Omg... even at this point, after 11yrs awake ....I am flabbergasted at the gall of these men! Lloyd, you are making it easier & faster for those who have been fooled into believing Wt drivel is true. Thank you for this.
I feel the substituting is for a subconscious mind game for believers to put them, the governing body, in the place of Christ so when they speak it’s as if Christ is speaking to the regular publisher. It gives power even if just one tiny little scripture.
Yes that's what I was gonna say because according to JW doctrine the New testament is only addressed to anointed ones aka the GB, so when they render it "substitute for Christ" the link is made in the mind of the rank and file that the anointed aka the GB are now In the place of Christ, not just representatives of him but literally in his place. Smh.
Yeah I agree.. the addition of the words “substituting for” pushes Jesus just a little further, perhaps completely out of the picture.. like if you’re an ambassador for a country (country is still in the picture and involved) vs being a substitute for the country (country not involved anymore)
@@dennisconstantine624 no. not all . but its still better to go back to the original languages. also, to keep in mind, that the bible is not, and never was about America ; )
@@Plethorality all bibles feature human sacrifice, rape, incest, murder, and justification for slavery, all presented as acceptable and good. How is it not terrible, vile, and perverse?
@@devent10n my comment was a reply to another comment. had you read carefully, you may have noticed that my reply was about the perversion of original texts, meaning the changing of original meanings of scripture, which is what this whole video is about. yes, the bible does include the "vile, terrible and perverse" horrors that you mentioned, but as history, which has always been vile, etc, and not as recommendations. i hope that i have made myself clear, and thar you will have the grace to put in as much effort to understand and resoect my reply, as i have put in, to answer your question. peace be with you.
Watchtower examination channel explained the “substitution” in one of his videos very thoroughly. The organization demands that you believe in THEM (many times believe them over Jesus’ actual teachings) so adding “substitute” makes perfect sense to support their tyranny.
Yes, It's tacit support of their doctrine. I get a similar feeling whenever they throw around the word contemporaries. They seem to use this word far more often than I would think normal. But then remember they used the word contemporaries in explaining their overlapping generation prophecy. Whether intentional or subconscious I think perhaps using this word kind of gives support ( or tries to anyway) to their convoluted overlapping generation teaching.
Yes and notwithstanding they admit to not being spirit directed and not infallible we have to treat everything they say as though it came from the high heavens
@@jimmchemings6140 I agree! Even as a young child I used to question certain teachings, such as shunning and the changing of the scriptures. I was always told by my Mom to hush and not question anything at all because we would get in trouble. I was much more drawn to Jesus than the Jehovah the JW’s talk about. Still am because Jesus said he came to abolish the burdensome law the Jews were under and to replace it with love. And therein lay the contradiction in my young heart. How could you love someone and then shun them so hatefully?
@Lloyd when I was questioning Matt 24:45-47 with two elders visiting me because of my doubts about the organization, especially my view that the Bible says that Jesus is the Way... and he never said a Slave Class would be the Way to life. I was quoted 2 Corinthians 5:20 and reminded that the Anointed were subsituting for Christ. I was taken back by that scripture and thanked the brothers for their encouragement. Less than an hour after the meeting I had read every scripture on Bible Hub and realised that this scripture had been doctored. I immediately sent a text to one of the Elders to tell them that only NWT inserted the words "substituting for" which seemed to change the intended meaning. I was told with almost irritation to stop playing with symantics. That was probably my wake-up moment.
@@reluctantheist5224 That doesn't mean he said a single word about the flood. The WT Org could have been honest and said "People of Noah's time were taken by surprise, but this time they have a chance to be saved! So evidently it is important to spread the Good News etc etc"
@@virtualglitter though some of the renderings do not necessarily suggest they were taken by surprise ..the last one said they did not understand , the KJV uses ' know ' in a number of ways especially in a way of understanding .
I noticed a further Watchtower alteration in this verse as well, about the word "presence" instead of coming. JWs make a big deal about "presence" because they teach He already came invisibly. Other Bibles use "coming" here, because it is about the future coming of Jesus, not his invisible "presence" since 1914 as they teach.
@@Plethorality I wish that my Mom knew this. She has a dominatrix who keeps indoctrinating her that all these criminal matters, prosecutions and lawsuits do not exist and are an evil ploy to contaminate her mind against the JW Org. She does not even believe the court stamped documents which we show to her.
This Cult has the Arrogance to call itself the Truth, it’s not the Truth it’s evil twisted lies! This Cult tells Lie after Lie , it’s not the Truth it’s false prophecy!
@@stevenclarke5606 not only "the real Truth", whatever you deem it to be, but also any genuine curiosity or opinion. and without curiosity, truth has nowhere to land.
Great video again. I’ve barked on about the “new nothing” about the flood even in the Greek Kingdom Interlinear, for several years now. I was at a meeting and a statement was given during a talk in the flood. The Wt said “God never destroys anyone without giving a warning first” so on the way out I said to this elder - interesting statement that God doesn’t kill without a warning. Can you show me in the bible where a warning was given to those of Sodom and Gomorrah? He said nothing. So I said the Wt is wrong then eh? Smiled and walked away.
As for the verse that added the extra word the only thing I could come up with is that since they call themselves Jehovah’s Witnesses they’re making it seem like well since Christ isn’t here to speak on god’s behalf we are going to do it. But I don’t know if that’s really what they’re trying to say. It does seem like they like to bend a lot of things their way.💁🏻♀️
Luke 22:17. Silverfish says “And accepting a cup, he gave thanks and said: ‘Take this and PASS IT FROM ONE TO THE OTHER AMONG YOURSELVES,’” This ‘passing’ sounds a lot like the JW annual rejecting of Jesus’ sacrifice ceremony. But every other bible says words like “divide it among yourselves” or “share it among yourselves”. It was NOT getting passed on after each received their division or share. This wording is clearly just to push their doctrine. Kingdom Interlinear confirms correct wording.
@@reluctantheist5224 If that's the case, then it's very bizarre that everyone still felt the need to just glance at the emblems while they passed them off to the next person... unless you were anointed, then it was free bread and wine time!
@@leicafox4403 Well, I think that has more to do with the covenant for a Kingdom. Everybody there was entitled to take it and ( I assume) did so. The rendering of the verse is to indicate that these ones should eat or drink and is understood by JWs to mean that.
Regarding "Noah and proselytising" in Matthew 24 v39,, I now have this image of Noah going door-to-door in a porkpie hat and bow tie with a JW phonograph and that old recording the JW's used to lug from door-to-door in the 1920's and 1930's.
I noticed a further Watchtower alteration in this verse as well, about the word "presence" instead of coming. JWs make a big deal about "presence" because they teach He already came invisibly. Other Bibles use "coming" here, because it is about the future coming of Jesus, not his invisible "presence" since 1914 as they teach.
@@AndyBCCA You're absolutely right! The protestations of the Society notwithstanding, the original Koine Greek word "parousia" refers to a future event; consequently, "coming" is far more accurate in English than is "presence", which refers to either a current event or an event which has already occurred. After all, contextually speaking, the language in the entire passage is in the future tense. Even the Society has tacitly admitted as much over the years. Only with regard to the "parousia" does the Society make the exception and insist on referring to that in either the past tense or the present tense, and that for no other purpose or intent than to lend some measure of credence, however weak, tepid or convoluted, to its teaching on A.D. 1914, a teaching which, by the way, the Society has needed to revise a number of times over the years in order to buy itself more time after its repeated failures!
@@AndyBCCA I was not a JW - but one thing that always bothered me about JW core beliefs is the thing about "invisible" Jesus in 1914. It just doesn't make sense to me why new JW's don't question this since the idea of an invisible visit from Jesus kinda goes against the whole New Testament and his supposed mission. Jesus's return was supposed to be a big deal because he'd be returning with a sword and in all of his glory as the Son of God... _yet he covertly comes back in 1914 as invisible Jesus??_ While I'm sure they justify it w/ verses - in my religious days I would have balked at this notion. I know I would have told anyone that tried to tell me that with a straight face " Invisible, secret trip Jesus just doesn't fit with what he said about himself, or with what Paul wrote." But I will say to be fair, the things/dogma that separate most Christian denominations baffle me.
Matthew 27:52, 53 is one good one. Here the NWT tries to suggest that the people coming from the graves were not in fact the resurrected bodies. But many translations and scholars agree that Matthew meant that a massive resurrection actually happened and the recently dead walked among the living, which has been a major thorn in the side of Christian apologetics ever since. But the WT just ignores the issue by mistranslating.
SUGGESTION: Micah 6:8 (NWT, 2013) " [...] And what is Jehovah requiring of you? Only to exercise justice, to cherish loyalty, And to walk in modesty with your God!" The same verse reads in the KJV " And what doth require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy (kindness, NRSV), and to walk humbly with thy God?" "... to cherish loyalty", " walk in modesty" ??
