@@colemarsh13 right, but there are different churches and communities, many of whom claim they base their beliefs and principles on the Bible, maybe even the same translation. However, they come to different conclusions and interpretations
The court accused JWs of creating the negative image of the clergy, claiming that it was anti-Orthodox Church, and hence extremism. However, any other translation of the Bible has absolutely the same image of the clergy, because Gospels, and Jesus in particular, criticized the clergy quite severely. And, naturally, it has nothing to do with the Orthodox Church, which didn't exist back then.
@@russianchristianity I got that. What I don't understand is why that particular biblical account was cited in court, to prove the translation is wholly inconsistent with the standard Septuagint?
@@russianchristianity although it isn't true that the Bible we are all familiar with attacks clergymen and people in authority, in the manner you've described. The existence of unrighteous priests doesn't disqualify the others who are righteous. If that were the case, we wouldn't have had the Apostles who were appointed by Jesus Christ Himself. This is the belief of mainline Orthodox, Roman Catholics and Protestants alike. JWs teach against the very concept of the Church, so in that respect they could well be classified as religious extremists under the law of a country which protects the specific rights of traditional Christianity.
@@markeedeep Russia is a secular state by the Constitution. So nothing they teach is extremist in a secular country. My point is, whether their translation good or bad, correct or not, it's after all a translation of the Bible. There is nothing extremist there that doesn't have the same meaning in any other translation. The example included
@@russianchristianity again, you didn't explain exactly how the Russian court discerned the JW interpretation of the trial of Jesus on Passover was "incorrect"? I do understand the Russian constitution is secular and upholds religious freedom, but does that then mean such a thing as religious extremism doesn't in fact exist? From what I can recall, the particular case in Russian court rested on findings into actual commission of crimes against ordinary citizens, while the theological questions were introduced in order to establish the criteria for a religiously based extremism (in contrast to a politically based or ideological or any other kind of one), pertaining to the relevant religious organisation.
An Orthodox priest in the West encouraged me NOT to tell a Russian emigree Orthodox woman who was unable to find a bible in Russian that she could get one from the local Jehovah's Witnesses for free.
well, she could. But the translation is quite specific. Apart from having the name Jehovah everywhere (which might be a good thing), it is after all a paraphrase translation. Moreover, the Russian version is translated from English, not from the original languages
The New World Translation is just that, a direct translation of the original Hebrew and Greek. The King James Version is a version of the scriptures that contain some preconceived religious ideas and not a direct translation of the scriptures.
@@hicnunc5994 maybe so, but they work hard to study all the possible alternatives, artificial blood, etc. Moreover, they don't prohibit it to believers, living it to themselves to decide.
what`s that guitar about?
it's background music
Cults are everywhere
would you elaborate?
@russianchristianity ...anything else besides the word of the Lord will lead you astray.
@@colemarsh13 right, but there are different churches and communities, many of whom claim they base their beliefs and principles on the Bible, maybe even the same translation. However, they come to different conclusions and interpretations
JW Panda is a former Jehovas Witness and has tons of videos about the JW organization in TH-cam.
Instead of going to a former JW, why not investigate the Bible yourself by reading it, meditate on what you read and pray about it.
Interesting channel. Keep up the good work.
Thank you for your support
I didn't quite understand what the specific interpretation of the account of Jesus's trial allegedly was?
The court accused JWs of creating the negative image of the clergy, claiming that it was anti-Orthodox Church, and hence extremism. However, any other translation of the Bible has absolutely the same image of the clergy, because Gospels, and Jesus in particular, criticized the clergy quite severely. And, naturally, it has nothing to do with the Orthodox Church, which didn't exist back then.
@@russianchristianity I got that. What I don't understand is why that particular biblical account was cited in court, to prove the translation is wholly inconsistent with the standard Septuagint?
@@russianchristianity although it isn't true that the Bible we are all familiar with attacks clergymen and people in authority, in the manner you've described. The existence of unrighteous priests doesn't disqualify the others who are righteous. If that were the case, we wouldn't have had the Apostles who were appointed by Jesus Christ Himself. This is the belief of mainline Orthodox, Roman Catholics and Protestants alike. JWs teach against the very concept of the Church, so in that respect they could well be classified as religious extremists under the law of a country which protects the specific rights of traditional Christianity.
@@markeedeep Russia is a secular state by the Constitution. So nothing they teach is extremist in a secular country.
My point is, whether their translation good or bad, correct or not, it's after all a translation of the Bible. There is nothing extremist there that doesn't have the same meaning in any other translation. The example included
@@russianchristianity again, you didn't explain exactly how the Russian court discerned the JW interpretation of the trial of Jesus on Passover was "incorrect"?
I do understand the Russian constitution is secular and upholds religious freedom, but does that then mean such a thing as religious extremism doesn't in fact exist?
From what I can recall, the particular case in Russian court rested on findings into actual commission of crimes against ordinary citizens, while the theological questions were introduced in order to establish the criteria for a religiously based extremism (in contrast to a politically based or ideological or any other kind of one), pertaining to the relevant religious organisation.
An Orthodox priest in the West encouraged me NOT to tell a Russian emigree Orthodox woman who was unable to find a bible in Russian that she could get one from the local Jehovah's Witnesses for free.
well, she could. But the translation is quite specific. Apart from having the name Jehovah everywhere (which might be a good thing), it is after all a paraphrase translation. Moreover, the Russian version is translated from English, not from the original languages
The New World Translation is just that, a direct translation of the original Hebrew and Greek. The King James Version is a version of the scriptures that contain some preconceived religious ideas and not a direct translation of the scriptures.
@@1914AD that's right, but also NWT in any other language than English is a translation from English
@@russianchristianity
The NWT was translated from Hebrew or Greek into English, not translated from English to English.
@@1914AD that's not what I said. I said other than English NWT are translations from English
my comment disappeared, I used the word b-l-o-o-d (transfusion)
yep, sorry. TH-cam does that sometimes. Can you try again?
@@russianchristianity I just wrote that pacifism is great, but then it's "no blood transfusion" and it ruins it
@@hicnunc5994 maybe so, but they work hard to study all the possible alternatives, artificial blood, etc. Moreover, they don't prohibit it to believers, living it to themselves to decide.
🇷🇺☦️SLAVA ROSSIYA☦️🇷🇺
The correct grammatical form would be: Slava Rossii (Слава России)
@@russianchristianity🌵📿🕯☦️🕯🌵
All religions are extremist: believing some bearded fellow up there runs things down here is just weird.
Extremist for different belief😂 I think you're the extremist
@@Joesmommy21 nope, just refuse to believe in Zeus 2.0
@@reneburger4317 you're literally calling like 5 billion people extremists, isn't that a bit extreme?
@@Joesmommy21 No.
@@reneburger4317 stop being ignorant