Skip to main content
15 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 28, 2018 at 17:49 review Suggested edits
Jul 28, 2018 at 22:43
Dec 15, 2017 at 4:38 comment added Christopher King One minor nitpick: unworthy Mormons are temporarily prohibited from taking the sacrament.
Nov 30, 2017 at 15:15 comment added user19845 @jpmc26, as far as JWs are concerned their viewpoint on that issue is explained in this article. The LDS Church mentions the issue here. It seems that their thoughts are that God has no expectation on "correct" pronunciation.
Nov 30, 2017 at 6:31 comment added jpmc26 @coderworks Because "Jehovah" arises from combining the vowel points of Adonai with the Tetragrammaton. Believing it to be the objective, correct translation does not really follow from its origins. I suppose they would have to believe that it was some divine miracle that the original was recovered in such a strange way, but many other Christians would likely regard this as an error.
Nov 30, 2017 at 5:21 comment added user19845 @jpmc26, as to "as simply a stand in for the Tetragrammaton or do you mean the literal word Jehovah", what's the difference? Although, the name is known widely and been in use for hundreds of years in this form. It is also pronounced not exactly the same in other languages (such as those in Europe: Spanish, Dutch, Swedish, Finnish, etc) because of language-specific differences as to intonation and vowel sounds. So even if the "correct" spelling was determined, some people somewhere on this planet would likely be pronouncing it "not exactly correct" to ancient Hebrew's ears.
Nov 30, 2017 at 4:48 comment added jpmc26 For point 3, "Jehovah" is thought to be an incorrect pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton. Are you using Jehovah as simply a stand in for the Tetragrammaton or do you mean the literal word Jehovah?
S Nov 29, 2017 at 17:16 history suggested Kenny Evitt CC BY-SA 3.0
Replace bullets with numbers to ease references to items.
Nov 29, 2017 at 16:49 review Suggested edits
S Nov 29, 2017 at 17:16
Nov 29, 2017 at 7:54 comment added candied_orange If you really want to be picky Mormons believe that TRANSLATIONS of the bible contain errors. And even if the translations didn't we'd still use additional books to inform our faith. Mormons don't believe that after the ink dried on revelations that God dropped the microphone and walked away from us.
Nov 28, 2017 at 23:04 comment added PipperChip Your point about using other books of scripture to interpret the bible isn't strictly true: a better phrasing would be that "Mormons believe in more books of scripture than just the bible, and also in modern revelation." So it's not used as only a springboard to understand the bible, but it's more like having more bible. (Although we should note that these other scriptures are not appended to the bible, but are "stand-alone" books.)
Nov 28, 2017 at 20:38 comment added user19845 @Machavity, I have not seen evidence anywhere that they believe that their Bible (New World Translation or NWT) is completely correct. In fact their website has, besides the 2015 version of NWT, also the 1984 version of NWT, the ASV, Byington, and KJV. Also if NWT was considered completely correct, they probably would not have revised it in 2015. Not to mention that their key beliefs predate their translation.
Nov 28, 2017 at 19:26 history edited Jacob Glad CC BY-SA 3.0
corrected misspelled word
Nov 28, 2017 at 18:48 comment added Machavity It's worth noting that, on point #4, JWs believe their Bible is completely correct. The New World Translation differs significantly from other translations in some areas
Nov 28, 2017 at 18:06 vote accept Dee
Nov 28, 2017 at 17:14 history answered Jacob Glad CC BY-SA 3.0