JW Materials Feedback and Discussion

JW Materials Feedback and Discussion

The Positive


I am an ex JW and I very much like your balanced advice to ex JW web page. I too am a bit of a Theoryhead. At present I am reading Habermas’ “Theory of Communicative Action.” Robert Kegan is great too (self proclaimed “postmodern constructive developmentalist”). Thanx for the web site. I just felt compelled to say HI! to a fellow EX-JW Brainiac. – Tom M


I have recently left the JW organization and as I began to search and study like a black hole taking in information, I found your site. Wow, wonderful! Very helpful ideas, but mostly I appreciate the non-hateful atmosphere! I have felt like I have been in a tight coil on the inside of the beginning of the coil. Now I am stepping slowly out and bigger. I have read things about the bible I did not know! I have read others thoughts like Baruch Spinoza, great things to think on. I feel like my brain is on fire! I am 47 but feel like an infant in many ways, it’s great. Thanks Again for the site! – Ronda


Hi. Enjoyed your site and your good advice. – AJ


The Negative


(1st contact) A lot of your content of Jehovah’s Witnesses is not close to their actual belief structure or organizational policies. Simple fact checking even from a third party source would keep things factual. I am a former witness and noticed your lack of clarity on several subjects. But I do not wish to continue talking, just a comment. (2nd contact) I am a former. Outside of the jokes there are many points that do not line up with even basic research into the organization. Take your outlook and perspective and just go to a reliable source and compare. – “Kristian” (no response on a request for examples)


The Well-Intentioned (?)


Cramped and narrow is the road leading to life and few are the ones finding it. Why did you fall off the path? Please don’t become blinded like the unbelievers. – “Jane Doe”


(1st contact) Are you a believer in Jesus as the way for salvation? I’m just curious. Since you left JW, I would think that you came to understand the full truth of the Gospel. Jesus states that He is the “truth” and to know him is to know God. (2nd contact) I agree Heidi! It’s not about a creed.
The truth is that it’s about a relationship. With the one true God, who is Jesus Christ. All truth is available if you ask for it. Just ask God to show you the truth about Jesus His Son, and God will reveal the truth. 100% guaranteed. (3rd contact) Thanks for responding. I still think it’s cool that you express so much creativity on your web site, and you expose the errors within the J.W. belief system.
– John


Bits of Ongoing Conversations


I have been doing a lot of research and I can really see that the JW’s are REALLY brainwashed! My parents are a prime example! They do nothing for my kids and the everytime they talk to my now 16yr old they tell her that if she doesn’t go to the KH that her life is in danger and it’s to the point where she hates talking to them. But at the same time she wishes they were normal grandparents. It is a very lonely situation. I have to struggle to work to take care of my kids and my parents do not help us at all but if we went to the meetings I know they would help us. But I shouldn’t have to do that! I am reading alot about ex JW’s having alot of mental and emotional problems due to growing up that way. I can honestly see why! I am still very angry! YOU need to write a book about this subject because I really am seeing a growing trend of these individuals not knowing how to cope or live in the real world!


It took me about a decade to completely break free, and there was a lot of guilt and remorse and fear that was included in that process. I was disfellowshipped once and have disassociated myself twice and don”t quite understand how they call themselves Christians or say they are loving. My parents look down there noses and judge me constantly, making snide remarks and jabs whenever possible. Most people don’t understand, unless they were in a cult themselves how difficult it is to step away from, and that it is developing a COMPLETELY new life. You can just walk away from most churches, but not them. I’d also like to tell you about a friend of mine who left Jehovah’s Witnesses and became a Non-Denominational Pastor. She’s been working on me to go to church, but I can’t bring myself to do it. – Leslie


Thanks so much for such excellent ex jw tips. I just left several months ago after over 20 yrs. I’ve had some very low days,some feeling extreme fear & anxiety,ect, but all in all I’m patting myself on the back for having the courage to leave. I’m hoping i’m one of the fortunate ones that wasn’t brought up in their org. & i was not married to one. I’m still at a loss of questioning “why did jesus say “God’s word is truth” (or is it their interpretation of it).Also,are we not living in the last day of this systems & isn’t it logical God will step in to get rid of ones ruining his earth? I know for sure, tho they are abusive,authoritarian but isn’t the bible still the word of our creator? Plus, I also wanted to ask, has anyone in canada ever sued the WB&Tract society for their deception & won damages? Plus what is truly behind all their subliminal sentences & illustrations that I examined in their mags & other publications. That was the “last straw” for me. Thanks, kj.


