08 Oct 13
1 edit
Originally posted by checkbaiterThese are titles, God has only one name represented by the four Hebrew characters of the tetragrammaton, YHWH or JHVH. 'I am that I am', is a very poor and inaccurate translation of the original Hebrew.
God uses many different names in the bible...
http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/695/what-are-the-different-names-of-god-in-the-bible-and-what-do-they-mean
08 Oct 13
ehovOriginally posted by robbie carrobieIf it is a Jehovahs Witness bible, then you only have half a translation. i only have one question, translate from direct ancient Jewish text. "I am, who am" correctly.
The worlds 'most accurate English translation', (independently assessed by associate professor Jason BeDhun) has undergone its latest revision. Begun sometime in 2005 this refining process took eight years and a team of volunteer researchers to accomplish and we thank them for their hard work! We are reminded of the words of the psalmist, that Go ...[text shortened]... r God be with you.
'Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my roadway' - Psalm 119:105
It cannot be translated into english. The word "I" in this text, is specifically Jewish. It is a singular plural word. The rough translation is, "I's am whom am". The Jews saw God as a singular plural being. Something overlooked by many christains in general.
08 Oct 13
Originally posted by PudgenikThis is what Proff BeDhun was saying! but there is no talking with robbie carrobie on this he is only posting this OP because he has had authorisation from the JW leadership.
If it is a Jehovahs Witness bible, then you only have half a translation. i only have one question, translate from direct ancient Jewish text. "I am, who am" correctly.
It cannot be translated into english. The word "I" in this text, is specifically Jewish. It is a singular plural word. The rough translation is, "I's am whom am". The Jews saw God as a singular plural being. Something overlooked by many christains in general.
08 Oct 13
Originally posted by divegeesterWhat is the problem with saying Jehovah instead of "I's am whom am" or trying to say JHVH. Don't Jews call him Yahweh?
This is what Proff BeDhun was saying! but there is no talking with robbie carrobie on this he is only posting this OP because he has had authorisation from the JW leadership.
08 Oct 13
3 edits
Originally posted by PudgenikThe text is not about Gods self existence, a proper translation is 'he causes to become', the idea being that God fulfils his purposes. 'I am that I am', or 'Is am who am', makes absolutely no sense in English and cannot be described in any other terms as poor translation. What other Christians or Jews think is irrelevant. I don't understand what you mean by a Jehovahs Witness Bible, we did not write the original Hebrew and Greek, half a translation makes even less sense. Its the most accurate English translation in the history of humanity, get yourself a copy and test out whether its not in fact the case.
If it is a Jehovahs Witness bible, then you only have half a translation. i only have one question, translate from direct ancient Jewish text. "I am, who am" correctly.
It cannot be translated into english. The word "I" in this text, is specifically Jewish. It is a singular plural word. The rough translation is, "I's am whom am". The Jews saw God as a singular plural being. Something overlooked by many christains in general.
08 Oct 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOf all the churches i've ever been in contact with. And that list is extensive, i feel most pity for the Jehovahs Witnesses. They strive so hard as a people. The main body. To find this elusive God. But the high leaders corrupt them, decieve them. Yet God's love is deep, even for these children. YOU leaders of churches, who read these messages. Take heed. Remember the scripture, if you are to decieve even the littlest of My children. You brood of vipers, you will not escape what is coming. It will be sonner than you think.
The text is not about Gods self existence, a proper translation is 'he causes to become', the idea being that God fulfils his purposes. 'I am that I am', or 'Is am who am', makes absolutely no sense in English and cannot be described in any other terms as poor translation. What other Christians or Jews think is irrelevant. I don't understand what y ...[text shortened]... n in the history of humanity, get yourself a copy and test out whether its not in fact the case.
08 Oct 13
3 edits
Originally posted by Pudgenik'wisdom is proved righteous by its works my friend', learn what that means.
Of all the churches i've ever been in contact with. And that list is extensive, i feel most pity for the Jehovahs Witnesses. They strive so hard as a people. The main body. To find this elusive God. But the high leaders corrupt them, decieve them. Yet God's love is deep, even for these children. YOU leaders of churches, who read these messages. Take heed. R ...[text shortened]... dren. You brood of vipers, you will not escape what is coming. It will be sonner than you think.
You don't scare me and neither does your text, we are beautiful. Haters gonna hate.
09 Oct 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat is wrong with Jesus saying the following?
The text is not about Gods self existence, a proper translation is 'he causes to become', the idea being that God fulfils his purposes. 'I am that I am', or 'Is am who am', makes absolutely no sense in English and cannot be described in any other terms as poor translation. What other Christians or Jews think is irrelevant. I don't understand what y ...[text shortened]... n in the history of humanity, get yourself a copy and test out whether its not in fact the case.
Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
(John 8:58 NKJV)
The Instructor
09 Oct 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMy text was not dirrected at you singularly, unless you are of the upper echelon of that church. If you only knew, ha, you wouldn't believe if i told you. All is still hidden yet.
'wisdom is proved righteous by its works my friend', learn what that means.
You don't scare me and neither does your text, we are beautiful. Haters gonna hate.
Let us reveal a bit of Revelations. The four horsemen, they travel in different directions. What do you think thier starting point is? Easy, Jerusalem! Interesting, in Revelations, it states, "run and hide, for the great day of the Lord is here". This verse is at the breaking of the sixth seal. Mankind will not even know that the other five seals have been broken.
09 Oct 13
2 edits
Originally posted by MISTER CHESSI refer you to the writing and examination of the somewhat obscure professor cited in the OP who criticises the use of the word "Jehovah" as a translation from the original, stating that it's use in the NWT is doctrinally biased (but the JWs). This of is indicative of all of the JWs non orthodox teachings and beliefs when it comes to their alignment with the bible.
What is the problem with saying Jehovah instead of "I's am whom am" or trying to say JHVH. Don't Jews call him Yahweh?
Robbie carrobie is using generalised comments made by this professor as back handed means to validate his religions authenticity. This is what I'm objecting to. I suggest you research and make your own conclusion.
09 Oct 13
Originally posted by PudgenikThanks for the wizardry, now can I put a request in for a strawberry milk shake, that would be awesome if you could conjure it up.
My text was not dirrected at you singularly, unless you are of the upper echelon of that church. If you only knew, ha, you wouldn't believe if i told you. All is still hidden yet.
Let us reveal a bit of Revelations. The four horsemen, they travel in different directions. What do you think thier starting point is? Easy, Jerusalem! Interesting, in Revelation ...[text shortened]... eaking of the sixth seal. Mankind will not even know that the other five seals have been broken.
09 Oct 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAre you going to address any of the points being raised in this thread, or are you going ignore them all and carry on pretending you are not reading my posts? 😵
Thanks for the wizardry, now can I put a request in for a strawberry milk shake, that would be awesome if you could conjure it up.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIsn't the word "truly" superlative itself is this instance? Were previous translations of the NWT falsely superlative or just not superlative at all and not to be referenced by JWs from henceforth? Has this translation's truly superlative text highlighted any areas that you felt have enhanced your being the sole holders of god's truth on earth and if so do that mean you were not holding the whole truth just a less truly superlative version of that truth?
...truly superlative...
Thank for the clarification.