What you received was a part of a Amazon customer review for Nate Merritt's book, "I was a Teenage Jehovah's Witness". This review has been removed from the Amazon site.
The complete "review" (if you can call it that) follows for those who want to know what it was. --VM44
more rantings from a bitter apostate loudmouth, September 8, 2006
Reviewer: Gabriel Rooster "sweetscholar" - See all my reviews
To the "lady" and to Nathaniel Merrit. About their extreme bias, dishonesty, and unfairness, about the New World Translation Bible. In both their books. There were some valid points of course. (hence 2 stars instead of just one.) But it was mostly whining. By bitter apostate loudmouths. Who crow and whine and cackle, every chance they get. Silly bitter saps. Who may have some legitimate grievances, here and there. But WAYYYY overblown. And tons of distortions and exaggerations. Hi Nate and Brenda. Was the NWT wrong in rendering the Hebrew word "owr" as "light", but the other Hebrew word "ma'owr" as "limuniaries"? Whereas the KJV renders both Hebrew words as "light", causing confusion and even some contradiction, used by higher critics, skeptics, and even evolutionists. The NWT clarified that, didn't it. And John 1:1? No excuse for that? I'm a Greek scholar, Natey boy. And I happen to know that an anarthrous "theos" CAN be rendered in English as "a God". It actually keeps with the Grammer. Whereas the KJV, NIV, and NASB, were put together by whom? Biased trinitarians and theologians and paganized Protestants, prone to color their own texts, cuz of pre-conceptions. So if the NWT committee did that, so, duhh, did Christendom's translation committees. What's sauce for the goose, sonny. So the argument becomes self-refuting in a way. But no matter, cuz with John 1:1:, it was the HOLY SPIRIT that left the second occurrence of "God" in Greek INDEFINITE. Not JWs in 1961. So to accurately convey the same thought in the receptor language (in this case English), it would be wise to do what the Holy Spirit did, and leave it INDEFINITE as well. Meaning yeah, the Logos could be Almighty God, but He may not be. It's INDEFINITE. Or how bout the way many biasd translations render different Greek words with the same one word "Hell". Though they were different in Greek? Hades, Gehenna, and Tartarus are NOT the same word, so why render it the same in English. Careful, buddy. Or what about statements in the "New Testament" that indicate a continuous action, in Greek, that is generally lost in most English translations? Is that a "mess" and "error" too, Mr Nate? The "aorist"? The NWT committee not scholars? Why? Cuz they don't believe in a confusing Nicean Athanasian distortion of co-equal co-eternal Trinity? (Or maybe because uptight elders got on your case over trifles, and you're gonna criticize everything JWs put out, whether it's accurate or not. I know about the flaws and silliness with JWs. No kidding. But let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater, and commite one logical fallacy after another. Yes, the Father, Son, and Spirit, are responsible for creation, salvation, justification, and sanctification. No one who takes the Bible seriously would honestly deny that fact. But the Supremacy of the Father, even over His Son, is still upheld and secured in the Bible. (John 1:18; 14:28; 17:3; 20:17; Revelation 3:12-14; 1 Corinthians 11:3, Psalm 2, etc) The Semi-Arians (unlike the hyper Athanasians and Sabellians) were pretty much right. The True God of the Bible is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. NOT "the Father AND the Lord Jesus Christ", per se. But Christ's own God is the True God, in the Absolute Sense. Hence why only the Father is called THE God ("HO Theos") unambiguously and irrefutably in Scripture. The Son is never unambiguously called HO Theos or THE God, not without debate anyway. Not even in Revelation 22. So your rantings and demonized babblings about John 1:1 in the NWT are just that, sir. For real. Also, sound uniformity. uniformity, note what Hebrew and Greek commentator Alexander Thomson had to say in his review on the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures: âaeThe translation is evidently the work of skilled and clever scholars, who have sought to bring out as much of the true sense of the Greek text as the English language is capable of expressing. The version aims to keep to one English meaning for each major Greek word, and to be as literal as possible. . . . The word usually rendered â~justifyâ(tm) is generally translated very correctly as â~declare righteous.