The Instigator
Bible2000
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ewolf
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Jehovah's Witnesses have the Truth in the Bible

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
ewolf
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/26/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 753 times Debate No: 72389
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (12)
Votes (1)

 

Bible2000

Pro

After debating atheists on the topic that it is more reasonable to believe in God rather than not to, I will now debate any Christian that believes Jehovah's Witnesses do not have the truth in the Bible. First round is acceptance. Accept only if you are a Christian who believes Jehovah's Witnesses' beliefs are not Biblical. Thank you.
ewolf

Con


Thank you for the opportunity to debate. I am a new member and I will try to be worthy of this discussion.


My background – I am a Christian, but that being said – you are not debating a Baptist, Catholic, or …. I simply believe in Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit and that the original Bible text was inspired by God.


I think your question as to whether Jehovah's Witnesses' beliefs are Biblical begins with the Bible itself. I am not a biblical scholar in the least. However, what I found is that the New World Translation differs a great deal from other Biblical translations.


The NIV version, for example, goes back to many of the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. Additionally, the Dead Sea Scrolls are also used. The NIV uses several denominations to ensure that the interpretation of the Greek, Hebrew text and other documents are translated correctly. I do not know of any other denominations that balance the interpretation of your NWT. I think this is essential, because humans tend to interpret language with a natural bias. Having other views discuss a translation before it is placed in the final document gives that translation more credence. Moreover, the creators of the NWT were not scholars of ancient Hebrew or Greek, only one professed that he was self-taught. The others had no knowledge of these languages. The NWT is not as reliable as other Bibles which use both scholars as well as multiple denominations to ensure that the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts are interpreted correctly. However, I also believe that your NWT leads one to believe that there is not a true Holy Trinity. Your NWT changes some things that the other Bibles do not change.


•Gen. 1:1-2. The NWT uses “God’s active force” instead of the true Hebrew translation “Spirit of God”


•Zech. 12:10. NWT translates the Hebrew incorrectly as "...they will look upon the one whom they have pierced..." The correct translation "look upon me whom they have pierced…"


•John 1:1. There is no “a” in any translation. The NWT inserts an “a” before God and then uses a lower case g. God is God, not “a god.” In this, the NWT gives the impression that Jesus is not the Holy Trinity, not God. Jesus is God. They are one. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.


•Col. 1:15-17. What is with adding “other” into the text over 4 times? No other translation does this. It is almost like this is inserted to make it so that Jesus is considered less than God. Jesus is God.


•Heb. 1:8. NWT messes the translation up in a way that makes the reading nonsensical…"God is your throne forever". The correct Hebrew translation is "your throne, O God, is forever".


There is consistency among researchers – the NWT changes things in a manner that suggests a bias. On the website, http://www.contenderministries.org... , my argument is passionately summarized by Ben Rast,


“Zechariah 12:10


NWT: And I will pour out upon the house of David and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem the spirit of favor and entreaties, and they will certainly look to the One whom they pierced through, and they will certainly wail over Him as in the wailing over an only [son]; and there will be a bitter lamentation over him as when there is bitter lamentation over the firstborn [son].


NIV: And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.


NASB: I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced; and they will mourn for Him, as one mourns for an only son, and they will weep bitterly over Him like the bitter weeping over a firstborn.


KJV: And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.


DISCUSSION: … God … is speaking in the first person about Him being the one who will be pierced through. … Since this was God’s prophecy about what would happen to Him, and Jesus fulfilled this prophecy, then Jesus MUST be God. In fact, in the NWT Zechariah 12:1 indicates these are the “words of Jehovah.”[1] The NWT translators apparently missed the inclusion in this verse of the Hebrew ayth, which Strong’s indicates it is a contraction of a word that gives the meaning of “self.” …


Acts 20:28


NWT: Pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed YOU overseers, to shepherd the congregation of God, which he purchased with the blood of his own [Son].


NIV: Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers.Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.


NASB: Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.


KJV: Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.


DISCUSSION: Some more grammatical games and bracket inclusions combine to once again pervert Holy Scripture in order to deny the deity of Jesus Christ. Going through my collection of legitimate Bible translations (and some not-so good translations), I find the NWT stands alone in their mistranslation of this verse. The verse speaks of God purchasing the church “with His own blood”. This is obviously a reference to God the Son, Jesus Christ. What a powerful biblical testimony to the deity of Christ, and what an anathema to the neo-Arian doctrines of the Jehovah’s Witnesses! In order to overcome this, a little mistranslation is made to completely change the meaning and deceive their followers. Not a single extant Greek manuscript contains the word “son”.


Titus 2:13


NWT: while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus


NIV: while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ


NASB: looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus


KJV: Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;


DISCUSSION: This verse identifies our great God and our Savior Jesus Christ as being one and the same. While an argument can be made that the KJV separates the two much like the NWT (by placing the Greek pronoun hemon, meaning “our,” in an improper location), the wording of the NWT and the additional bracketed definite article go beyond a disputed positioning of the Greek, and presents an inferior and erroneous translation that once again separates Jesus Christ from His deity.



I disagree with the prejudices that Ben Rast has, but he offers a perfect summary of the facts – the NWT does not support reliable translations of original Hebrew and Greek languages. Unlike Ben Rast who believes this is a purposeful distortion of the truth. I believe this is what happens when scholars and researchers fail to influence our knowledge of God’s Word. This can happen in all Christian religions when the followers fail to question and investigate and then, leave interpretations to one church.


God inspired the original manuscripts – man combined these and then began writing translations. We later discovered that man left out and changed some things – as we found when the Dead Sea Scrolls were translated. We follow Christ and not a church, a founder, or any man. And, if a founder created his own translation, then, we, as followers of Christ, must pursue an increase in our understanding of that translation and others. As followers of Christ, and not man, it is our obligation to pursue increased knowledge of His Word rather than becoming stagnant and accepting. Following implies action, movement, life. Merely accepting a translation as gospel stops growth. Your NWT is not the work of multiple denominations, with conflicting beliefs coming together to interpret original manuscripts. Multiple Christian scholars believe it to be a biased interpretation without the input of linguists and historians studying the original text and updating and renewing the word using the increased knowledge and resources of an academic community.


I believe we should follow God more than religion. That pursuit must be a passion which seeks to personally, individually knowing His Word. Christians and Jews are brothers. Attempt to understand the Torah and its differences and similarities to our Old Testament – grow in knowledge of His Word. I am not a Catholic or a Protestant. I am a follower of God and His Word. We should all be. Thus, if errors are discovered in a church’s text, then we change even if the church does not. We should adapt our beliefs and understandings as our knowledge and information grows in God’s Word. Spreading His Word is important, but we must also grow in His Word. Otherwise, we may be spreading misunderstandings instead of truth.


Debate Round No. 1
Bible2000

Pro

Bible2000 forfeited this round.
ewolf

Con

My opponent has forfeited the round due to time constraints. I have formally requested that he forfeit the entire debate or continue in Round 3.
Debate Round No. 2
Bible2000

Pro

Bible2000 forfeited this round.
ewolf

Con

My opponent has forfeited another round with out the courtesy of forfeiting the entire debate. This is not good form.
Debate Round No. 3
Bible2000

Pro

Bible2000 forfeited this round.
ewolf

Con

Although my opponent is active in other debates, my opponent continues to forfeit these rounds. My argument is forwarded to this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Bible2000

Pro

Bible2000 forfeited this round.
ewolf

Con

ewolf forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ewolf 2 years ago
ewolf
No. That is not okay. Forfeiting one round was pushing it. Starting the debate again when it is okay with you is not okay. Please just forfeit the debate as a whole.
Posted by Bible2000 2 years ago
Bible2000
ewolf, I want you to start this debate again, and copy-paste all your arguments, but I will let you know when. Is that ok? :)
Posted by Bible2000 2 years ago
Bible2000
ewolf, I want you to start this debate again, and copy-paste all your arguments, but I will let you know when. Is that ok? :)
Posted by ewolf 2 years ago
ewolf
Understood. Tried to respond to your request but my phone is not letting me. Should I just post more to round 2 or recopy what I wrote in round 1?
Posted by Bible2000 2 years ago
Bible2000
I would have manually written it, but time ran out first.
Posted by Bible2000 2 years ago
Bible2000
If time runs out, it automatically forfeits you
Posted by ewolf 2 years ago
ewolf
I am confused. How are you allowed to forfeit a round?
Posted by Bible2000 2 years ago
Bible2000
But right now I have school work to do, plus I had too many debates going on. I'll start doing 2 at a time at most.
Posted by Bible2000 2 years ago
Bible2000
I was going to forfeit, but the time ran out. I will invite this same member again and he can copy-paste his arguments so I can address them.
Posted by PM1066 2 years ago
PM1066
I think it only fair you forfeit the debate. You've kind of wasted a member's time here.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by PM1066 2 years ago
PM1066
Bible2000ewolfTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided solid arguments, cited multiple sources, and responded in a timely fashion. Pro provided no arguments and let time expire.