I realise that from his upbringing and his family that he will never be baptised and will probably just be in a limbo for the rest of his life with his religion and really all I can do is support him and show him that no matter what he will always have a place to be whoever he wants with me. He doesn’t need to pretend. Thank you so much for getting back to me. You’ve certainly helped and it’s nice to hear from you. I think I will pray for him. – A


I have a question about Bible interpretation concerning the New World Translation, and how the NWT came about to translate John 1:1.. I already understand much about this interpretation where it came from Westcott’s and Hort’s The New Testament in Original Greek. Now I understand that a group of scholars would usually be presented with many manuscripts and decide, with all in mind, which would reflect the intention of the author. Now if we examine John 1:1 in a Greek grammatical sense one would come to the conclusion that “and the word was a god” would not obey the rules of grammar. Because I, already, as I said before have some kind if understanding on this subject, I have come to the conclusion that when scholars chose to use the words “and the word was God” although taught in the doctrine of the Trinity do not come as though they interpret the manuscripts as conforming to holy doctrine but come to the conclusion that this would be the true meaning and intent of the original authors. Why did the NWT committee choose to include their interpretation in their text? When the NWT bible committee claims to use the Greek, Aramaic scriptures for translation who is to say that other scholars have not used the same manuscripts for translation? I guess my question is why does the NWT use this interpretation when it chooses its scripture? You can provide me with your opinion on the subject and maybe some analysis? Thank you. – Vincent


At Romans 16:1 Paul says “I recommend to you our sister Phoebe a minister (servant or deaconess depending on translation) of Cenchreae’s congregation,” and he asks that she be assisted because she defended many including himself (16:2) Prisca, (or Priscilla) with her husband Aquilla risked their lives for Paul, kept a congregation in their home (Ro 16:3), took in Apollos and instructed (=taught) him even more correctly about God (Ac 18:26). Paul said let older respectable women be “TEACHERS” of goodness although he added that haughty or noisy women must not teach or disrupt meetings (1Co 14:33-4), something obviously true also for haughty or noisy men.

Many women ministered to Christ and the 12 apostles, were among the 120 getting Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Ac 1:14) and prophesied (Ac 2:17-8). Notable New Testament women include Lydia, Dorcas, and Martha. Old Testament ones include Esther, Ruth, Naomi, Martha, Sarah, Hulda. Judges says Deborah was a Judge or leader against foes even as was Samson. The Bible says males and females are one in Christ (Ga 3:28, Ac 10:34).

Each Christian group decides if a respectable Christian woman is in fact ministering for them and others (Ro 4:15, 14:1-5, 1 Cor 10:23). Being a minister is not properly a position of power and control over others, but an untitled condition of humble, helpful service, an acknowledgment of what one is by deeds and attitude. In 111 A.D. not long after John’s death, Pliny the Younger noted he had had two women tortured for being deaconesses (congregational servants) which also helps show the continual service rendered by women throughout Bible history and up to today. – JM


For your use from someone who spent 45yrs as a JW – Kind regards, Mike

The NSCFC launches Support & Advice for Existing or Ex Jehovah’s Witnesses

The UK charity…National Society for Children and Family Contact (NSCFC) now extends its Free and Confidential service in support of the long-term effects and sufferings of existing and ex-Jehovah’s Witnesses.
An increasingly concerning cause of Family Breakdown of an insidious nature is the result of the affiliation of at least one Family Member to this powerfully controlling religious Organisation.

1/ Any religious organisation that separates Family Members using Mind Control via fear of ostracism and everlasting death must be challenged in the best interest of The Children, Family Life and Society as a whole.

2/ Dictating an individual’s Human Right to contact with family members, especially The Children, clearly threatens the bonds, unity and natural love within the family Unit.

3/ The resulting Damage is so great that many adults, teenagers and children continue to feel the emotional and psychological effects long after successfully pulling away from such an Organisation.
For this reason we have brought onboard ex members all of whom have vast experience in how best to face, overcome and survive subtle mind control albeit mental, emotional or physical, which can and does include child abuse and other unlawful acts, the like of which is covered up by Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (WTBTS) Headquarter secrecy dictates, to the exclusion of the police and local authorities and well documented as such worldwide. Suffice to say, we want to expose any form of child abuse be it sexual or otherwise. We wish to provide assistance to victims who have been molested as children and silenced from speaking out or seeking proper assistance as directed by any religious authority. So please, if you were, are and know of any such victim or perpetrator, then why not help yourself and or save others also, for indeed just as it is written “the truth will set you free”. Please Contact Us Online or Phone 0870 794 0075

National Society for Children and Family Contact (NSCFC) is a registered charity which believes that continuing contact with a child’s parents or extended family after separation or divorce is vital for the child’s balanced development and it works tirelessly to foster those all-important family contacts. As such we offer free support and advice to all those in need. Helpline at National rate on 0870 794 0075 or at www.nscfc.com

Mike Ellis
Chairman: National Society for Children and Family Contact
Tel: UK 0870 794 0075
www.nscfc.com

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

3 thoughts on “JW Materials Feedback and Discussion

  1. Many who take issue with Jehovah’s Witnesses’ “New World Translation” of ‘theos’ in John 1:1c (as, “a god”) often miss the point that this is ‘a singular anarthrous predicate noun *preceding the verb*’ – that is, not just that use of the noun ‘theos’ in the third clause lacks the Greek definite article.

