# Jehovah witnesses scholats opinion of the Bible **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 2, 2012, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144 "2012-01-02T15:08:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2012, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144/21 "2012-01-04T16:36:24Z")
Actually, we do know pretty much who “wrote” John. John the Apostle. It clearly came from the group of disciples that John gathered in Ephesus. Of course, we have to understand that ‘wrote” doesn’t mean what we think of as ‘wrote” today. Back then very few wrote their own memoirs, etc, instead they were dictated to others. So, It appears John dictated his memories and inspirations to others, then there was likely a editorial phase, too. The criticisms are pretty weak. Yes, John was likely raised as a fisherman until he met Jesus. However, John died around AD100, giving him some 60 years to become better educated. The newest theory is called “the new look “= wiki “\*The resulting revolution in Johannine scholarship was termed the new look by John A. T. Robinson, who coined the phrase in 1957 at Oxford. According to Robinson, this new information rendered the question of authorship a relative one. He considered a group of disciples around the aging John the Apostle who wrote down his memories, mixing them with theological speculation, a model that had been proposed as far back as Renan’s Vie de Jésus (“Life of Jesus,” 1863).” And “The Gospel of John developed over a period of time in various stages,[24] summarised by Raymond E. Brown as follows:[25] 1. An initial version based on personal experience of Jesus; 2. A structured literary creation by the evangelist which draws upon additional sources; 3. The final harmony that presently exists in the New Testament canon, around 85-90 AD.[26] In view of this complex and multi-layered history it is meaningless to speak of a single “author” of John, but the title perhaps belongs best to the evangelist who came at the end of this process.”\* ---
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [January 4, 2012, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144/22 "2012-01-04T18:15:43Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > I know it’s not fair to judge translations of the Bible on the basis of single quotes…but… > > King James: “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord.” > New World Translation: “Look! God’s slave-girl!” > > Oy vey… I’m not familiar with this specific verse, but I have a copy of the New World Translation somewhere and I was rather nonplussed with it’s overall tone. To me, it sounds more like a (quite possibly dumbed down) textbook for remedial students than an actual dignified tome. Translation accuracy concerns aside, it just doesn’t sound like the real Bible. When I’ve attempted to read a copy of the Watchtower I find it to be rather condescending in the way that it treats me as a primary school student rather than an educated inquirer. It’s in no way equivalent to an academic journal that covers Biblical scholarship and Christian history, or even preachy doctrinal materials from many other traditions. ---
**Author:** ![Senegoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senegoid/32/6606_2.png) [@Senegoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Senegoid)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2012, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144/23 "2012-01-05T03:34:18Z")
> [@robert\_columbia](#): > > \ > > **When I’ve attempted to read a copy of the Watchtower I find it to be rather condescending in the way that it treats me as a primary school student** rather than an educated inquirer. It’s in no way equivalent to an academic journal that covers Biblical scholarship and Christian history, or even preachy doctrinal materials from many other traditions. Yes, their materials are essentially somewhat like elementary morality textbooks, which is clearly as they intend. Bear in mind that they preach to a world-wide audience, largely including under-educated third-world societies. (But even supposedly well-educated first-worlders could profit from these materials, as evidenced by [sorry, can’t say it here for fear of moderator anti-snark attack]) Point being, they do seem to know their sales-and-marketing, and their elementary level textbook approach may in fact be well-suited to a large majority of their intended audience. Note for the OP: When I asked why you needed to know this stuff, that was meant as a rhetorical question of course. Your response, basically “for the entertainment value” is of course the answer I expected and was looking for. You should definitely read the “Red Book” I described above. Entertainment fu! ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2012, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144/24 "2012-01-05T04:54:17Z")
> [@Sister\_Vigilante](#): > > It is, indeed, not the most faithful translation, as the people who translated it knew neither Greek nor Hebrew (at least not any more than I know French 101 from college), and had to admit to it in court. > > My hubby is an ex-JW. One day Mormons came knocking. He grilled them for 45 minutes straight while they squirmed. I’ve heard that too. Supposedly none of them spoke Greek. What exactly makes this translation a bad one? ---
