Based on comments on an answer here. A strong answer discussing the new testament and NWT alterations to the texts was posted, and I posted a comment suggesting some attention also be given to NWT alterations of the old testament texts.

Another user (not the answer poster) then posted several criticisms of my suggestion, eventually leading to a suggestion to post my own answer 'supplementing' the one I had suggested be improved.

That struck me as bad policy, but upon review, the reason I think it's bad policy is here, on a site-specific meta for another site.

What's Christianity.SE's perspective on partial answers adding info to existing ones instead of editing said info into the 'supplemented' answer?

  • I only asked you once to clarify if you were asserting that NWT had altered OT verses as found in various bible translations that are preferred by trinitarian and catholic scholars or that NWT altered the meaning of older accepted Hebrew manuscripts. Then I suggested you offer a supplementary answer including examples of such altered verses. However after reading @caleb answer to this question that looks like a bad idea. Besides in the answer Lesley gave a cited source gives 2 OT examples. You could of course ask Lesley if she would allow you to edit into her answer additional information
    – Kris
    Jul 31 '18 at 18:26

Answers on this site need to address the original question. They can of course different ground than other answers –maybe hit on some things where other answers were weak– but they must actually answer the question. Sans any other answer, if the post does not stand alone as covering the scope of the question it shouldn't be posted as an answer.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .