The Instigator
FexHere
Pro (for)
Losing
33 Points
The Contender
beem0r
Con (against)
Winning
43 Points

JWitnesses's bible is fabricated?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/19/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,125 times Debate No: 1992
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (24)

 

FexHere

Pro

Ancient and Moderns liquistic challenge the way how JW translate thier bible.
Most Religion claimed that their beliefs are bible based. in JW case they change bible to proved thier beliefs
beem0r

Con

I hold that Jehovah's Witnesses use a bible that is just as legitimate as any other common bible.

My opponent has yet to show what the Jehovah's Witnesses have made up in their bible. What are we supposed to go off, your word? I have no way to defend against that. Unless you think I should have the burden of showing that every bible verse is justifyably translated, you have no offense for me to rebut.

Please give examples of JW verses that are purposely mistranslated. I will show that any verse you give me has beem justifyably translated.

Don't give me _too_ many, I need to be able to fit a comprehensive response in 8000 characters. Just give me the strongest evidence you have of the JW bible being fabricated.
Debate Round No. 1
FexHere

Pro

My opponents argue that bible are all the same. indeed, its true.
same message given to all believers.

allow me to post the validity of my thesis.:

John 1:1 " In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and the Word is God"

Quite confusing, but with deep study, God turn into god

Why? for the proponent believe this verse doesnt support their belief
beem0r

Con

What I am about to do is out of pity for my opponent's lack of ability to post what he was supposed to.

The verse that my opponent has a problem with is as follows:

John 1:1
In the beginning, there was the word, and the word was with god, and the word was a god.

The problem my opponent has with this translation is at the end: "the word was a god." In other translations, it is translated as "the word was god."

First, I'll go over something quite simple about Greek grammar:

The word "a" does not exist. "The," however, does. When translating from Greek to English, it is sometimes necessary to put an "a" next to nouns that did not have any articles in the original Greek.

For example, the sentence "A man robbed a bank" in Greek would simply read "man robbed bank" if one translated it literally.

Now, let's have a quick chat about the word theos in Greek. It is the same word they would have used to talk about Zeus or Hades. The word god was just a position, just like chef or factory worker. It didn't have crazy rules like it does in English.

Now, let's talk about how god was referred to in Greek. God almighty, the main man, mind you. He usually has the Greek definite article attached to him ("the"). Consider the literal Greek translation of John 1:1 with no indefinite articles added in:

In beginning was the word, and the word was with the god, and the word was god.

Notice how in the second part, god has a "the" on before it? This is how God was usually referred to in Greek.

Now, if we recall, the word god in Greek did not have the same implications as it does in modern-day English. In Greek, god was just like any other word. Therefore, to demonstrate the point, I will substitute the word factory worker where the last instance of god is in John 1:1.

In beginning was the word, and the word was with the god, and the word was factory worker.

Just like "man robbed bank," we see that an article is needed. "A" factory worker would be the normal way to translate it. While we're at it, I'll get rid of the "the" before the other instance of god and put an "a" before beginning as well.

In a beginning was the word, and the word was with god, and the word was a factory worker.

Now "In a beginning" doesn't rightly make sense in English, though it does in Greek. It is in fact the same phrase as the English "in the beginning." Also, I'll go ahead and change factory worker back to god.

In the beginning was the word, and the word was with god, and the word was a god.

As you can see, the actual Greek grammar implies an "a." Perhaps it is not required, but this translation is not just made-up. It's a translation directly from the original Greek. I hardly call that a fabrication. It is a valid translation.

The point being, whether the translation is how it is intended to be read or not, it is a valid translation. It is not a fabrication. A fabrication would include work that is simply fabricated, which you have not shown.
Debate Round No. 2
FexHere

Pro

Writing 101. Noun must be written in a Capital letter.

the word "the\" has nothing to do with this argument as my opponent established.

God into god. here we can see how they make this noun inferior.

No argument and rebuttal. My proponent move the topic into nothing.

One thing that i proved here, He is an Atheist but he fondly choose this topic.
" The desire for God is written in the human heart, Man Created by God for God, He never cease to find Him; to Him(God) he will find True Happiness"- CC.

If you want another topic to debate on religion, i will.

God Bless you.
beem0r

Con

The original Greek does not uppercase the word for god. The way God is referred to in the bible is much the same as the way any gods are referred to in Greek. The only difference is that God is usually denoted as _the_ god in Greek. However, this instance of the word did not have "the" attached to it.

If you're not satisfied with how well I've went into it, read this link.

http://www.greeklatinaudio.com...

It's a rather long read, though. I believe I've addressed the problems with the Jehovah's Witness version of John 1:1.

I addressed the so-called problem that the JW version translates "and the Word was a god" rather than "and the Word was God." I specifically addressed the inclusion of the article 'a,' but the capitalization/lack thereof is _entirely_ based on whether there is an article or not (in English, not Greek). I showed that the JW translation of John 1:1 is valid, and therefore it is not a fabrication, as my opponent would have you believe.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by FexHere 9 years ago
FexHere
I admit it. thanks dtmstr. and thanks also to beemor.
Posted by dthmstr254 9 years ago
dthmstr254
no offens Fex, but you lost this one for the same reason most Christians lose. They don't know how to form a coherent argument, or how to debate. Your final point is supposed to attempt to wrap it up in a neat knot, without new info being given. You, of course, didn't give yourself enough string to tie a knot, so you couldn't and ended up writing a quote instead. It doesn't pass scrutiny, point to beem.
Posted by brittwaller 9 years ago
brittwaller
By the way, JWs don't believe in hell and believe that only 144,000 people are going to heaven; the "righteous" (meaning most JWs) will live forever in a paradise on earth. For what it's worth.
Posted by Capt.Herp 9 years ago
Capt.Herp
Whether or not the Bible says we should celebrate the birthday of Christ (I don't believe it says not to) I still don't understand the absolute banishment of holidays in the Jehovah's Witness brand of "Christianity." If they don't want to celebrate things like Independence Day in the US, let them go to a country that doesn't have such holidays.

The thing about blood transfusions is based on a verse in the Bible talking about not eating animal blood. Tell me how that's really relevant (or sane, for that matter).

My Bible says this: if you want to get to heaven, you have two choices:

1. Be perfect, as God is (impossible for humans to do, so that's off the table), or:
2. Believe in Christ as God in human form.

You can't work your way to heaven, regardless of how many holidays you don't (or do) celebrate, and you're not going to hell because you drink, swear, dance, or smoke, regardless of what different denominations want to tell you. I reiterate: want to make your kid a weirdo -- just take away every form of joy in childhood like the JWs seem bent on doing.
Posted by Knologistprime 9 years ago
Knologistprime
Is Jesus Christ actually God?

John 17:3, RS: "[Jesus prayed to his Father:] This is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God ["who alone art truly God," NE], and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." (Notice that Jesus referred NOT to himself but to his Father in heaven as "the only true God.")
John 20:17, RS: "Jesus said to her [Mary Magdalene], ‘Do not hold me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'" (So to the resurrected Jesus, the Father was God, just as the Father was God to Mary Magdalene. Interestingly, NOT ONCE in Scripture do we find the Father addressing the Son as "my God.") Find it! Prove it!

Does John 1:1 prove that Jesus is God?

John 1:1, RS: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God [also KJ, JB, Dy, Kx, NAB]." NE reads "what God was, the Word was." Mo says "the Logos was divine." AT and Sd tell us "the Word was divine." The interlinear rendering of ED is "a god was the Word." NW reads "the Word was a god"; NTIV uses the same wording.

What is it that these translators are seeing in the Greek text that moves some of them to refrain from saying "the Word was God"? The definite article (the) appears before the first occurrence of the·os; (God) but not before the second. The articular (when the article appears) construction of the noun points to an identity, a personality, whereas a singular anarthrous (without the article) predicate noun before the verb (as the sentence is constructed in Greek) points to a quality about someone. So the text is not saying that the Word (Jesus) was the same as the God with whom he was but, rather, that the Word was godlike, divine, a god.