**Author:** ![virtually\_yours](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a587f6/32.png) [@virtually\_yours](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/virtually_yours)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2012, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144/25 "2012-01-05T11:42:28Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > . So, It appears John dictated his memories and inspirations to others, then there was likely a editorial phase, too. > > …wrote down his memories, mixing them with theological speculation, a model that had been proposed as far back as Renan’s Vie de Jésus (“Life of Jesus,” 1863).” And “The Gospel of John developed over a period of time in various stages,[24] summarised by Raymond E. Brown as follows:[25] > > 1. An initial version based on personal experience of Jesus; > 2. A structured literary creation by the evangelist which draws upon additional sources; > 3. The final harmony that presently exists in the New Testament canon, around 85-90 AD.[26] > In view of this complex and multi-layered history it is meaningless to speak of a single “author” of John, but the title perhaps belongs best to the evangelist who came at the end of this process.”\* Key words: \*there was likely a editorial phase, too. \* hmm _mixing them with theological speculation_ Johns disciples mixing them With…? whose theological speculation? \*draws upon additional sources; \* so he is not the author of all the gospel. _it is meaningless to speak of a single “author” of John, but the title perhaps belongs best_. meaningless and perhaps. virtually yours ---
**Author:** ![virtually\_yours](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a587f6/32.png) [@virtually\_yours](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/virtually_yours)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2012, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144/26 "2012-01-05T11:45:07Z")
> [@robert\_columbia](#): > > I’m not familiar with this specific verse, but I have a copy of the New World Translation somewhere and I was rather nonplussed with it’s overall tone. To me, it sounds more like a (quite possibly dumbed down) textbook for remedial students than an actual dignified tome. Translation accuracy concerns aside, it just doesn’t sound like the real Bible. The christian scholars say the same thing about the Bible today. That the Bible we have does not sound like the _real_ Bible. They say we don’t have the _real_ Bible. virtually yours ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2012, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144/27 "2012-01-05T12:40:46Z")
I just ask them ,before they start to preach, to first prove the Bible was the word of God(or their teachings)And if they know that everything written, taught, read, or thought was just the word of the Bishops of the early Roman and Orthodox church’s from the 300’s so their belief like all beliefs are not belief in God, but the person who wrote it, and if the can find the proof that it was of God then come back and we will talk, of course they never come back. Some do come in maybe 3 or 4 years,but they are new recruits. I tell them the same thing. ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2012, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144/28 "2012-01-05T12:45:58Z")
> [@virtually\_yours](#): > > The christian scholars say the same thing about the Bible today. That the Bible we have does not sound like the _real_ Bible. They say we don’t have the _real_ Bible. > virtually yours What is the real bible? ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2012, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144/29 "2012-01-05T12:47:35Z")
> [@monavis](#): > > I just ask them ,before they start to preach, to first prove the Bible was the word of God(or their teachings)And if they know that everything written, taught, read, or thought was just the word of the Bishops of the early Roman and Orthodox church’s from the 300’s so their belief like all beliefs are not belief in God, but the person who wrote it, and if the can find the proof that it was of God then come back and we will talk, of course they never come back. Some do come in maybe 3 or 4 years,but they are new recruits. I tell them the same thing. I can tell you it doesn’t quite work that way. ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [January 5, 2012, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144/30 "2012-01-05T14:14:36Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > I don’t think you are going to find any. Scholarship involves looking for answers, while they clearly “know” they’ve got the answers first. You might do better talking about evolution, so long as you familiarize yourself with it. > > The one time they came to my house I said “this is a devout atheist household” and they ran like little chickens. > > When the Baptists came, before this, I said I wasn’t interested since I was Jewish. I was polite. They started telling me how I needed to be saved, and I went into my 2,000 years of oppression rant - and they ran like little chickens. Neither have been back. My house used to be owned by Mormons, so we must still have the secret Passover sign up somewhere - they’ve never come either. They ran. _Ran?_ _Like little chickens?_ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jehovah-witnesses-scholats-opinion-of-the-bible/608144.md?page=1)