Jehovah's Witnesses and etc. Is it true that the Watchtower misquoted Dr Julius Mantey?

Answer 1

They didn't misquote..they took his comment, cut it in half, put their own spin on it and reprinted it..just like they did with their translation of the Bible.


I think that is the first time Bill, I mean Heiss has no dogma to cut and paste to support his spin. We can all now applaud that Bill has found something to paste..or is he answering under Heiss now? I get confused.

Mr. Mantey may sue, but God will wipe them out.



My friend Pedi C provided the following info.


(Have you seen the letters from one of them telling the JW Society to cease and desist saying he supports their Bible or they'd "suffer the consequences?"

Dr. Julius R. Mantey
"...The afore mentioned are only a few examples of Watchtower mistranslations and perversions of Gods Word.

In view of the preceding facts, especially because you have been quoting me out of context, I herewith request you not to quote the Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament again, which you have been doing for 24 years. Also that you not quote it or me in any of your publications from this time on. Also that you publicly and immediately apologize in the Watchtower magazine, since my words had no relevance to the absence of the article before theos in John 1:1. And please write to Caris and state that you misused and misquoted my "rule."

On the page before the preface in the grammar are these words: "All rights reserved - no part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the publisher."

If you have such permission, please send me a photo-copy of it. If you do not heed these requests you will suffer the consequences.

Regretfully yours,

Julius R. Mantey"

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/har...


Dr. William Barclay
"Dear Professor XXXXXXXXXXXX,

Thank you for your letter of August 11th. The Watchtower article has, by judicious cutting, made me say the opposite of what I meant to say. What I was meaning to say, as you well know, is that Jesus is not the same as God, to put it more crudely, that he is of the same stuff as God, that is of the same being as God, but the way the Watchtower has printed my stuff has simply left the conclusion that Jesus is not God in a way that suits themselves.

If they missed from their answer the translation of Kenneth West and the N.E.B., they missed the whole point.

It was good of you to write and I don't think I need say anything more to make my position clear.

With every good wish.

Yours Sincerely

William Barclay.")

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/har...
17 hours ago

Answer 2

The portion of Dr. Mantey expertise of Greek that was quoted was done so accurately and correctly.

What Dr. Mantey objected to was being shown that his interpretation of Greek disagreed with his translation of the Greek.

And, Yes I have read both the quote and Dr. Mantey's objection.

The Watchtower did not say 'Dr. Mantely didn't believe in the trinity', they said, based on the correctness of Dr. Mantely understanding of Greek Grammar, Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in the trinity.

Note what the NAB Footnotes says:

"Was God: lack of a definite article with "God" in Greek signifies predication rather than identification."

Dr Mantey also claimed 'no other bible translates John 1:1 as the NWT'

1864 “and a god was the Word”

The Emphatic Diaglott (J21, interlinear reading), by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London.

1975 “and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word” Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz,Göttingen, Germany.

1978 “and godlike sort was the Logos”
Das Evangelium nach Johannes,by Johannes Schneider,Berlin.

1979 “and a god was the Logos”
Das Evangelium nach Johannes,by Jürgen Becker, Würzburg, Germany.

A Fairly Literal English Translation of the Coptic Text:

1 In the beginning the Word existed. The Word was in the presence of God, and the Word was a god.

(The above was translated into Egyptian, +/- 100 years after John wrote the book of John, ce 150 to 200 A.D. by people who spoke the same Greek John spoke.)

Makes you wonder: What else did Dr. Mantey miss apply?

.

Answer 3

No.

Jehovah's Witnesses never relied on or focussed on Mantey's work, but did mention him exactly three times over the decades. Watchtower publications have not mentioned him in more than 30 years.

In 1974, Mantey wrote and publicized an "open letter" to Watchtower, expressing remarkably picayune protestations about why he felt that his writings had been misapplied. It seems impossible to ignore that Mantey's customers were almost exclusively trinitarian.

Apparently, anti-Witnesses have not found anything more interesting to harp on in three decades.

Learn more:
http://watchtower.co.uk/e/20000622/
http://watchtower.co.uk/e/ti/index.htm?article=article_02.htm

Answer 4

evidently Dr. Mantey thinks so, as evidenced by his letter.
the JWs must've thought highly of his reputation as a bible scholar as they tried to use it to back their mis-theology for over 24 years.

I can only imagine his embarassment in being linked with false religion.

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/letter_mantey.htm

Answer 5

Honestly, the name doesn't shake the cobwebs in my mind to well. I would say in general, no.

I do know that errors have been made before, which is why retractions exist.

Answer 6

YES

Check this link http://www.bible.ca/trinity/trinity-Mantey.htm

The fact is Dr Mantey was misquoted and he challenged them on it.

For witnesses to say "no" their credibility sinks even lower.

Answer 7

Ya it looks like it is bash the JW's day...... although this guy has been bashin them for a while...... get a life dude. You dont like the religion, get over it.........

Answer 8

Is it Bash the JW's Day in R&S ?

Answer 9

Julius Mantey "SAID What H.E. SAID"

PERIOD .................................................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!