    This would also explain why some of the examples many feel inclined to provide (John 1, verses 2, 6, 12, 13, 18 and 51), that is, as NWT violations of this supposed guideline (that these also do not have the Greek definite article, and yet they translate theos there as “God”), do not apply; and this is simply because, those other instances do not fit the same Grammatical, syntatical criteria as that found within John 1:1c.

    For some specific examples of those which do, that is, those which represent the same, basic Greek, grammatical construction of John 1:1c, please examine the following verses within your own prefered translation of the Bible and see whether the translators had inserted either an “a” or “an” there:

    Mark 6:49
    Mark 11:32
    John 4:19
    John 6:70
    John 8:44a
    John 8:44b
    John 9:17
    John 10:1
    John 10:13
    John 10:33
    John 12:6

    At each of those verses, identity of the one discussed was not at issue; no, but rather, the class of the individual is. Therefore, as can be seen, at those verses, most all versions of the Bible can be found to have added either an “a” or “an” to the translated text. Following this same syntactatical pattern, at John 1:1c, Jesus (“the Word”) can also be properly identified as “a god,” and not as “God,” the one he was just said to be “with” (1:1b).

    Taking this one step further, regarding the suggestion that such a rendering would be in direct violation of the cultural, religious, strictly monotheistic view of the Jews of this period, apparently, because of theological bias, many, in fact, fail to consider just such facts. One need examine most any Bible commentary about Jesus’ use of Psalm 82:6 within John 10:34 to see the cultural context of such legitimate uses ‘theos’ for others, that is, beside its application to Jesus.

    With reference to such considerations, please see this insightful statement, made by a Trinitarian scholar:

    “The Hebrew for ‘gods’ (‘elohîm) could refer to various exalted beings besides Yahweh [or, Jehovah], without implying any challenge to monotheism,…”

    Taken from: Blomberg, Craig L. (b.?-d.?). “The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel: Issues & Commentary.” (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, c2002), “The feast of Dedication” ([John] 10:22-42), p. 163. BS2615.6.H55 B56 2002 / 2001051563.

    Curiously, another Trinitarian had made the same observation; but this time, when discussing John 1:1, making direct allusion to John 10:34 –

    “…the Logos was God…. It [the Greek word Logos, more commonly translated “Word”], signifies, among the Jews and other ancient people, when applied to God, every thing by which God reveals Himself to men, and makes known to them His will. In this passage [John 1:1] the principal proof [for “the Word” being identified as God] does not lie in the word [Greek, ‘logos’], nor even in the word [Greek, ‘theos’], which in a larger sense is often applied to kings and earthly rulers,…”

    Taken from: Knapp, Georg[e] Christian (b.1753-d.1853), D.D., Professor of Theology in the University of Halle. “Lectures on Christian Theology.” Translated by Woods, Leonard (b.?-d.?), Jun.D.D., President of Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Maine. Second American Edition, Reprinted from the last London Edition. (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Thomas Wardle, 1845), pp. 136, 137. BT75 .K64 1845 / 35-22780.

    Furthermore, there is this:

    “If Moses could be [called in Hebrew ‘elohim,’ often translated as ‘a god,’ at Exodus 4:16 and 7:1], then, for the gospel writers, so could Jesus [in Greek as ‘theos’ = elohim], who was regarded by the New Testament [writers] as the very least a new Moses.”

    Taken from: Fletcher-Louis, Crispin (b.?-d.?). “4Q374: A Discourse on the Sinai Tradition: The Deification of Moses and Early Christology.” Article appearing within: Dead Sea Discoveries, A Journal of Current Research on the Scrolls and Related Literature. (Leiden, Netherlands; New York, New York: E. J. Brill, vol. 1, no. 1; April 1994–), vol. 3, no. 3 (1996), p. 252. BM487.A6 E6 / 96647062.

    Quite interestingly, when discussing John 10:34 & 35, although most Bible commentaries accurately discuss/explain the Bible’s legitimate uses of the Hebrew and Greek terms for “god” for others throughout a number of places within the Bible (that is, as utilized in a lesser role than in its typical uses for the Almighty, Jehovah), many fail to follow through, that is, in making the logical, Scriptural connection between this and its lesser use for Jesus at John 1:1c.

    Perhaps it would interest some to know that, when translating John 1:1c, during the first few centuries after Christianity had begun, two of the earliest known Christian translations of the Greek ‘New Testament’ into a foreign language had utilized their own languages’ indefinite article there as well (for, in the Greek language of Jesus’ day, there were no indefinite articles); and again, all in order to complete the proper sense of the phrase from the Koine Greek (of which, people were still using during this period), both of these translations rendered John 1:1c (when translated to English), “and the Word was a god.”

    For this, please examine the contents of the following link:

    http://nwtandcoptic.blogspot.com/2006/09/john-11c-word-was-god.html

    Obviously, there need be more evidence to substantiate such a position; but, otherwise, that is just one of the many points I hope to bring out within my forthcoming work entitled, “What About John 1:1?”

    Agape, Alan.
    john1one@earthlink.net
    http://wwww.goodcompanionbooks.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *