Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Recommended Posts

I would like some feedback from folks who have read the REV or who were even involved in the research. I realize that some folks on GSC have no (P) love for John.S but if you respond, I would appreciate it if you would keep it objective (I may be a newbie but have read past threads). If you want to get to a specific area, I would only suggest, chapter of 11 of the gospel of John regarding the raising of Lazarus.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My issue with the REV is that it is basically a vanity book. It is non-peer reviewed for accuracy, and since accuracy is the hallmark of STFI, then it should be happy to be picked apart by people who

I dunno, I don't think calling Waysider "Kermit" is that big of a deal. If Waysider has a problem with it he's a big boy, he can speak for himself. Besides, Kermit is kind of a nice frog isn't he?

As one who 'bashes heads' with the 'mod squad' from time to time, my advice is to take a breather every now and then and enjoy a coffee and learn to agree to disagree !Again, something we were never a

Your advice is appreciated. I have juiciey TWI stuff but that ain't why I am here, I am looking for some intercourse on Biblical stuff. It seems that if I don't crap on TWI or the STF than nobody cares. It's just pretty much a bitch site and folks are not really focused on the word. I think that I made a mistake coming here for discussion on the things that matter. Yes, be patient, but I see folks hit the site but nobody wants to discuss the word. I don't know about you but I think I am just dealing with ....ed off kids. I say kids cause I see folk in corp years past 10 - they have nothing for me other than how they were wronged - dang Raf, I got it too but earlier than they. Does anybody care about working the Bible on this site?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The doctrinal forum is where you'll usually find people who are interested in that sort of thing.

Hey Kermitt, I could not find it, can you provide some navigation in order to get there? Greatly would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people here do not understand your acronym of REV. I understand your military background uses them for everything, but a little clarity would help others.

Also, if you are on Facebook, there are several forums you can find where people (exTWI and current alike) like to discuss Biblical version "truths or fictions". That might be more inline with your interest. Just start searching names of people you knew or heard of who taught in TWI and you will find them rather easily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was involved with STF in the home office when JWS started his rewriting of the NT into his Revised English Version (REV). It was his goal and intent to rework the language of the NT to fit STF doctrine. My conversation with him about that was that the JWs had done the same thing and it had not boded well with them. I see it basically as a vanity book.

People here are cynical when it comes to religious organizations in general, and TWI and its offshoots in particular. "Right doctrine" is not the end all that some would claim it to be, as far as some of us are concerned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MRAP: The persona with the frog avatar has a name. It is "Waysider". It wasbeyond rude for you to march in here and address him the way you did. "hey Kermit"...especially since you wanted something. You called him that several times. In future, please use your manners.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people here do not understand your acronym of REV. I understand your military background uses them for everything, but a little clarity would help others.

Also, if you are on Facebook, there are several forums you can find where people (exTWI and current alike) like to discuss Biblical version "truths or fictions". That might be more inline with your interest. Just start searching names of people you knew or heard of who taught in TWI and you will find them rather easily.

Yes, the military is wild with acronyms (they actually have an acronym encylopedia) but the REV acronym was devised by STF (Revised English Version); I never ordered it, I just print it out by the books since it changes so often with new research. Sometimes I just read it on line.

I was involved with STF in the home office when JWS started his rewriting of the NT into his Revised English Version (REV). It was his goal and intent to rework the language of the NT to fit STF doctrine. My conversation with him about that was that the JWs had done the same thing and it had not boded well with them. I see it basically as a vanity book.

People here are cynical when it comes to religious organizations in general, and TWI and its offshoots in particular. "Right doctrine" is not the end all that some would claim it to be, as far as some of us are concerned.

Hey, Taz, we should continue this discussion on the Biblical discussion site as "Kermit" suggested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MRAP: The persona with the frog avatar has a name. It is "Waysider". It wasbeyond rude for you to march in here and address him the way you did. "hey Kermit"...especially since you wanted something. You called him that several times. In future, please use your manners.

Well, I am certainly doing my best to get at everyones goat. The avatar that Waysider uses is not a frog (I used to hunt frogs - delicious), it's Kermit. If I had remembered that the pic of Kermit was Waysider, than I would have addressed him as such. Now really, there are alot of things to correct me on, and you choose this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MRAP: The persona with the frog avatar has a name. It is "Waysider". It wasbeyond rude for you to march in here and address him the way you did. "hey Kermit"...especially since you wanted something. You called him that several times. In future, please use your manners.

Since it's already been brought to your attention, MRAP,

I'd like to point out that good manners are rarely a bad thing,

especially when goodwill is both free and priceless.

If you're just trying to pile on reasons to be disliked so you

can turn around later and say

"See, they all hated me because I'm a Christian" or

"See, they all hated me because of my Christian organization",

you will be called on it and caught.

I was under the impression that the military encouraged courtesy with

women so long as the soldiers are not actively in a combat situation

at the time. Perhaps I have been misinformed. If not, then it's

not a good reflection on the other military veterans we've had here

for you to be the exception. krys had a perfectly legitimate point,

and your manners could use some fine-tuning. You may not know your

way around here, but mocking people is generally rude wherever you

go and that can hardly be considered news nor unique to here.

