Timeline for What are the main differences between Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
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 |