Thursday, 13 May 2010

237 Times - A Debate Request

This is to notify readers that I have asked StandFirm to debate me on the 237 times "Jehovah" has been inserted into the text of the New World Translation. Thus far, my comment requesting this debate* has not been published on his blog and I have had no response via the email address I offered him to contact me by.

The reason I wish to debate him on this topic is that this apostate corruption of the inspired text of the Bible is at the very heart of the Governing Body's misleading of Jehovah's Witnesses; because they can cite corrupted verses in their corrupted Bible gives the Governing Body the authority they need over Jehovah's Witnesses.

However, facing up to this fact is a challenge for even the most confident Witness apologist; how do you defend the Governing Body for actually changing, and adding to, God's Word to support their "unique beliefs"?

It's an issue that's clearly very sensitive to StandFirm as he has already threatened to delete comments of mine that make reference to he 237 insertions of YHWH. He has also studiously avoided providing me with any New Testament reference to 1st century Christians witnesses about "Jehovah", instead merely saying "they talked about God all the time", which isn't the same thing and presupposes the existence of YHWH 237 in the Gospels, Acts and the Epistles.

*StandFirm's original comment "challenging" me to debate him seems to missing from his blog. Perhaps he realises he's bitten off much more than he can chew.


  1. Getting a JW to debate on any topic has almost less of a chance than a snowball in a blast furnace. However, I think such a topic needs to be debated, as I don't think it ever has been done in any public forum. The NWT's justification for the insertion of the name in the Christian Scriptures is absolutely amazing, and would never hold up if the same standard were applied to the Hebrew Scriptures or just textual criticism in general.

    The only person I know of that would defend this topic in debate would be Greg Stafford, though he is no longer a JW.

  2. Mark,


    I would rather do one debate and be done rather than revise a post on my blog over and over; besides, my blog is not a discussion thread.

  3. How does Topix work? Will the discussion be swarmed by JWs?

  4. I should correct the above, I'm not asking that we have a "discussion" but rather a debate. You would present your opening comments in defence of the 237 insertions of YHWH, I'd present my opening comments as to why this is an act of apostasy, then we would each rebut the other's opening comments.

    We would then be allowed to choose 3 points from each other's opening comments and rebuttals to cross-examine. Then we would have concluding comments.

    That's pretty much how a debate works. I'm not convinced that Topix is the best place to do that. I maintain that the blogs are, as it would only be us that would be commenting.

  5. "How does Topix work? Will the discussion be swarmed by JWs?"

    It depends. This topic, I don't think so-the Witnesses there are relatively few. This kind of topic does not come up much, so I can't be 100% certain.

    There are a few trolls and obnoxious persons, but they can be easily ignored. There are many in-depth discussions there. Also, there are some born-again/evangelical Christians-so both sides are well represented.

    So, it's up to you. I'm ready with my opening comments...

  6. To be honest with you, I'd rather operate via the blogs; if you wish to publish your opening comments on your blog, I'll publish mine on this blog. Rebuttals etc would follow with a link to the blog post that is being rebutted.

    I'm not convinced Topix or other open forums is the best way to handle a debate.

  7. Alright then; my opening comments are pending and will be posted soon.