Jehovah's Witnesses, have you ever been corrected on YA?

Question

As strong as I feel about my own theology, I have been corrected a number of times, and I've grown.

Have you ever been enlightened by another theology? Please share...

Answer 1

The amount of research I've done to offer correct and truthful answers has helped me immensely.

Before I'm accused of researching only WT literature. I haven't.

For example 'Biblegateway.com' states that in order to understand Col 1:15, you have to apply Greek philosophy and the teachings of Plato. Yet this is contrary to what Paul said at Col 2:8.

One person gave me the address of the original source of a Watchtower quote stating we misquoted the person.

When I read the whole quote / article and not just the 'anti-proof' text, Not only did the WT quote the individual honestly, but the original writer made several more interesting points that I enjoyed. It turned out the one trying to disprove our understanding of the quote left out some very important information.

Another example of miss information going around about us.
How honest has the CARM been?

"I am" in John's Gospel
The Expository Times, 1996, page 302 by Kenneth Mckay.

"The verb 'to be' is used differently, in what is presumably its basic meaning of 'be in existence', in John 8:58: prin Abraam genesthai ego eimi, which would be most naturally translated 'I have been in existence since before Abraham was born', if it were not for the obsession with the simple words 'I am'. If we take the Greek words in their natural meaning, as we surely should, the claim to have been in existence for so long is in itself a staggering one, quite enough to provoke the crowd's violent reaction."

The Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry admits that there are times when the present tense in Greek can be translated into the English perfect tense:

"Does the Bible ever legitimately translate the present tense 'ego eimi' into the English perfect tense "I have been."? Yes it does. In John 14:8-9 it says, "Philip said to Him, 'Lord show us the Father, and it is enough for us.' 9Jesus said to him, 'Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how do you say, 'Show us the Father?'" Where Jesus says, "I have been" is in the Greek present tense, 'ego eimi'. Literally, again, this is "I am." Here we have an example of the present being translated into the perfect tense. If we did not do this, then the English would say this in response to Philip's request for Jesus to show them the Father, "I am with you so long...." That is awkward in the English, so translators translate it as "Have I been so long with you...." It is legitimate to do this in some instances where it is warranted.
But, the NWT's version of John 8:58 is not warranted, particularly if you look at the context."

But what the CARM writer does not inform it's readers of is that it is not only the producers of The New World Translation that think that the "ego eimi" at John 8:58 can be translated as "I have been," as the quote above shows.

The writer of CARM also when using John 14:8-9 as an example where they feel it IS justified fail to mention that this type of construction in passages of scripture the Greek Grammars of Winer and J.H.Moulton include John 8:58 where such a translation as found in the New World Translation is "warranted." As A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, by G.B.Winer says:

" Sometimes the Present includes also a past tense (Mdv. 108), viz. when the verb expresses a state which commenced at an earlier period but still continues, a state in its duration; as, Jno. xv. 27 .....viii. 58."


And the examples can go on.

I don't think this is the enlightened you were thinking about, but I have increased my knowledge, and faith in Jehovah and His Word. Thus becoming enlightened.

Answer 2

It seem difficult to imagine that anyone responsible for publishing Jehovah's Witnesses' official teachings would have the time or inclination to be on Yahoo Answers. Thus, it seems unlikely that the "Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses" as a religion will receive any "correction" from YA. Of course, they certainly do NOT ignore outside correction...

For many decades, Jehovah's Witnesses believed the "superior authorities" (of Romans 13:1) to be Jehovah God and Jesus Christ. The teaching was not a major one and had little practical effect on the worship of Jehovah's Witnesses, but it was wrong.

As the years passed, many sincere persons wrote to the branch offices of Jehovah's Witnesses, and the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses recognized that it seemed appropriate to revisit and research the matter. Thus, in the 1960's, Jehovah's Witnesses revised their official understanding of this verse and published a correction. As the years went by, many of those sincere persons who had written one or many letters about the matter were thanked, both in private and more generally.

A godly person accepts correction whenever he perceives that it is correct. By contrast, it is sad that so many cling to pagan philosophy and human tradition instead of allowing themselves to be corrected by the bible.

(Acts 23:4-5) [The anti-Christian members of the Sanhedrin] said: “Are you reviling the high priest of God?” And Paul said: “Brothers, I did not know he was high priest. For it is written, ‘You must not speak injuriously of a ruler of your people.’”


Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/20050715/article_01.htm
http://watchtower.org/library/pr/index.htm?article=article_04.htm

Answer 3

good day I even have not seen data of something you have reported. Your questions are the two flames or rants crammed with emotion seeing which you spot the Jehovah's Witnesses as brainwashed nincompoops who refuse to think of for themselves. I even have seen a great number of alternative insults besides. you won't see them as insults, yet I do. You insulted my intelligence once you pronounced I had no longer been around the Witnesses lengthy sufficient to make a determination. i'm an person only as you're and could make my own judgements on what's the fact and what isn't the fact. i think of the terrific element you have pronounced replaced into the accusations that the Jehovah's Witnesses are toddler abusers by fact of their refusal to conform to a regulation in Australia. slightly a stretch if I say so myself. i could call them criminals by fact they refused to conform with that regulation. they are no longer toddler abusers in spite of the incontrovertible fact that. I even have responded a lot of your accusations against the Witness ideals. We fluctuate in perspective. I even have been analyzing the Bible seeing that i replaced into 18. i'm now 40 4. I even have studied with the Witnesses for 2 years. I even have discovered lots with regards to the Bible in those 2 years yet maximum of what i'm being taught is a variety of evaluation. I could accept as true with lots of what the Witnesses say right here. lots of what you convey out only would not line up with what I even have experienced. collectively as interestingly like actuality there's a hoop of dishonesty to what you assert. once I examine your accusations it rather is like analyzing a tabloid mag. Take your cutting-edge accusation against the Witnesses with regards to the corporate being an ark. After wading by that accusation, you refrain from making one remark. One could be a Christian to be stored. Its an unique club. only people who comprehend Jesus' voice would be an element of it. it will be a small club. no longer many will locate it. according to probability I even have ignored your accusations that had evidence. i do no longer see all your accusations right here at Yahoo solutions. What I do locate on the information superhighway against the Jehovah's Witnesses is so one sided that it makes me ponder whether those human beings are making those issues up. once I even have regarded into the accusations i detect that those people who lead them to truly don't have a balanced view of the Witnesses. Your accusation that the Proclaimers e book is fake is only an accusation. the place is the evidence? what's misguided approximately this e book? How is it misguided?

Answer 4

Yes. One little thing. Someone once asked what does "Immanuel" means. I said it meant "Jehovah With Us." A woman emailed me and said it meant "God With Us." I emailed her back and thanked her for the correction.

Answer 5

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "corrected" . . . no, I have not changed any of my beliefs, but I have learned a lot about other religions and the spiritual beliefs of others.