I feel that the language used in Corinthians (substitute) is to support the doctrine of Jesus only being the mediator for the anointed, and the anointed (read governing body) being the "substitute" for Jesus to the other sheep. Most JWs don't realize that this is core doctrine. One of the things that woke me up. JWFACTS has a great article about it
that is one reason why other churches never recognised jw's. it also takes power from the people, which is what cult leaders must do, to function, as the narcissistic tyrannical r's holes they choose to be.
Luke 23:43 in NWT is a good example of how they change the Bible to fit their doctrines. They move the comma to make it look like Jesus is talking about some future paradise instead of that same day
@@vinegar10able Well, how come the NWT is the ONLY bible that reads that way at Luke 23:43? I'll answer that for you.. To make it seem Jesus was talking about some future paradise instead of them going to paradise at the moment they died. They altered this verse because jws teach soul sleep, like the 7 day adventist cult they started out with..Do your research
@@vinegar10able instead of arguing over translations that are missing nuances in any case (not just the doctored JW Bible), why dont you go back to the original Greek text where its plain to see? ''καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· Ἀμήν λέγω σοι, σήμερον μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.''
Great video Lloyd. Thanks for continuing. As per instructions in the video the scripture that spoke to me was Zach 12:10. GB changed the me to him to avoid the whole trinity thing. Thanks!
Thanks Lloyd for reading my suggestion and thanks to the Activists for helping me wake up from that cult. GB adds "substitution", they want to take the place of Christ.
The wt idea of Substituting for Christ gave me the idea that jws were just like little christs...... running around doing his preaching job! So nuts!!!!
10:57 it would be hilarious if the sound effect of opening a bottle and scotch being poured into a glass while Tony was reading from the flood narrative 😅🤣😂🥃
2 Cor. 5:20 where they put the word "substitute" I believe means that only some of the annointed are ambassadors of Christ, not the entire 144000. That would explain why JWs only follow the direction of the GB who they believe are annointed as well, and not all of the annointed that are on the earth right now. Only some of them can substitute for the role of Christ but not all.
An ambassador is not a substitute. An ambassador is a representative, a messenger. But never a substitute. They bring messages from their leader (president, prime minister, etc), not act as the leader themselves. The 1st century Christians were ambassadors - messengers of Christ. They did not have the authority that Christ had/has and didn’t pretend to. The GB want the rank and file to equate them with the same authority that Christ has. As for being anointed, there is no such thing as a non-anointed Christian. It’s in the word Christ, meaning “anointed one”. How can you have an anointed anointed one and a non-anointed anointed one? It’s simply more lies, and shady, twisting (re-writing) of the scriptures to give the GB all the power they crave. Despicable and blasphemous.
Yes Romans 10 is all about Jesus, but WT changed their Bible from Lord to Jehovah in verse 13 when Jehovah or the tetragram YHWH was never used in the New Testament. In the Greek interlinear Kyrios or Kurios was used and it translates to Lord not Jehovah. And if you read the full chapter it’s clear that it doesn’t belong there.
@@LucieNan yes this is a great point about the name Jehovah not appearing in certain texts so they have to add it to give weight and change context. Was talking to a friend of mine Ex elder like myself. And he was saying he is unsure about the validity of the name Jehovah, because witnesses use it all the time. So I said a convincing argument about it is Why didn’t Jesus use it at all in conversation? WT insert it at the only places they can and that is when Jesus quotes from the Hebrew Scriptures. But in general conversation, prayers etc he never used it once! Why. And he said I never knew that. AND it never appears in any of the manuscripts of the gospels either. Very Telling
@@meanmazda exactly. Jehovah is a made up name. Jesus always called the Father, Father. You never call your father by his first name. It’s disrespecting your father. And that is exactly what they are doing, disrespecting God the Father calling Him by a name which is not even His name. No reverence at all. Shameful. And not following Jesus example which they always claim they are doing. NOT AT ALL! ,
2 Cor 5:20 Substituting for Christ. They absolutely are sitting in the seat of Moses/Christ. Making rules and doctrine that go up and beyond biblical commands. As well as the reason they have made a 2 class system thus making only the partaking of emblems for those with "heavenly calling" They are not just ambassador's..which would be a promoter OF...whereas substitute literally takes the place OF!! So if you have a substitute teacher or quarterback in the game of football. You have replaced your starter! On a timeline the gb has continually escalated their position. A constant drum beat UP!!!
Texts like Hebrew 1:8 are "explained" in the book "Reasoning From the Sriptures" - "Texts from which a person might draw more than one conclusion, depending on the Bible translation used", from page 415 on, especially p.422.
According to Tony, god blessed Noah's "construction work," which no one took note of. Hmm. I suppose 8 billion folks who don't know about the miracle at Ramopo will deserve to die as well.
Had any noticed how immersive the flood story was presented? The GB has really ramped up the manipulation. Good work Lloyd. Always appreciate your perspective.
Thank you Lloyd for another great video and for responding to my comment. There were many other great comments from others, well I’m glad you chose mine and as always your thoughts were on point. They changed it cause it refers Jesus as God. I look forward to listening to your future videos in this series. Hopefully these will wake up JW to see how biased their NWT is. They always pointed out to me Rev 22:18-19 which backfires against them. It reads: « For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. » Revelation 22:18-19 KJV
They've probably all been counselled on proper emphasis and have been churned through a Theocratic Ministry School at some point or another. Add to that, that they're all living together in the same complex, and each thinks they're chosen by God, you likely get a lot of opinions flying around about how to do something properly that get amalgamated into each GB member's presentation style. That'd be my guess.
It's actually very reminiscent of Neuro Linguistic Programming language (NLP) ... I don't think they're doing it *knowingly*, though. Too stupid to learn the technique properly.
my reason why there are so many changes from the bible is because in the early days there were people they couldn't show the truth from the bible .. so many and pagans because of the changes ...
When I was doing my own personal study of the Bible I came across this rather strange verse. It was Leviticus 25:55 “for the Israelites are my own slaves.” In the king James version it says. “ for on to me the children of Israel are servants”
In the original Greek it says ''ὅτι ἐμοὶ οἱ υἱοὶ ᾿Ισραὴλ οἰκέται εἰσί, παῖδές μου οὗτοί εἰσιν, οὓς ἐξήγαγον ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς ὑμῶν''. The word you want is ''οἰκέται'' (oiketai) (plural) and it literally means member of my household (oikos). Now this can be used as synonymous to a house-slave. The exact word for slave is Δούλος (doulos). Oiketas falls under the category of a domestic servant who could be also a freed slave, that is seen as member of the family and not just a slave.
Luke 23:43 changed to support the future earthly paradise . The placement of the coma makes a big difference. It makes more sense in other translations
Substituting for Christ this is what I get from this, (we being the anointed) the GB substitutes for Christ because they teach that all 1st century Christians were of the anointed so who do the JW think of when anointed is mentioned the GB how many KH have anointed in the besides the GB threw them under the bus, so JW would think the GB are substitutes for Christ for them.
The reason the added "substitute for Christ" is because they set themselves up in Christs place. The way to God is through them whereas the bible says that the way to God is through Christ.
This is only a thought, no fact. Maybe by adding in the word "substituting" they want their followers of Jehovahs Witness to salitify in their minds that the governing body is the substitution for Christ. How deceitful this would be especially if "new light" comes forward to say that Jehovah sent them directly to help His people. They would be able to really make any rule because they are the ones that have Jehovahs backing and that they better DO what they say or you won't gain Jehovahs favor..
They substuted/changed the bible according to their doctrine, which is so obvious. thank you for covering this topic. JW changed Jesus or Lord and anything to do with Christ being God as in John 1:1 and equal with God himself - in other words God being the sacrifice for us and our sins. Corinthians are such a great example. Also the true Christians are Christ's witnesses, that's what the new testament is about. New covenant through Jesus. The jws keep living under the old testament law. And they need to be freed from it.
John 5:29 - The NWT twists judgment with condemnation to support their narrative of a ressurection of righteous (i.e. JWs and servants of Jehovah of old) and unrighteous (those who died without the change of knowing Jehovah, that is not becoming a cult member) ... also the motion of these three classes of people: righteous, unrighteous and wicked is very centrict to JW's doctrine ....
I can't remember if this was mentioned, but there was one scripture in the NWT that I found to be changed. It is in Colossians 1:16 where it says: "Because by means of him (Jesus) all things were created." The agreed translation of that verse is: "for by him were all things created" King James version, "because in him were created all things" Rotherham, and the list goes on. Watchtower even tries to defend this by saying that it would go against THEIR narrative to translate this verse literally. They have no shame.
I reckon they inserted the words "substituting for" in the NWT at 2 Cotinthians 5:20, to emphasise the role of the GB as an agent used by Christ in the eyes of rank and file JW's. Similar to one of the titles of the pope: (Latin: Vicarius Christi) vicar of Christ. Meaning one who substitutes or acts as an agent for Christ.
Another scripture I've come across 1 Kings 20:28 "Then the man of the true God approached the king of Israel and said: “This is what Jehovah says, ‘Because the Syrians have said: “Jehovah is a God of mountains, and he is not a God of plains,” I WILL GIVE ALL THIS LARGE CROWD INTO YOUR HAND, and you will certainly know that I am Jehovah." NWT Other translations read: The LORD is a god of the hills and not of the plains.’ So I WILL DEFEAT THIS VAST ARMY FOR YOU. Then you will know that I am the LORD.” NLT I will DELIVER ALL THIS GREAT ARMY INTO YOUR HANDS." Berean Study Bible "I WILL GIVE ALL THIS GREAT MULTITUDE INTO YOUR HAND." ESV; KJV; "therefore I will hand over to you all this great multitude." NASV So he has promised to HELP YOU DEFEAT THEIR POWERFUL ARMY. Then you will know that the LORD is in control." Contemporary English Version
'Substituting', for Christ is a distancing technique that adds to the basic JW practise of not having a close relationship with God . . . and a close 'captured' relationship with JW GB. Just my opinion. Like John 17:21 NLT "I pray that they will all be one, just as you and I are one-as you are in me, Father, and I am in you. And may they be in us so that the world will believe you sent me." NWT says "in union" throughout, instead of simply 'are one' . . . and 'in us' - it's distancing ie disconnecting from the idea of an intimate living personal relationship with God. You must stay close to the organisation, but God? An elder specifically said to me at a judicial meeting -"You cannot have a personal relationship with God Grace!" That would never do - I might follow guidance by God's spirit, rather than WT! There could be chaos if everyone was guided by God!
I might be wrong but on the first example from Exodus I am positive that the New World Translation in the 70s/80s said "hardens his heart" as I remember it being quoted at meetings. In fact there were talks I heard which the speakers highlighted those words in particular. Unless those speakers used another bible for comparison in those talks. If anyone out there has an old edition can they confirm? If so they have actually changed their own translation in the last few years.
@@clarity2478 Very annoying that I don't have a copy as I would love to confirm if they even changed their OWN version as it didn't fit with their ethos. I was hoping someone on here might have still had a copy to verify.
Thank you for this. You can also check on Gen 6:14 about gopher wood (in aleppo codex it is “gopher”) a wood Noah used for building his ark...although other translations kept it as it is, other translations have changed it to cypress wood. In NWT, they mentioned it as a “resinous tree”. Just an input.
Substitute means to take someone's place while ambassador means to be a representative of someone. So instead of trying to be a representative of the Christ the Governing body wanted to take his place in total. The bible said many will come in my name but don't believe them.
Here are a couple more scriptures to consider Lloyd: Acts 20:20, Acts 5:42 and Luke 10:7. These are the only scriptures the term "house to house" is used in the entire NWT. Obviously JW's have chosen these words to support their door to door ministry. Additionally, you can find several bible that also use these words. That said, when you look at how the bibles that use the words and other bibles that choose other phrases like "in each house, in houses, in homes or in your homes" a different narrative begins to emerge. It appears that the actual message is not to be preaching from door to door, but to make sure the message is taught in each house. This idea can be supported by looking at the organizations own interlinear version on their own website. Interestingly enough, it is Luke 10:7 that is the only one that speaks of actually going from house to house. In this verse Jesus actually is saying NOT to go from house to house.
One expression the NWT uses ad nauseam is "loyal love". This expression is not in the Hebrew or Greek Interlinear Bible. If you read Ps 136 (if you can stand it), then you'll see what I mean. The Hebrew says, "His mercy endures forever". In other places its translated as "undeserved kindness". It would seem that the word "loyal" is an indocrinated trigger word for JWs who must remain loyal to the organisation, which is lead by those substituting for Christ. It's an organisation run by eight little Christs who have written a Bible; but it's not a translation: its an interpretation
I generally think I’ve pretty much heard every possible issue with the JWs. Matthew 24:39 was, however, something I’ve not heard before. One of those verses that fundamentally changes the perception of God’s loving personality. While I’ve seen plenty of JW videos of Noah preaching and teaching (though never really believing everyone would have been made aware of the judgement about to befall the world), it’s a rather shocking change to find the Bible really does offer up judgement upon a world without warning and an opportunity to change. There was no written word, no moral position to be taught and yet God thought he’d drown everyone for not abiding by some rules they were supposed to infer from the story of Adam and Eve. Cruel and unusual.
The idea that Noah was a preacher was first introduced in the apocrypha in the Book of Jubilees, which the author of Peter was familiar with. Though that preaching, if I remember correctly, was after the flood. So the idea of Noah preaching before the flood was probably unknown in Bible times. And yes, the Greek scriptures refer to the apocryphal and pseudepigrafal Biblical writing several times, especially Peter and Jude. The org's literature has blatantly lied that apocryphal books are not referred to.
I'm not surprised with 2 Cor. 5: 20. We are talking about a group of people who are taking Christ's position little by little. This is a group that teaches that Christ is the mediator only between God and them. This means that they, the Governing Body, are the mediators between God and the Other Sheep.
Ok let me get my recommendation in early.... The book of Jude vrs. 5 in the nwt kingdom interlinear reference notes where they use the name jehovah the reference notes in their kingdom interlinear says JESUS and not listed is p72 that says the GOD CHRIST.
P72 is papyrus 72 and is the oldest codex manuscript containing 1&2 Peter as well as Jude . Where it is the only discovered case where we see the unique title that the "God Christ" saved the Hebrews from out of the land of Egypt in Jude vrs. 5. And Since the .org changed this unique title of Jesus to Jehovah, as I understand the scripture in the nwt, Jesus is God and his father is God and the Holy Ghost is God. What in world is the word for this concept? as a monotheist or the belief in 1 almighty God? We've got to come up with something to title this one of a kind unique concept with no other example in nature since it's clearly there no matter how you translate the word. "Trinity" anyone? Might catch on!
Unfortunately (and unsurprisingly!), the Kingdom Interlinear text is not reliable, for one of two reasons: sometimes, deliberate distortion, even there; sometimes perhaps accidental "howlers", because the Greek of the people who did the interlinear text was just not good enough, and they sometimes chose the wrong word from the dictionary.
interestingly, I had a conversation about your first example, just a few weeks ago, with my JW soon-to-be-ex-wife. I found a few more instances, and I wish I'd taken note of them.
Hi Lloyd. I think WT have added "substituting" to 2 Corinthians 5:20 because that confirms exactly what the GB think they are - In place of Christ. Basically to make their Bible agree with their 'anointed' teaching.
Agree, they place themselves as mediators for the great crowd and Jesus being only the mediator for the anointed ones (new covenant), contrary of the Bible says about Jesus being the mediator for all.
I expect the alteration to Mathew to read "they took no note" is done because they interpret 2 Peter 2:5, which calls Noah "a preacher of righteousness", to indicate that Noah would have warned those around at the time of the coming flood. I suggest that the Bible indicates no such thing. Noah was called a preacher of "righteousness", or in other words an advocate of behaving in a righteous fashion. He was not a preacher in the JW sense of someone who warns of (a preacher of) "floods and imminent destruction". 1. It is clear from the account in Revelation that God had decided to destroy everyone apart from Noah and his family, on account of "every thought and intention of their hearts was only evil all the time" - in other words they were unable to respond to any kind of preaching campaign. 2. The ark had no where near enough space and resources to save a large number of people through the flood. IF a large number had responded, would God had asked Noah to build a newer, bigger boat? 3. If most of the people had responded and repented, would God have then flooded the whole world just to kill a few people? 4. If such a preaching campaign had been done, then we know from the Bible that no one actually responded, since only Noah and his family entered the boat and were saved. So the preaching campaign was evidently useless. Would God, who is able to see into the future, have ordered a useless preaching campaign? 5. Could Noah and his small family have accomplished a global preaching work, up against such opposition as the giants (Nephilim) and the super powerful materialised demonic angels? Would they not have simply killed him and his family for preaching their imminent destruction? 6. Would not such an amazing preaching campaign be mentioned in Genesis? A handful of people to preach to the whole population of the Earth (at the time) !!
I always had MANY issues regarding Noah and the flood… as you were going through Matt 24:39 I went back and read the entire story of Noah in Genesis. Not once did the scriptures say Noah went out and preached. Infact, Genesis 6:18 further proves it. It says, NWT, “And I am establishing my covenant with you, and you must go into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you.” Jehovah never told him to tell other people so they could be saved. He specifically made a list of all who were invited. What is the definition of the word covenant? An agreement. And the bible says Noah did JUST SO. No preaching was involved.
About a mistranslation of the Second Corinthians 5:21, this has left me in absolute disgusting and schocking. They have done a huge blafesmous against Christ. They put themselves as the mediator of God, "substituting" Christ. They denied the Savior of the mankind, which is the basic of the Christianity. They have commited a condenatory sin. They have been the false messiah. Or even, the Anticrist.
I am currently listening to the ESV version of the Bible, still in Exodus. The part about God hardening Pharoah's heart really stood out to me...that is NOT what I remembered from what I learned as a JW kid, and it certainly puts God in a different light. Thank you, Lloyd, for doing these videos; they are very much eye-opening!
