XPost: uk.religion.misc, alt.religion.jehovahs-witn, talk.religion.misc   
   From: defcon@dodo.com.au   
      
   While speaking to some JWs I was told that there is more than one God, and   
   they quoted John 1:1 as their reference.   
   In the beginning was the word, the word was with God and the word was A god.   
   It is quite a good argument, except that I had, at that time, been studying   
   biblical Greek and knew that the word 'THE" is what is known as a DEFINATE   
   ARTICLE while the work 'A' is an INDEFINATE ARTICLE. The God is refering to   
   a definate item nwhile a god is referring to an indefinate item (I hope you   
   understand that English leson)   
   The point is that the JWs claim the Word was '"A" god, but in fact, the   
   Greeks did not use the INDEFINATE ARTICLE in their language, only the   
   DEFINATE ARTICLE, so with very litle research, it was obvious that their   
   translation of the bible has at least 1 major mistake.   
   If there is even 1 mistake, then that text can not be trusted.   
   Let us hope that many JWs will realise that they are being told what the   
   oversight wants them to hear, not actually the truth.   
   God loves us ll, but I wonder if he loves those that knowingly follow   
   another gospel?   
      
      
   "Lupe Lu"  wrote in message   
   news:1gZ0b.3378$IY5.155@fe01.atl2.webusenet.com...   
   >   
   > "Nori Otaku"  wrote in message   
   > news:pan.2003.08.20.10.57.31.546697.23736@noriotaku.usenet...   
   > : .  = * | * =  .. wrote on Tue, 19 Aug 2003 01:21:29 -0500:   
   > : > Which TRUTH?  They change their truth so often no one can keep up?   
   -)   
   > : > Anyone know what their newest TRUTH is these days?  And remember, with   
   > the   
   > : > WTS what is sworn truth today is no longer truth tomorrow....   
   > :: > Remember the 1975 fiasco???  Now that was their TRUTH in the 60s and   
   > 70s and   
   > : > anyone who questioned it was disfellowshipped.  It's of course OLD   
   TRUTH   
   > now   
   > : > in favor of newer truths.  LOL!!!!   
   > :======================   
   > : Do you do any research?   
   >   
   > ** Do YOU?  I was studying with them in the 60s........  where were YOU   
   back   
   > then?   
   >   
   > There was a *faction* of JW's that believed the   
   > : world would end in 1975.  Even some of the highly-placed believed it to   
   > : be so.  Many left after nothing happened.  However, no one was   
   > : disfellowshipped for not believing in the 1975 date.   
   >   
   > * BS my dear,....  2 in a Bklyn KHZ were DFed for trying to convince   
   others   
   > to stay in college, to go ahead and marry and have a family etc.  They   
   > simply did not believe all the nonsense that 1975 was the end of this   
   system   
   > of things - as was being taught at the time.  The JWs even had scripture   
   to   
   > PROVE 75 was the end.  The elders were discouraging these things so young   
   > people would have more time and freedom to seek out new recruits.   
   > :   
   > : If you want to harp on the JW redefinition of truths, there are much   
   > : better candidates than the highly-publicized 1975 incident.   
   >   
   > *  Such as?   
   > :   
   > : Besides, what the JW's define as "The Truth" is the core dogmatic   
   beliefs   
   > : of their system.  Those core beliefs settled into place long before   
   1975.   
   >   
   > *  Their truths change faster than many can keep up with......   
   > --   
   > Scallion...   
   > JOH 2:16 And said unto them that sold doves, "Take these things   
   >  hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise (like   
   > the Jehovah's Witnesses have wickedly done by selling books and   
   magazines.)   
   > ~~~~<~~~~<~~~{@     ~~~~<~~~~<~~~{@      ~~~~<~~~~<~~~{@   
   >   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)