Well, I am certainly doing my best to get at everyones goat. The avatar that Waysider uses is not a frog (I used to hunt frogs - delicious), it's Kermit. If I had remembered that the pic of Kermit was Waysider, than I would have addressed him as such.

"I forgot his screen-name, and I was too lazy to scroll up the page and look

it up, and too impolite to care" is neither an apology nor an admittance of

any fault.

Now really, there are alot of things to correct me on, and you choose this.

And yet, she was right to correct you on it.

The proper response might have included a "thank you, ma'am" to krys and an apology

to Waysider.

An IMproper response is to duck responsibility for shortcomings and refuse to

offer an apology when an apology is called for.

If you want to be treated like a gentleman, I'm sure most of us would be fine with

that (there's always an exception.) However, that requires you to act like one so

there's a reason to expect a response in kind.

Yes, the military is wild with acronyms (they actually have an acronym encylopedia) but the REV acronym was devised by STF (Revised English Version); I never ordered it, I just print it out by the books since it changes so often with new research. Sometimes I just read it on line.

(snip)

Ever consider that it's rude for others to just use acronyms you're unfamiliar with

and just expect you to know them or find out what they mean?

Ever consider that it's not nice for others to do that to you?

Ever consider doing unto others as you would have them do unto you,

or at least refrain from doing what you don't want others to do?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since it's already been brought to your attention, MRAP,

I'd like to point out that good manners are rarely a bad thing,

especially when goodwill is both free and priceless.

If you're just trying to pile on reasons to be disliked so you

can turn around later and say

"See, they all hated me because I'm a Christian" or

"See, they all hated me because of my Christian organization",

you will be called on it and caught.

I was under the impression that the military encouraged courtesy with

women so long as the soldiers are not actively in a combat situation

at the time. Perhaps I have been misinformed. If not, then it's

not a good reflection on the other military veterans we've had here

for you to be the exception. krys had a perfectly legitimate point,

and your manners could use some fine-tuning. You may not know your

way around here, but mocking people is generally rude wherever you

go and that can hardly be considered news nor unique to here.

"I forgot his screen-name, and I was too lazy to scroll up the page and look

it up, and too impolite to care" is neither an apology nor an admittance of

any fault.

And yet, she was right to correct you on it.

The proper response might have included a "thank you, ma'am" to krys and an apology

to Waysider.

An IMproper response is to duck responsibility for shortcomings and refuse to

offer an apology when an apology is called for.

If you want to be treated like a gentleman, I'm sure most of us would be fine with

that (there's always an exception.) However, that requires you to act like one so

there's a reason to expect a response in kind.

Ever consider that it's rude for others to just use acronyms you're unfamiliar with

and just expect you to know them or find out what they mean?

Ever consider that it's not nice for others to do that to you?

Ever consider doing unto others as you would have them do unto you,

or at least refrain from doing what you don't want others to do?

So you are WordWolf and you corrected me when I spelled your avatar with a small "w" on the wolf portion but you capped the "W" on waysider when it is not capped; if you want to find something to attack me on, you can do better than that. Now, with some regard to being inappropriate to a female (i.e. military protocol - like you might know), on this site, I have no clue who is male/female and I think it inappropriate to go back to the members tag in order to address folks more appropriately depending on their gender: now that's sexist WordWolf.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not at all offended. (I'm male, by the way.) Waysider is not capitalized because I am not THE Waysider, I'm just ANOTHER waysider. Not a specific person, rather a type of person. There's a story behind it. Maybe I'll tell you some time when you're having trouble sleeping. It's a snoozer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not at all offended. (I'm male, by the way.) Waysider is not capitalized because I am not THE Waysider, I'm just ANOTHER waysider. Not a specific person, rather a type of person. There's a story behind it. Maybe I'll tell you some time when you're having trouble sleeping. It's a snoozer.

Shucks waysider, everyone knows that Kermit is male; maybe catch you on another forum. Not literaly, I love frog legs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you are WordWolf and you corrected me when I spelled your avatar with a small "w" on the wolf portion but you capped the "W" on waysider when it is not capped; if you want to find something to attack me on, you can do better than that. Now, with some regard to being inappropriate to a female (i.e. military protocol - like you might know), on this site, I have no clue who is male/female and I think it inappropriate to go back to the members tag in order to address folks more appropriately depending on their gender: now that's sexist WordWolf.

That is merely an excuse. You were simply too lazy to scroll back at the time, perhaps. But having revisited the site to respond to other posters, you must have seen that krys' avatar is a floating pink butterfly...a distinctly feminine signature. That is, of course, unless you know any men who would willingly associate with such a symbol.

You would have been better off to have said nothing than to have made this excuse. WordWolf is not sexist but it seems that you would rather not engage women (females).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your advice is appreciated. I have juiciey TWI stuff but that ain't why I am here, I am looking for some intercourse on Biblical stuff. It seems that if I don't crap on TWI or the STF than nobody cares. It's just pretty much a bitch site and folks are not really focused on the word. I think that I made a mistake coming here for discussion on the things that matter.

You don't have to "crap on TWI or STF" to get your questions answered here.

Edited by dmiller
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...