This is great information but I am thinking, for me, it would have helped to have Lloyd or someone else show how the actual Greek text is translated. Much appreciation for Lloyd for all he does. Praise be to the Lloyd :)
Revelation 1:10 seems to be another example of tampering with the Bible in order to support JW dogma. In the NWT this scripture is rendered "By inspiration I came to be in the Lord’s day, ....", whereas virtually all other Bibles render it as "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day," ( Berean Literal Bible). The reason I believe they have done this is that the word "inspiration" in the scripture at 2 Timothy 3:16 ("All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, ,,,," (NWT) is not treated as the normally understood definition of the word "inspired", meaning that people found God to be source of inspiration, encouraging them to worship God. Rather, the word inspiration is interpreted as meaning that God has put His words in the minds of the authors of the Bible via Holy Spirit, using them rather like secretaries taking dictation. This is particularly the case with Paul, where every letter he wrote is assumed to be divine truth, coming from God rather than Paul. The watchtower governing body loves Paul, presumably seeing him as a first century equivalent. I believe that using the word "inspiration" to apply to John receiving a revelation from Jesus, rather than being "in the spirit" is an attempt to back up this divine authorship of the Bible, which in reality was written by men. I don't know if they did this in your time, but recently before I left, whenever they would read a quote from Paul, they would usually insert the phrase "Paul's inspired letter" or something similar, to enforce this idea that it was to treated with the same importance as if God himself had written it.
with the ambassador thing the jw version says that we are gods ambassadors whereas the other versions say that we are Christ's ambassadors, they insert the word substitute to change the meaning, and seperate jesus and god, and the other ones can be understood that Jesus is God
Following a long (2,000 years) and robust Christian tradition of adding to and doctoring the text through error and intent in the pursuit of bolstering personal theology / interpretation--to which there is no end.
2 Timothy 3:14 was always of interest to me. When I’d ask and gave definition of persuaded I was counseled on being humble. 😂 With 2 Corinthians I feel that helps to justify/validate the GB’s authority for rulership… maybe 🤔
The flood was global. Noah and his family spent many years building the arc yet he preached to the entire world about a coming flood. Does not sound possible?
I would like to suggest, Lloyd, the Romans chapter 9 verses 1-5. In the many bible translations, we have a patron: the word "which" or "that is" repeat many times, include the final verse, that put in this way: "...which them belong the patriachs, and which them Christ descends, according to the flesh, that is, above all, God through the centuries! Amem" (Bible of Jerusalem) In the NWT, we don't have this sequence being respected. But this, i leave for you see for yourself. I hope you notice my comment. Take care, man.
Noahs flood - I never read in any bible that provision was made for any of the people who may have repented to get in the ark.. Surely they would have mentioned it? ie compartments?
"Substituting for Christ"- because the GB have put themselves in that position, they've made themselves equivalent to Christ, if not equivalent to Jehovah (The borg = Jehovah, the GB = Jesus)
Loyed “ I wanted to know why they removed many words from there first Bible, To there new silver Bible,? It’s Ezekiel 14 : 7. In there new silver Bible there’s 79 words. And there older first Bible there’s 48 Words, ?”
About Hebrews 1:8 I looked in to it back then when still a witness. I don't even have the citations but I did research on the watchtower library cd rom after meeting a trinitarian when preaching. There explanation was something of the sort that that verse directly quotes from another old testament verse. Since the verse original verse also referred to a human, "God is your throne" becomes what the original author meant.
There is a apologetic about the Hebrews verse out there, since I've had to defend that verse years ago. Reasoning book: Hebrews 1:8: RS reads: “Of the Son he says, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.’” (KJ, NE, TEV, Dy, JB, NAB have similar renderings.) However, NW reads: “But with reference to the Son: ‘God is your throne forever and ever.’” (AT, Mo, TC, By convey the same idea.) Which rendering is harmonious with the context? The preceding verses say that God is speaking, not that he is being addressed; and the following verse uses the expression “God, thy God,” showing that the one addressed is not the Most High God but is a worshiper of that God. Hebrews 1:8 quotes from Psalm 45:6, which originally was addressed to a human king of Israel. Obviously, the Bible writer of this psalm did not think that this human king was Almighty God. Rather, Psalm 45:6, in RS, reads “Your divine throne.” (NE says, “Your throne is like God’s throne.” JP [verse 7]: “Thy throne given of God.”) Solomon, who was possibly the king originally addressed in Psalm 45, was said to sit “upon Jehovah’s throne.” (1 Chron. 29:23, NW) In harmony with the fact that God is the “throne,” or Source and Upholder of Christ’s kingship, Daniel 7:13, 14 and Luke 1:32 show that God confers such authority on him. Hebrews 1:8, 9 quotes from Psalm 45:6, 7, concerning which the Bible scholar B. F. Westcott states: “The LXX. admits of two renderings: [ho the·osʹ] can be taken as a vocative in both cases (Thy throne, O God, . . . therefore, O God, Thy God . . . ) or it can be taken as the subject (or the predicate) in the first case (God is Thy throne, or Thy throne is God . . . ), and in apposition to [ho the·osʹ sou] in the second case (Therefore God, even Thy God . . . ). . . . It is scarcely possible that [’Elo·himʹ] in the original can be addressed to the king. The presumption therefore is against the belief that [ho the·osʹ] is a vocative in the LXX. Thus on the whole it seems best to adopt in the first clause the rendering: God is Thy throne (or, Thy throne is God), that is ‘Thy kingdom is founded upon God, the immovable Rock.’”-The Epistle to the Hebrews (London, 1889), pp. 25, 26
Omg... even at this point, after 11yrs awake ....I am flabbergasted at the
gall of these men! Lloyd, you are making it easier & faster for those who
have been fooled into believing Wt drivel is true. Thank you for this.
I feel the substituting is for a subconscious mind game for believers to put them, the governing body, in the place of Christ so when they speak it’s as if Christ is speaking to the regular publisher. It gives power even if just one tiny little scripture.
If the GB is a substitute for Christ, they can claim more power.
I agree…substituting for Christ in their minds means, GB is that substitute.🙄
Yes that's what I was gonna say because according to JW doctrine the New testament is only addressed to anointed ones aka the GB, so when they render it "substitute for Christ" the link is made in the mind of the rank and file that the anointed aka the GB are now In the place of Christ, not just representatives of him but literally in his place. Smh.
Yeah I agree.. the addition of the words “substituting for” pushes Jesus just a little further, perhaps completely out of the picture.. like if you’re an ambassador for a country (country is still in the picture and involved) vs being a substitute for the country (country not involved anymore)
Agreed! My first thoughts exactly.
Wow Lloyd You are almost at 100,000 subscribers! Congratulations very well done! Thank you for all you do ✨
One of the most teribble bible translations in the world
@ giorgos zar, aren’t all Bibles terrible, vile and perversed?
Don't you mean terribible?😁
@@dennisconstantine624 no. not all . but its still better to go back to the original languages. also, to keep in mind, that the bible is not, and never was about America ; )
@@Plethorality all bibles feature human sacrifice, rape, incest, murder, and justification for slavery, all presented as acceptable and good. How is it not terrible, vile, and perverse?
@@devent10n my comment was a reply to another comment. had you read carefully, you may have noticed that my reply was about the perversion of original texts, meaning the changing of original meanings of scripture, which is what this whole video is about.
yes, the bible does include the "vile, terrible and perverse" horrors that you mentioned, but as history, which has always been vile, etc, and not as recommendations.
i hope that i have made myself clear, and thar you will have the grace to put in as much effort to understand and resoect my reply, as i have put in, to answer your question.
peace be with you.
Watchtower examination channel explained the “substitution” in one of his videos very thoroughly. The organization demands that you believe in THEM (many times believe them over Jesus’ actual teachings) so adding “substitute” makes perfect sense to support their tyranny.
Yes, It's tacit support of their doctrine. I get a similar feeling whenever they throw around the word contemporaries. They seem to use this word far more often than I would think normal. But then remember they used the word contemporaries in explaining their overlapping generation prophecy. Whether intentional or subconscious I think perhaps using this word kind of gives support ( or tries to anyway) to their convoluted overlapping generation teaching.
I believe they used the words substitute for Christ because it allows them to say they are in Christ’s place themselves.
My thoughts exactly
I totally agree with your assessment. That's some claim and how powerful if they quoted that. Look, it says it in the Bible !! (our version that is)
Yes and notwithstanding they admit to not being spirit directed and not infallible we have to treat everything they say as though it came from the high heavens
@@jimmchemings6140 I agree! Even as a young child I used to question certain teachings, such as shunning and the changing of the scriptures. I was always told by my Mom to hush and not question anything at all because we would get in trouble. I was much more drawn to Jesus than the Jehovah the JW’s talk about. Still am because Jesus said he came to abolish the burdensome law the Jews were under and to replace it with love. And therein lay the contradiction in my young heart. How could you love someone and then shun them so hatefully?