Research a word for word Greek to English bible and try to undo the Greek grammar and syntax.

The only logically solution is that, God, Jesus, or the person is lying about the identity of God.
Posted by beem0r 9 years ago
beem0r
Wondering why I'm losing. I showed that the JW version of John 1:1 was indeed a correct translation, and therefore not fabricated. I don't know what else y'all expected me to do.
Posted by Knologistprime 9 years ago
Knologistprime
What is the origin of popular customs associated with birthday celebrations?

"The various customs with which people today celebrate their birthdays have a long history. Their origins lie in the realm of magic and religion. The customs of offering congratulations, presenting gifts and celebrating—complete with lighted candles—in ancient times were meant to protect the birthday celebrant from the demons and to ensure his security for the coming year. . . . Down to the fourth century Christianity rejected the birthday celebration as a pagan custom."—Schwäbische Zeitung (magazine supplement Zeit und Welt), April 3/4, 1981, p. 4.

"The Greeks believed that everyone had a protective spirit or daemon who attended his birth and watched over him in life. This spirit had a mystic relation with the god on whose birthday the individual was born. The Romans also subscribed to this idea. . . . This notion was carried down in human belief and is reflected in the guardian angel, the fairy godmother and the patron saint. . . . The custom of lighted candles on the cakes started with the Greeks. . . . Honey cakes round as the moon and lit with tapers were placed on the temple altars of [Artemis]. . . . Birthday candles, in folk belief, are endowed with special magic for granting wishes. . . . Lighted tapers[candles] and sacrificial fires have had a special mystic significance ever since man first set up altars to his gods. The birthday candles are thus an honor and tribute to the birthday child and bring good fortune. . . . Birthday greetings and wishes for happiness are an intrinsic part of this holiday. . . . Originally the idea was rooted in magic. . . . Birthday greetings have power for good or ill because one is closer to the spirit world on this day."—The Lore of Birthdays (New York, 1952), Ralph and Adelin Linton, pp. 8, 18-20.
Posted by brittwaller 9 years ago
brittwaller
I was raised as a JW but am now considered an "apostate," and my entire family are JWs still, in general refusing to acknowledge my existence, much less speak to me. So I can answer that one, Capt. Herp.
JWs don't celebrate birthdays because they don't celebrate the birthday of Jesus, whenever that might be. Everyone knows that most holidays evolved out of old "pagan" traditions, so all in all, as much as I personally disagree with them on so many practices, they are probably closer to practicing actual "Christianity" than most other denominations.
That being said, as screwed up as their translation of the bible is, it is trivial compared to their actual doctrines - no blood transfusions, discouragement from "worldly" learning, looking upon all non-JWs as evil people to avoid associating with as much as possible, having only entertainment that is approved by what they call "the Society," and so on.
As for the debate here, JWs claim their bible to be the only "true" translation, but once researched it is easily seen that this is stupidity. The validity of the bible, whatever translation, is irrelevant in any case as one can pick and choose from hundreds of different ones, all claiming to be the most "correct;" what is harmful are the conclusions and doctrines that they draw from it, the same as most religions in general.
Posted by Capt.Herp 9 years ago
Capt.Herp
I'm just curious why JW's have to make childrens' lives miserable by not even allowing them to celebrate their birthday or any holidays, while all their friends are having a wonderful time.

Boy, they sure are giving their kids a childhood to remember.
24 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by stevencho 6 years ago
stevencho
FexHerebeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
FexHerebeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by JUDGE 9 years ago
JUDGE
FexHerebeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Renzzy 9 years ago
Renzzy
FexHerebeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Aietius 9 years ago
Aietius
FexHerebeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by THEmanlyDEBATER3 9 years ago
THEmanlyDEBATER3
FexHerebeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by evad 9 years ago
evad
FexHerebeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by dxpilot 9 years ago
dxpilot
FexHerebeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Darth_Grievous_42 9 years ago
Darth_Grievous_42
FexHerebeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by bigbass3000 9 years ago
bigbass3000
FexHerebeem0rTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30