kyrios" (Greek-lord) as "Jehovah," which makes the verse read "... 'You shall not put Jehovah your God to the test.'" See Greek-English Interlinear. Why is kyrios translated as "Jehovah" in this verse? Was the devil, in Lk 4:9-11, putting Jehovah to the test or JESUS to the test?
Most of the questions are centered or from the New World Translation Bible. I and others want to know. Please take them seriously. I remain.
Comments
-
@C Mc posted:
@BroRando, since you're the only current JW on CD, I think it's reasonable to ask you to answer the questions below. If you cannot do so concisely, please send the questions to someone who can or invite a JW who will do so with accuracy. We know your website exists. Please avoid long labors quotes in attempting to answer the questions. They are not to stump you.
For full disclosure's sake, I think it's useful to note that: 1) I found, word-for-word, the eleven questions you posed to @BroRando as questions 8, 18, 19, 22, 28, 31, 32, 42, 47, 48, and 53 on THIS PAGE titled "Questions that Jehovah's Witnesses do not like to be asked"; 2) I found various sub-groups of the questions on other web pages; and 3) I found responses from JW defenders to many of the questions via simple Google searches. I think it's reasonable to presume @BroRando's responses will not vary to any consequential degree from those readily available.
And I can't help but call attention to the irony of your caution to @BroRando against "long labors [sic] quotes" from his website that "[w]e know... exists," when 100% of the content of the questions you posed to him is quoted directly from one or more websites that, with Google's assistance, we also know exist.
I'm not complaining about the questions! They appear cogent and thoughtful to me. But I think you should identify their source and acknowledge the awkwardness of your resistance to website-copied responses to questions you've copied from websites.
-
@Bill_Coley I respectfully disagree. I found @C Mc 's post to be an excellent and useful collation of questions. We have come to not expect answers from @BroRando, but when a person refuses to answer a question directed toward them, the inability / unwillingness to answer is a meaningful bullhorn to forum readers.
Case in point would be silence in threads such as this one.
-
There you go again, inferring before you let @BroRando be given a chance to answer the questions! Just because the questions I posed to @BroRando are printed elsewhere, it doesn't mean that they are not my questions. What part of "I and others wants to know" you, @Bill_Coley, didn't read or comprehend in my OP? You didn't process the statement about my questions when I asked @BroRando to "Please take them seriously"?
Regardless of how questions are generated or where they may be found, they have little or no consequences. These are my questions, and yes, I want answers to them from one who is supposed to know to get someone from @BroRando 's organization who can.
As a devout Unitarian and a quasi-JW, stop making a mountain out of a "mole-hill" and allow the addressee to answer the question asked by a fellow CD Poster. You seem to do anything to get (my) attention. You, Bill, are like the dog in the door of the barn, barking at the horse, and he (dog) can't eat the hay. Meaning, you are getting in the way of @BroRando from answering my questions, yet you can't answer them.
@Bill_Coley said:
And I can't help but call attention to the irony of your caution to @BroRando against "long labors [sic] quotes" from his website that "[w]e know... exists," when 100% of the content of the questions you posed to him is quoted directly from one or more websites that, with Google's assistance, we also know exist.
Is @BroRando a child? He needs you to do a google search for him or to caution him; my questions may exist someplace else? You, @Bill_Coley, provided nothing to this conversation. No one people or website have a monopoly or patient on questions unanswered by JWs. I don't have to bake every piece of bread I eat. Nor does every question asked to have to be self-generated. He who wants answers must ask questions even if someone asked it before, especially, If JWs never answered it before. @BroRando appears to be an adult, but your statement above shows he needs you, @Bill_Coley, to hold his hand to cross the street in front of his rural, dirt, unpaved house to the mailbox of questions.
@Bill_Coley, how is it that you conveniently failed to see that "Most of the questions are centered or from the New World Translation Bible"? @BroRando claim to know one of the Translators (ashamed to acknowledge him or them by name) and provide information on this work. It's fair and reasonable to inquire of answers to the text ("Bible") he reads, promotes, teaches others, and defends against the overwhelming independent evidence of gross deficiencies in the NWT.
Instead of embellishing the nebulous, you, @Bill_Coley, should be helping to show @BroRando the error of his understanding. No one needs long, laborious website answers to any questions, especially if he has given them before to ad nauseam. On second thought, "how could the blind lead the blind? They both will fall in the ditch." CM
-
@C Mc posted:
As a devout Unitarian and a quasi-JW, stop making a mountain out of a "mole-hill" and allow the addressee to answer the question asked by a fellow CD Poster. You seem to do anything to get (my) attention. You, Bill, are like the dog in the door of the barn, barking at the horse, and he (dog) can't eat the hay. Meaning, you are getting in the way of @BroRando from answering my questions, yet you can't answer them.
Nothing in my previous post prevented (or even delayed) @BroRando from addressing your questions.
As for any deleterious effects of barking dogs on hungry horses, I'll take your word that there are some.
Regardless of how questions are generated or where they may be found, they have little or no consequences. These are my questions, and yes, I want answers to them from one who is supposed to know to get someone from @BroRando 's organization who can.
Nothing in my previous posted expressed doubt about the authenticity of your desire for answers to the questions you pasted into your previous post. I simply suggested that you should have identified the source from which your drew them. After all, though they're "yours" in the sense that you seek answers to them, they're not "yours" in the sense that you researched and phrased them.
Is @BroRando a child? He needs you to do a google search for him or to caution him; my questions may exist someplace else? You, @Bill_Coley, provided nothing to this conversation. No one people or website have a monopoly or patient on questions unanswered by JWs. I don't have to bake every piece of bread I eat. Nor does every question asked to have to be self-generated. He who wants answers must ask questions even if someone asked it before, especially, If JWs never answered it before. @BroRando appears to be an adult, but your statement above shows he needs you, @Bill_Coley, to hold his hand to cross the street in front of his rural, dirt, unpaved house to the mailbox of questions.
In my previous post, I wrote, "I'm not complaining about the questions! They appear cogent and thoughtful to me." By those words I intended to communicate support for the substance of the questions. I repeat that support here.
Ask WHATEVER questions you want from WHATEVER source(s) you find them! But when you do, cite the source(s). That's not asking you to eat the bread you bake. That's asking you to credit the one who created the recipe you used to bake the bread. I don't understand why you object so strenuously to such a reasonable request.
As for @BroRando's "rural, dirt, unpaved house" and any street that lies in front of it, I'll take your word that there is one.
Whether he addresses your questions is up to him, just as whether you credit the sources from which you copy questions is up to you, and whether I call attention to the sources from which you copy them is up to me.
FWIW, I hope @BroRando will answer your questions, and will do so directly (and if he copies his answers from other sources, I hope he will credit those sources!) Further, I hope his responses yield a substantive and productive exchange of views between the two of you and any other posters who choose to join the conversation.
-
As a devout Unitarian and a quasi-JW, stop making a mountain out of a "mole-hill" and allow the addressee to answer the question asked by a fellow CD Poster. You seem to do anything to get (my) attention. You, Bill, are like the dog in the door of the barn, barking at the horse, and he (dog) can't eat the hay. Meaning, you are getting in the way of @BroRando from answering my questions, yet you can't answer them.
Three guesses as to why Bill does the, although one is enough.
-
t@Bill_Coley said to @C Mc:
Ask WHATEVER questions you want from WHATEVER source(s) you find them! But when you do, cite the source(s). That's not asking you to eat the bread you bake. That's asking you to credit the one who created the recipe you used to bake the bread. I don't understand why you object so strenuously to such a reasonable request.
Bill,
I know you want to protect your JW- adopted son, @BroRando, at any cost. What part of you fail to grasp doesn't drive my train? When it comes to posting, you don't understand? The posts' time, content, length, or frequency, with or without citations. You're not a factor and will not, moving forward. Your desires don't matter at this juncture. I find you are a hard-core, dye-in-wool, divinity of Christ denier! Unfortunately, you're NOT searching for truth, in need of information, under conviction to follow Christ or accept biblical teachings. Although you provide slick-charlatanry lip-service to the Word and Christ, it is only to mislead. You are a spiritual prostitute with a bible in hand and a pulpit with your year-long "Jesus is not God" nonsense. You were allowed to bring your campaign here in CD. I am not judging or criticizing you. I am calling attention (or holding up a mirror) to your many years of posts on CD. This is what I "object" to so "strenuously." You acting as flare or decoy flare is an aerial infrared countermeasure used by a plane or helicopter to counter an infrared homing ("heat-seeking") surface-to-air when biblical truth is set to come out.
I start sharing citations as a courtesy and for those desiring further reading or a broader understanding of a subject matter. Your former "side-kick," Wolfgang (who abandoned you to defend the indefensible - JWs), used to complain bitterly of my including other voices or scholars in the conversation. I encourage newcomers to cite sources, providing they have them or are inclined to share, but never demand or require such. CD had no such rule in place. Need I remind you we are not writing dissertations, publishing for money, or seeking royalties for our posts. We are sharing comments (facts/opinions). You, @Bill_Coley, can't impose or demand anything in my posts. I know your name is Bill, but you don't have to behave like a "bully."
Now that you got the attention you have been craving be content, in your stale brooding. While you are at it, remove the cloak of Bible-believing, Christ-follower, and let the spiritual chickens/lambs (JWs and others) see who you are -- A spiritual butcher pretending to feed them. These are my words, your posts. CM
SOURCE:
- @Bill_Coley years of posting.
- Wayback Machine
PS. @Bill_Coley, please allow this thread to breathe.
-
@C Mc posted:
I find you are a hard-core, dye-in-wool, divinity of Christ denier!
Unfortunately, you're NOT searching for truth, in need of information, under conviction to follow Christ or accept biblical teachings.
Although you provide slick-charlatanry lip-service to the Word and Christ, it is only to mislead.
You are a spiritual prostitute with a bible in hand and a pulpit with your year-long "Jesus is not God" nonsense.
I am calling attention (or holding up a mirror) to your many years of posts on CD. ...
You acting as flare or decoy flare is an aerial infrared countermeasure used by a plane or helicopter to counter an infrared homing ("heat-seeking") surface-to-air when biblical truth is set to come out. ...
You, @Bill_Coley, can't impose or demand anything in my posts. I know your name is Bill, but you don't have to behave like a "bully."
Now that you got the attention you have been craving be content, in your stale brooding.
While you are at it, remove the cloak of Bible-believing, Christ-follower, and let the spiritual chickens/lambs (JWs and others) see who you are -- A spiritual butcher pretending to feed them.
I'll take that as a "no."
I am not judging or criticizing you.
Why would I ever think that you were?
-
False prophets don sheep’s clothing to disguise the fact that they are ravaging wolves masquerading as true disciples.
However, a prophet’s character and behavior (his fruit) indicates whether he is true or false.
Other NT texts insist that a teacher’s doctrine must also be examined (1Jn 4:2–3).
True disciples bear the fruit of good works, and this confirms their identity as Jesus’s disciples (Mt 7:21–23).
The image of cutting down and burning a bad tree portrays the judgment and eternal punishment of false disciples.
Robert H. Stein, “Differences in the Gospels,” in CSB Study Bible: Notes, ed. Edwin A. Blum and Trevin Wax (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2017), 1512.