@@anaschulz8084 Thank you for sharing your experiences ❤️
I will try showing this (in my language, explained by me) to my JW grandpa. Last time she did not only listen, but also agreed with me...
@Lloyd when I was questioning Matt 24:45-47 with two elders visiting me because of my doubts about the organization, especially my view that the Bible says that Jesus is the Way... and he never said a Slave Class would be the Way to life. I was quoted 2 Corinthians 5:20 and reminded that the Anointed were subsituting for Christ. I was taken back by that scripture and thanked the brothers for their encouragement. Less than an hour after the meeting I had read every scripture on Bible Hub and realised that this scripture had been doctored. I immediately sent a text to one of the Elders to tell them that only NWT inserted the words "substituting for" which seemed to change the intended meaning. I was told with almost irritation to stop playing with symantics. That was probably my wake-up moment.
I saw a NWT at a yard sale today lol. No takers!
I would tell the guy not to sell it lest he becomes blood guilty for leading another poor soul into perdition. He should instead burn it....
True!
Ah, the Silverfish- I mean sword!
Take the scales off your eyes, readers of the NWT (i.e. silverfish).
When I was a kid I was taught that Noah and his family preached about the coming flood and that the people laughed at him.
He was a preacher of righteousness according to 2 Peter 2:5
@@reluctantheist5224 That doesn't mean he said a single word about the flood.
The WT Org could have been honest and said "People of Noah's time were taken by surprise, but this time they have a chance to be saved! So evidently it is important to spread the Good News etc etc"
@@virtualglitter though some of the renderings do not necessarily suggest they were taken by surprise ..the last one said they did not understand , the KJV uses ' know ' in a number of ways especially in a way of understanding .
I noticed a further Watchtower alteration in this verse as well, about the word "presence" instead of coming. JWs make a big deal about "presence" because they teach He already came invisibly. Other Bibles use "coming" here, because it is about the future coming of Jesus, not his invisible "presence" since 1914 as they teach.
I was told the same thing in the 60s, 70s and early 80s. Can't confirm later than that, I was well out.
I knew they doctored the bible I just knew it
churches always taught that their version was incorrect, and why.
yes, you were right. listen to your gut : )
Every Religion has!
I find this dishonesty absolutely disgraceful.
on the other hand, the gb got very rich, and protected child rapists. so they obviously thought it was worth it.
@@Plethorality I wish that my Mom knew this. She has a dominatrix who keeps indoctrinating her that all these criminal matters, prosecutions and lawsuits do not exist and are an evil ploy to contaminate her mind against the JW Org. She does not even believe the court stamped documents which we show to her.
This Cult has the Arrogance to call itself the Truth, it’s not the Truth it’s evil twisted lies!
This Cult tells Lie after Lie , it’s not the Truth it’s false prophecy!
@@gailcullinan349 This is classic Watchtower procedure used to control and hide the real Truth from the gullible sheep!
@@stevenclarke5606 not only "the real Truth", whatever you deem it to be, but also any genuine curiosity or opinion. and without curiosity, truth has nowhere to land.
Great video again. I’ve barked on about the “new nothing” about the flood even in the Greek Kingdom Interlinear, for several years now.
I was at a meeting and a statement was given during a talk in the flood. The Wt said “God never destroys anyone without giving a warning first” so on the way out I said to this elder - interesting statement that God doesn’t kill without a warning. Can you show me in the bible where a warning was given to those of Sodom and Gomorrah? He said nothing. So I said the Wt is wrong then eh? Smiled and walked away.
Nice catch Grandpa! After a 2 hr meeting
my brain had pretty well turned to mush!
The NWT's rendering of Matthew 24:39 is a doozy. However, even a reliable Bible can disfigure one's psyche.
As for the verse that added the extra word the only thing I could come up with is that since they call themselves Jehovah’s Witnesses they’re making it seem like well since Christ isn’t here to speak on god’s behalf we are going to do it. But I don’t know if that’s really what they’re trying to say. It does seem like they like to bend a lot of things their way.💁🏻♀️
Luke 22:17. Silverfish says “And accepting a cup, he gave thanks and said: ‘Take this and PASS IT FROM ONE TO THE OTHER AMONG YOURSELVES,’”
This ‘passing’ sounds a lot like the JW annual rejecting of Jesus’ sacrifice ceremony. But every other bible says words like “divide it among yourselves” or “share it among yourselves”. It was NOT getting passed on after each received their division or share.
This wording is clearly just to push their doctrine. Kingdom Interlinear confirms correct wording.
I'm not sure about that. The ones who were there were allowed to partake of it even according to JW theology.
Oh neat, It's the origin of the annual shunning of the emblems! Good find
@@leicafox4403 Except the ones there to which this verse , even in the NWT , refers , has them all taking it .
@@reluctantheist5224 If that's the case, then it's very bizarre that everyone still felt the need to just glance at the emblems while they passed them off to the next person... unless you were anointed, then it was free bread and wine time!
@@leicafox4403 Well, I think that has more to do with the covenant for a Kingdom. Everybody there was entitled to take it and ( I assume) did so. The rendering of the verse is to indicate that these ones should eat or drink and is understood by JWs to mean that.
Regarding "Noah and proselytising" in Matthew 24 v39,, I now have this image of Noah going door-to-door in a porkpie hat and bow tie with a JW phonograph and that old recording the JW's used to lug from door-to-door in the 1920's and 1930's.
I noticed a further Watchtower alteration in this verse as well, about the word "presence" instead of coming. JWs make a big deal about "presence" because they teach He already came invisibly. Other Bibles use "coming" here, because it is about the future coming of Jesus, not his invisible "presence" since 1914 as they teach.
@@AndyBCCA You're absolutely right! The protestations of the Society notwithstanding, the original Koine Greek word "parousia" refers to a future event; consequently, "coming" is far more accurate in English than is "presence", which refers to either a current event or an event which has already occurred. After all, contextually speaking, the language in the entire passage is in the future tense. Even the Society has tacitly admitted as much over the years. Only with regard to the "parousia" does the Society make the exception and insist on referring to that in either the past tense or the present tense, and that for no other purpose or intent than to lend some measure of credence, however weak, tepid or convoluted, to its teaching on A.D. 1914, a teaching which, by the way, the Society has needed to revise a number of times over the years in order to buy itself more time after its repeated failures!
The phonograph has been replaced now with iPads which they use to play pre-recorded messages to anyone weak enough, or silly enough, to listen.
@@AndyBCCA I was not a JW - but one thing that always bothered me about JW core beliefs is the thing about "invisible" Jesus in 1914. It just doesn't make sense to me why new JW's don't question this since the idea of an invisible visit from Jesus kinda goes against the whole New Testament and his supposed mission. Jesus's return was supposed to be a big deal because he'd be returning with a sword and in all of his glory as the Son of God... _yet he covertly comes back in 1914 as invisible Jesus??_ While I'm sure they justify it w/ verses - in my religious days I would have balked at this notion. I know I would have told anyone that tried to tell me that with a straight face " Invisible, secret trip Jesus just doesn't fit with what he said about himself, or with what Paul wrote." But I will say to be fair, the things/dogma that separate most Christian denominations baffle me.
Love that Hebrews 1 made this episode cut. More of this Lloyd! The translation changes is tip of the iceberg.
Matthew 27:52, 53 is one good one. Here the NWT tries to suggest that the people coming from the graves were not in fact the resurrected bodies. But many translations and scholars agree that Matthew meant that a massive resurrection actually happened and the recently dead walked among the living, which has been a major thorn in the side of Christian apologetics ever since. But the WT just ignores the issue by mistranslating.
Lloyd you are going to be a very old man when you finish this series. The best yet . This is what all jws need to see.
Hebrews 1 vs 8 is a crazy bible verse I have never seen that
Should read your Bible then.
This first point just shows how evil this nwt God is.... The evil 8 are so corrupt
SUGGESTION: Micah 6:8 (NWT, 2013) " [...] And what is Jehovah requiring of you? Only to exercise justice, to cherish loyalty, And to walk in modesty with your God!"
The same verse reads in the KJV " And what doth require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy (kindness, NRSV), and to walk humbly with thy God?"
"... to cherish loyalty", " walk in modesty" ??
Right. Not even the same meaning. Loving mercy doesn't remotely mean to cherish loyalty. Sheesh.
Was Uncle Tony using a real Bible, or is that a Bible-shaped Flask?
🤣
they dont have real bibles.
The Hebrew Interlinear Bible at Ex 4:21 also says, "And I will harden his heart".
I feel that the language used in Corinthians (substitute) is to support the doctrine of Jesus only being the mediator for the anointed, and the anointed (read governing body) being the "substitute" for Jesus to the other sheep.
Most JWs don't realize that this is core doctrine. One of the things that woke me up. JWFACTS has a great article about it
that is one reason why other churches never recognised jw's. it also takes power from the people, which is what cult leaders must do, to function, as the narcissistic tyrannical r's holes they choose to be.
Luke 23:43 in NWT is a good example of how they change the Bible to fit their doctrines. They move the comma to make it look like Jesus is talking about some future paradise instead of that same day
Well, they didn't have punctuation in the days of the early manuscripts, so there's no telling where the comma, if any, is supposed to go.
@@vinegar10able Well, how come the NWT is the ONLY bible that reads that way at Luke 23:43? I'll answer that for you.. To make it seem Jesus was talking about some future paradise instead of them going to paradise at the moment they died. They altered this verse because jws teach soul sleep, like the 7 day adventist cult they started out with..Do your research
@@toomyconne768 Well, be better to leave the comma out altogether and let people make their own interpretation.
@@vinegar10able instead of arguing over translations that are missing nuances in any case (not just the doctored JW Bible), why dont you go back to the original Greek text where its plain to see? ''καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· Ἀμήν λέγω σοι, σήμερον μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἔσῃ ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ.''
@@joek600 can you tell us where the comma falls according to your understanding of Greek please?
Great video Lloyd. Thanks for continuing. As per instructions in the video the scripture that spoke to me was Zach 12:10. GB changed the me to him to avoid the whole trinity thing. Thanks!
Why the doctoring of the 2nd Corinthians verse? Two words: Confirmation. Bias.
more words:
money and power.
Another example of god "allowing" the hardening of hearts is Joshua 11:20.
Thanks Lloyd for reading my suggestion and thanks to the Activists for helping me wake up from that cult. GB adds "substitution", they want to take the place of Christ.
Imperceptible rain?
Edit to say: Tony? Have you encountered imperceptible rain? hmmm? Tony? Maybe after a McCallens...
The wt idea of Substituting for Christ gave me the idea that jws were just like
little christs...... running around doing his preaching job! So nuts!!!!
10:57 it would be hilarious if the sound effect of opening a bottle and scotch being poured into a glass while Tony was reading from the flood narrative 😅🤣😂🥃
Jesus is a bit of a thorn in the GB's side.
2 Cor. 5:20 where they put the word "substitute" I believe means that only some of the annointed are ambassadors of Christ, not the entire 144000. That would explain why JWs only follow the direction of the GB who they believe are annointed as well, and not all of the annointed that are on the earth right now. Only some of them can substitute for the role of Christ but not all.
An ambassador is not a substitute. An ambassador is a representative, a messenger. But never a substitute. They bring messages from their leader (president, prime minister, etc), not act as the leader themselves.
The 1st century Christians were ambassadors - messengers of Christ. They did not have the authority that Christ had/has and didn’t pretend to. The GB want the rank and file to equate them with the same authority that Christ has.
As for being anointed, there is no such thing as a non-anointed Christian. It’s in the word Christ, meaning “anointed one”. How can you have an anointed anointed one and a non-anointed anointed one? It’s simply more lies, and shady, twisting (re-writing) of the scriptures to give the GB all the power they crave. Despicable and blasphemous.
Maybe if one of their predictionsss happen.🤣🤣
So obvious why they made these dishonest changes to their own holy book. 😳 thanks for taking the time to do the research and point these out Lloyd. 💪
Great job Lloyd!!
Thanks, Lloyd. Romans chapter 10 is all about Jesus. Not Jehovah
Yes Romans 10 is all about Jesus, but WT changed their Bible from Lord to Jehovah in verse 13 when Jehovah or the tetragram YHWH was never used in the New Testament. In the Greek interlinear Kyrios or Kurios was used and it translates to Lord not Jehovah. And if you read the full chapter it’s clear that it doesn’t belong there.
Lucthatsme that’s true, if u read verse 9-13 of chapter 10 it becomes obvious it’s about Jesus
@@LucieNan yes this is a great point about the name Jehovah not appearing in certain texts so they have to add it to give weight and change context. Was talking to a friend of mine Ex elder like myself. And he was saying he is unsure about the validity of the name Jehovah, because witnesses use it all the time. So I said a convincing argument about it is Why didn’t Jesus use it at all in conversation? WT insert it at the only places they can and that is when Jesus quotes from the Hebrew Scriptures. But in general conversation, prayers etc he never used it once! Why. And he said I never knew that. AND it never appears in any of the manuscripts of the gospels either. Very Telling
@@meanmazda exactly. Jehovah is a made up name. Jesus always called the Father, Father. You never call your father by his first name. It’s disrespecting your father. And that is exactly what they are doing, disrespecting God the Father calling Him by a name which is not even His name. No reverence at all. Shameful. And not following Jesus example which they always claim they are doing. NOT AT ALL! ,
Here is another one I learned: Genesis 3:6. NWT inserts the word “when” suggesting that eve ate the fruit at the tree alone.
This is my favorite series! I love it!
Side note maybe the end will come when Lloyd Evens gets 144000 subscribers 😂😂
2 Cor 5:20 Substituting for Christ. They absolutely are sitting in the seat of Moses/Christ. Making rules and doctrine that go up and beyond biblical commands. As well as the reason they have made a 2 class system thus making only the partaking of emblems for those with "heavenly calling" They are not just ambassador's..which would be a promoter OF...whereas substitute literally takes the place OF!! So if you have a substitute teacher or quarterback in the game of football. You have replaced your starter! On a timeline the gb has continually escalated their position. A constant drum beat UP!!!
Yes, exactly. Followers of Jesus are ambassadors, not substitutes. their is no substitute for Jesus Christ.
Texts like Hebrew 1:8 are "explained" in the book "Reasoning From the Sriptures" - "Texts from which a person might draw more than one conclusion, depending on the Bible translation used", from page 415 on, especially p.422.
The Greek Interlinear Bible says at Matt 24:39, "and they did not know until the flood came and took all away".
According to Tony, god blessed Noah's "construction work," which no one took note of. Hmm. I suppose 8 billion folks who don't know about the miracle at Ramopo will deserve to die as well.
Like your analogy
Had any noticed how immersive the flood story was presented? The GB has really ramped up the manipulation. Good work Lloyd. Always appreciate your perspective.
Thank you Lloyd for another great video and for responding to my comment. There were many other great comments from others, well I’m glad you chose mine and as always your thoughts were on point. They changed it cause it refers Jesus as God. I look forward to listening to your future videos in this series. Hopefully these will wake up JW to see how biased their NWT is. They always pointed out to me Rev 22:18-19 which backfires against them. It reads: « For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. »
Revelation 22:18-19 KJV
Hey lloyd. I'm super curious, why is it when the governing body speaks, they stress syllables weirdly? It's like the have a formula.
They might be inspired by the spirit of whisky.
They've probably all been counselled on proper emphasis and have been churned through a Theocratic Ministry School at some point or another. Add to that, that they're all living together in the same complex, and each thinks they're chosen by God, you likely get a lot of opinions flying around about how to do something properly that get amalgamated into each GB member's presentation style. That'd be my guess.
@@rasklaat2 LOL yeah their formula: Step #1 Take a shot of whiskey Step #2 Take two more shots of whiskey #3. Film JW Broadcasting episode.
It's actually very reminiscent of Neuro Linguistic Programming language (NLP) ... I don't think they're doing it *knowingly*, though. Too stupid to learn the technique properly.
@@scottjones3411 i would not put that past some of them.
listening to them, is like being shifted into some nauseating paralled universe.
my reason why there are so many changes from the bible is because in the early days there were people they couldn't show the truth from the bible .. so many and pagans because of the changes ...
Great video, so many more ,keep doing this kind please
When I was doing my own personal study of the Bible I came across this rather strange verse. It was Leviticus 25:55 “for the Israelites are my own slaves.” In the king James version it says. “ for on to me the children of Israel are servants”
In the original Greek it says ''ὅτι ἐμοὶ οἱ υἱοὶ ᾿Ισραὴλ οἰκέται εἰσί, παῖδές μου οὗτοί εἰσιν, οὓς ἐξήγαγον ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου· ἐγὼ Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς ὑμῶν''. The word you want is ''οἰκέται'' (oiketai) (plural) and it literally means member of my household (oikos). Now this can be used as synonymous to a house-slave. The exact word for slave is Δούλος (doulos). Oiketas falls under the category of a domestic servant who could be also a freed slave, that is seen as member of the family and not just a slave.
Servants and Slaves are basically the same thing.
Luke 23:43 changed to support the future earthly paradise . The placement of the coma makes a big difference. It makes more sense in other translations
Substituting for Christ this is what I get from this, (we being the anointed) the GB substitutes for Christ because they teach that all 1st century Christians were of the anointed so who do the JW think of when anointed is mentioned the GB how many KH have anointed in the besides the GB threw them under the bus, so JW would think the GB are substitutes for Christ for them.
The reason the added "substitute for Christ" is because they set themselves up in Christs place. The way to God is through them whereas the bible says that the way to God is through Christ.
They also play the role of mediators for the great crowd, in place (substitute) for Christ.
The watchtower are replacing Christ Jesus with themselves, leading millions away from the saving grace of Christ 😢
This is only a thought, no fact. Maybe by adding in the word "substituting" they want their followers of Jehovahs Witness to salitify in their minds that the governing body is the substitution for Christ. How deceitful this would be especially if "new light" comes forward to say that Jehovah sent them directly to help His people. They would be able to really make any rule because they are the ones that have Jehovahs backing and that they better DO what they say or you won't gain Jehovahs favor..
They substuted/changed the bible according to their doctrine, which is so obvious. thank you for covering this topic. JW changed Jesus or Lord and anything to do with Christ being God as in John 1:1 and equal with God himself - in other words God being the sacrifice for us and our sins. Corinthians are such a great example. Also the true Christians are Christ's witnesses, that's what the new testament is about. New covenant through Jesus. The jws keep living under the old testament law. And they need to be freed from it.
John 5:29 - The NWT twists judgment with condemnation to support their narrative of a ressurection of righteous (i.e. JWs and servants of Jehovah of old) and unrighteous (those who died without the change of knowing Jehovah, that is not becoming a cult member) ... also the motion of these three classes of people: righteous, unrighteous and wicked is very centrict to JW's doctrine ....
I can't remember if this was mentioned, but there was one scripture in the NWT that I found to be changed. It is in Colossians 1:16 where it says: "Because by means of him (Jesus) all things were created." The agreed translation of that verse is: "for by him were all things created" King James version, "because in him were created all things" Rotherham, and the list goes on. Watchtower even tries to defend this by saying that it would go against THEIR narrative to translate this verse literally. They have no shame.
I reckon they inserted the words "substituting for" in the NWT at 2 Cotinthians 5:20, to emphasise the role of the GB as an agent used by Christ in the eyes of rank and file JW's.
Similar to one of the titles of the pope: (Latin: Vicarius Christi) vicar of Christ.
Meaning one who substitutes or acts as an agent for Christ.
Another scripture I've come across 1 Kings 20:28 "Then the man of the true God approached the king of Israel and said: “This is what Jehovah says, ‘Because the Syrians have said: “Jehovah is a God of mountains, and he is not a God of plains,” I WILL GIVE ALL THIS LARGE CROWD INTO YOUR HAND, and you will certainly know that I am Jehovah." NWT
Other translations read: The LORD is a god of the hills and not of the plains.’ So I WILL DEFEAT THIS VAST ARMY FOR YOU. Then you will know that I am the LORD.” NLT
I will DELIVER ALL THIS GREAT ARMY INTO YOUR HANDS." Berean Study Bible
"I WILL GIVE ALL THIS GREAT MULTITUDE INTO YOUR HAND." ESV; KJV;
"therefore I will hand over to you all this great multitude." NASV
So he has promised to HELP YOU DEFEAT THEIR POWERFUL ARMY. Then you will know that the LORD is in control." Contemporary English Version
'Substituting', for Christ is a distancing technique that adds to the basic JW practise of not having a close relationship with God . . . and a close 'captured' relationship with JW GB. Just my opinion.
Like John 17:21 NLT "I pray that they will all be one, just as you and I are one-as you are in me, Father, and I am in you. And may they be in us so that the world will believe you sent me." NWT says "in union" throughout, instead of simply 'are one' . . . and 'in us' - it's distancing ie disconnecting from the idea of an intimate living personal relationship with God. You must stay close to the organisation, but God? An elder specifically said to me at a judicial meeting -"You cannot have a personal relationship with God Grace!" That would never do - I might follow guidance by God's spirit, rather than WT! There could be chaos if everyone was guided by God!
I might be wrong but on the first example from Exodus I am positive that the New World Translation in the 70s/80s said "hardens his heart" as I remember it being quoted at meetings. In fact there were talks I heard which the speakers highlighted those words in particular. Unless those speakers used another bible for comparison in those talks.
If anyone out there has an old edition can they confirm?
If so they have actually changed their own translation in the last few years.
Too bad I tossed that old green book. I finally
realized most of it was superstition scribbled by ignorant Desert Dwellers!
@@clarity2478 Very annoying that I don't have a copy as I would love to confirm if they even changed their OWN version as it didn't fit with their ethos. I was hoping someone on here might have still had a copy to verify.
Thank you for this. You can also check on Gen 6:14 about gopher wood (in aleppo codex it is “gopher”) a wood Noah used for building his ark...although other translations kept it as it is, other translations have changed it to cypress wood. In NWT, they mentioned it as a “resinous tree”. Just an input.
Substitute means to take someone's place while ambassador means to be a representative of someone. So instead of trying to be a representative of the Christ the Governing body wanted to take his place in total. The bible said many will come in my name but don't believe them.
Here are a couple more scriptures to consider Lloyd: Acts 20:20, Acts 5:42 and Luke 10:7. These are the only scriptures the term "house to house" is used in the entire NWT. Obviously JW's have chosen these words to support their door to door ministry. Additionally, you can find several bible that also use these words. That said, when you look at how the bibles that use the words and other bibles that choose other phrases like "in each house, in houses, in homes or in your homes" a different narrative begins to emerge. It appears that the actual message is not to be preaching from door to door, but to make sure the message is taught in each house. This idea can be supported by looking at the organizations own interlinear version on their own website. Interestingly enough, it is Luke 10:7 that is the only one that speaks of actually going from house to house. In this verse Jesus actually is saying NOT to go from house to house.
One expression the NWT uses ad nauseam is "loyal love". This expression is not in the Hebrew or Greek Interlinear Bible. If you read Ps 136 (if you can stand it), then you'll see what I mean. The Hebrew says, "His mercy endures forever". In other places its translated as "undeserved kindness". It would seem that the word "loyal" is an indocrinated trigger word for JWs who must remain loyal to the organisation, which is lead by those substituting for Christ. It's an organisation run by eight little Christs who have written a Bible; but it's not a translation: its an interpretation
I generally think I’ve pretty much heard every possible issue with the JWs. Matthew 24:39 was, however, something I’ve not heard before. One of those verses that fundamentally changes the perception of God’s loving personality. While I’ve seen plenty of JW videos of Noah preaching and teaching (though never really believing everyone would have been made aware of the judgement about to befall the world), it’s a rather shocking change to find the Bible really does offer up judgement upon a world without warning and an opportunity to change. There was no written word, no moral position to be taught and yet God thought he’d drown everyone for not abiding by some rules they were supposed to infer from the story of Adam and Eve. Cruel and unusual.
The idea that Noah was a preacher was first introduced in the apocrypha in the Book of Jubilees, which the author of Peter was familiar with. Though that preaching, if I remember correctly, was after the flood. So the idea of Noah preaching before the flood was probably unknown in Bible times. And yes, the Greek scriptures refer to the apocryphal and pseudepigrafal Biblical writing several times, especially Peter and Jude. The org's literature has blatantly lied that apocryphal books are not referred to.
I didn’t realize they changed the verse about Pharaohs heart; even as a kid I had an issue with that verse, seemed so unfair and wrong
I'm not surprised with 2 Cor. 5: 20. We are talking about a group of people who are taking Christ's position little by little. This is a group that teaches that Christ is the mediator only between God and them. This means that they, the Governing Body, are the mediators between God and the Other Sheep.
As for the third one, to me this seems to be an example of sneaking in something to use it much later, when people have become used to it.
Ok let me get my recommendation in early.... The book of Jude vrs. 5 in the nwt kingdom interlinear reference notes where they use the name jehovah the reference notes in their kingdom interlinear says JESUS and not listed is p72 that says the GOD CHRIST.
P72 is papyrus 72 and is the oldest codex manuscript containing 1&2 Peter as well as Jude . Where it is the only discovered case where we see the unique title that the "God Christ" saved the Hebrews from out of the land of Egypt in Jude vrs. 5.
And Since the .org changed this unique title of Jesus to Jehovah, as I understand the scripture in the nwt, Jesus is God and his father is God and the Holy Ghost is God. What in world is the word for this concept? as a monotheist or the belief in 1 almighty God?
We've got to come up with something to title this one of a kind unique concept with no other example in nature since it's clearly there no matter how you translate the word.
"Trinity" anyone?
Might catch on!
Unfortunately (and unsurprisingly!), the Kingdom Interlinear text is not reliable, for one of two reasons: sometimes, deliberate distortion, even there; sometimes perhaps accidental "howlers", because the Greek of the people who did the interlinear text was just not good enough, and they sometimes chose the wrong word from the dictionary.
interestingly, I had a conversation about your first example, just a few weeks ago, with my JW soon-to-be-ex-wife. I found a few more instances, and I wish I'd taken note of them.
An edit in Matthew 24. That's quite something.
Noah would not have had time to preach if he was building an ark, especially if he had to put in the required number of hours per week.
Do you thank they will find any evidence of ‘Ark Crashing’ back in Noahs day?
One from one of your own recent rebuttals (May 21) - Daniel 9:26, Messiah vs Annointed One
Hi Lloyd. I think WT have added "substituting" to 2 Corinthians 5:20 because that confirms exactly what the GB think they are - In place of Christ. Basically to make their Bible agree with their 'anointed' teaching.
Agree, they place themselves as mediators for the great crowd and Jesus being only the mediator for the anointed ones (new covenant), contrary of the Bible says about Jesus being the mediator for all.
I expect the alteration to Mathew to read "they took no note" is done because they interpret 2 Peter 2:5, which calls Noah "a preacher of righteousness", to indicate that Noah would have warned those around at the time of the coming flood. I suggest that the Bible indicates no such thing. Noah was called a preacher of "righteousness", or in other words an advocate of behaving in a righteous fashion. He was not a preacher in the JW sense of someone who warns of (a preacher of) "floods and imminent destruction".
1. It is clear from the account in Revelation that God had decided to destroy everyone apart from Noah and his family, on account of "every thought and intention of their hearts was only evil all the time" - in other words they were unable to respond to any kind of preaching campaign.
2. The ark had no where near enough space and resources to save a large number of people through the flood. IF a large number had responded, would God had asked Noah to build a newer, bigger boat?
3. If most of the people had responded and repented, would God have then flooded the whole world just to kill a few people?
4. If such a preaching campaign had been done, then we know from the Bible that no one actually responded, since only Noah and his family entered the boat and were saved. So the preaching campaign was evidently useless. Would God, who is able to see into the future, have ordered a useless preaching campaign?
5. Could Noah and his small family have accomplished a global preaching work, up against such opposition as the giants (Nephilim) and the super powerful materialised demonic angels? Would they not have simply killed him and his family for preaching their imminent destruction?
6. Would not such an amazing preaching campaign be mentioned in Genesis? A handful of people to preach to the whole population of the Earth (at the time) !!
Could you give the verse in Revelation you refer to, please?
Wow! Thank you for sharing your discernment.
Very logical indeed…
I always had MANY issues regarding Noah and the flood… as you were going through Matt 24:39 I went back and read the entire story of Noah in Genesis. Not once did the scriptures say Noah went out and preached. Infact, Genesis 6:18 further proves it. It says, NWT, “And I am establishing my covenant with you, and you must go into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you.” Jehovah never told him to tell other people so they could be saved. He specifically made a list of all who were invited. What is the definition of the word covenant? An agreement. And the bible says Noah did JUST SO. No preaching was involved.
About a mistranslation of the Second Corinthians 5:21, this has left me in absolute disgusting and schocking.
They have done a huge blafesmous against Christ. They put themselves as the mediator of God, "substituting" Christ. They denied the Savior of the mankind, which is the basic of the Christianity.
They have commited a condenatory sin. They have been the false messiah. Or even, the Anticrist.
I am currently listening to the ESV version of the Bible, still in Exodus. The part about God hardening Pharoah's heart really stood out to me...that is NOT what I remembered from what I learned as a JW kid, and it certainly puts God in a different light. Thank you, Lloyd, for doing these videos; they are very much eye-opening!
This is great information but I am thinking, for me, it would have helped to have Lloyd or someone else show how the actual Greek text is translated.
Much appreciation for Lloyd for all he does. Praise be to the Lloyd :)
Revelation 1:10 seems to be another example of tampering with the Bible in order to support JW dogma.
In the NWT this scripture is rendered "By inspiration I came to be in the Lord’s day, ....", whereas virtually all other Bibles render it as "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day," ( Berean Literal Bible). The reason I believe they have done this is that the word "inspiration" in the scripture at 2 Timothy 3:16 ("All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, ,,,," (NWT) is not treated as the normally understood definition of the word "inspired", meaning that people found God to be source of inspiration, encouraging them to worship God. Rather, the word inspiration is interpreted as meaning that God has put His words in the minds of the authors of the Bible via Holy Spirit, using them rather like secretaries taking dictation. This is particularly the case with Paul, where every letter he wrote is assumed to be divine truth, coming from God rather than Paul. The watchtower governing body loves Paul, presumably seeing him as a first century equivalent.
I believe that using the word "inspiration" to apply to John receiving a revelation from Jesus, rather than being "in the spirit" is an attempt to back up this divine authorship of the Bible, which in reality was written by men. I don't know if they did this in your time, but recently before I left, whenever they would read a quote from Paul, they would usually insert the phrase "Paul's inspired letter" or something similar, to enforce this idea that it was to treated with the same importance as if God himself had written it.
with the ambassador thing the jw version says that we are gods ambassadors whereas the other versions say that we are Christ's ambassadors, they insert the word substitute to change the meaning, and seperate jesus and god, and the other ones can be understood that Jesus is God
Following a long (2,000 years) and robust Christian tradition of adding to and doctoring the text through error and intent in the pursuit of bolstering personal theology / interpretation--to which there is no end.
2 Timothy 3:14 was always of interest to me. When I’d ask and gave definition of persuaded I was counseled on being humble. 😂
With 2 Corinthians I feel that helps to justify/validate the GB’s authority for rulership… maybe 🤔
The flood was global. Noah and his family spent many years building the arc yet he preached to the entire world about a coming flood. Does not sound possible?
Hebrews 1: 8.
But unto the son he saith , “ thy throne, O, God is for ever and ever; a scepter of Righteousness is the scepter of thy Kingdom.
I would like to suggest, Lloyd, the Romans chapter 9 verses 1-5.
In the many bible translations, we have a patron: the word "which" or "that is" repeat many times, include the final verse, that put in this way: "...which them belong the patriachs, and which them Christ descends, according to the flesh, that is, above all, God through the centuries! Amem" (Bible of Jerusalem)
In the NWT, we don't have this sequence being respected. But this, i leave for you see for yourself.
I hope you notice my comment. Take care, man.
Noahs flood - I never read in any bible that provision was made for any of the people who may have repented to get in the ark.. Surely they would have mentioned it? ie compartments?
"Substituting for Christ"- because the GB have put themselves in that position, they've made themselves equivalent to Christ, if not equivalent to Jehovah (The borg = Jehovah, the GB = Jesus)
Loyed “ I wanted to know why they removed many words from there first Bible,
To there new silver Bible,?
It’s Ezekiel 14 : 7.
In there new silver Bible there’s
79 words.
And there older first Bible there’s 48 Words, ?”
No the other way around, there older Bible has 79. Words , in Ezekiel 14 : 7.
And the new silver Bible it has only 48. Words.
Sorry about that.”
About Hebrews 1:8 I looked in to it back then when still a witness. I don't even have the citations but I did research on the watchtower library cd rom after meeting a trinitarian when preaching. There explanation was something of the sort that that verse directly quotes from another old testament verse. Since the verse original verse also referred to a human, "God is your throne" becomes what the original author meant.
There is a apologetic about the Hebrews verse out there, since I've had to defend that verse years ago. Reasoning book: Hebrews 1:8:
RS reads: “Of the Son he says, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.’” (KJ, NE, TEV, Dy, JB, NAB have similar renderings.) However, NW reads: “But with reference to the Son: ‘God is your throne forever and ever.’” (AT, Mo, TC, By convey the same idea.)
Which rendering is harmonious with the context? The preceding verses say that God is speaking, not that he is being addressed; and the following verse uses the expression “God, thy God,” showing that the one addressed is not the Most High God but is a worshiper of that God. Hebrews 1:8 quotes from Psalm 45:6, which originally was addressed to a human king of Israel. Obviously, the Bible writer of this psalm did not think that this human king was Almighty God. Rather, Psalm 45:6, in RS, reads “Your divine throne.” (NE says, “Your throne is like God’s throne.” JP [verse 7]: “Thy throne given of God.”) Solomon, who was possibly the king originally addressed in Psalm 45, was said to sit “upon Jehovah’s throne.” (1 Chron. 29:23, NW) In harmony with the fact that God is the “throne,” or Source and Upholder of Christ’s kingship, Daniel 7:13, 14 and Luke 1:32 show that God confers such authority on him.
Hebrews 1:8, 9 quotes from Psalm 45:6, 7, concerning which the Bible scholar B. F. Westcott states: “The LXX. admits of two renderings: [ho the·osʹ] can be taken as a vocative in both cases (Thy throne, O God, . . . therefore, O God, Thy God . . . ) or it can be taken as the subject (or the predicate) in the first case (God is Thy throne, or Thy throne is God . . . ), and in apposition to [ho the·osʹ sou] in the second case (Therefore God, even Thy God . . . ). . . . It is scarcely possible that [’Elo·himʹ] in the original can be addressed to the king. The presumption therefore is against the belief that [ho the·osʹ] is a vocative in the LXX. Thus on the whole it seems best to adopt in the first clause the rendering: God is Thy throne (or, Thy throne is God), that is ‘Thy kingdom is founded upon God, the immovable Rock.’”-The Epistle to the Hebrews (London, 1889), pp. 25, 26
Beautifully done. Thank you
If you presuppose that the Bible is harmonious, you translate like this. But that is a bias, even if the NWT translators don't view it as such.
This is one of the best videos . Taking apart there own bible