â(tm) . . . The word for the Cross is rendered â~torture stakeâ(tm) which is another improvement. . . . Luke 23:43 is well rendered, â~Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.â(tm) This is a big improvement upon the reading of most versions.â On the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, the same reviewer made this comment: âaeThe New World Version is well worth acquiring. It is lively and lifelike, and makes the reader think and study. It is not the work of Higher Critics, but of scholars who honour God and His Word.ââ"The Differentiator, April 1952, pages 52-7, and June 1954, page 136. The Hebrew scholar Professor Dr. Benjamin Kedar of Israel, in an interview with a representative of the Watch Tower Society, evaluated the New World Translation as follows: âaeIn my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translations, I often refer to the English edition of what is known as the New World Translation. In so doing, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew. . . . Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translating. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain." Honest assessments of the New World Translation version of the Bible. Not biased cockeyed dogmatic uptight pre-judiced inaccurate "filters" from pagan Protestantism or blabbering apostate nutjobs. But just the real facts, people. As cold and as unpopular (in a demon-controlled world) that it may be. It's still facts. Ah, the unsearchable riches of the New World (1961) Translation of the Holy Scriptures! Conveying thenuances of wordings with accuracy and care. Any version of the Bible is worth owning and studying and following and obeying and cherishing. In fact, itâ(tm)s encouraged to have multiple translations of the Bible, to compare, study and appreciate. The Holy Bible gives us the answers. But the NWT 1961 is fresh and accurate, and very careful in its renderings. This is the version put out by Godâ(tm)s Faithful Slave in the Last Days, as honest and unbiased evidence shows. The Spirit of God was obviously with the New World Translation Committee. And was with their translation of the Scriptures into modern speech. This fact can be seen by reasonable and honest people. (Which would exclude James White, Robert Morey, Walter Martin, Leo Feher, Nathaniel Merrit, Larry Wessels, Jim Toungate, Ron Rhodes, R.C. Sproul, Rob Zins, etc.) It was carefully and honestly and thoughtfully and precisely translated, to capture the full meaning of the original Hebrew and Greek texts and manuscripts, that were faithfully copied and preserved. And free of pagan bias and doctrine and tradition and denominational corruption, as many other Versions have, given the fact that they were all put out by people doctrinally prone to color and slant certain texts. And even in the general words in the original Bible languages, in the NWT, the words are carefully translated, so as to convey the precise shades and flavors and tenses intended. Where the King James Bible would say âaelightsâ in Genesis 1:14, the New World Translation would more accurately say âaeluminariesâ, because there was a different Hebrew word inthe original text of Genesis 1:14 than in Genesis 1:3. âaeLightsâ means the beams of light that are shining, whereas the word âaeluminariesâ refers to the OBJECTS THAT ARE PRODUCING, HOLDING, AND BEAMING FORTH THE LIGHT! Or the âaelight-holders.â So no contradictions in Genesis. And thatâ(tm)s just one of MANY examples. Some more serious and more important than that. And this Bible Translation, above others, points us clearly to the True and Living Christ, and really helps and âaeequips us for every good workâ and to âaefight the fine fight of the faithâ as âaefine soldiers of Christ Jesus.ââ"2 Timothy 3:16,17; 1 Timothy 6:12; 2 Timothy 2:3. It's too bad you allowed yourself to get corrupted and swayed away from the facts. I know about JWs, and their uptightness and flaws. No kidding. But let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Because possibly some annoying elders gave you a hard time over certain minor matters. Let's not get totally totally intellectually dishonest about everything now. Tut tut tut, sir. You talk about "bias"? Reading your words (and some of your points are valid, by the way), I see almost complete and utter bias, distortion, half-truths, exaggerations, and ommissions, and ad hominems, and a bunch of logical fallacies and poppeycock. With some kernels of truth sprinkled in, here and there. Try answering that question I put to you in the beginning, though. Was "luminaries" wrong and "messy", for the different Hebrew word in Genesis 1:14? Selective observations and amnesia. No big surprise. LOL. Just being candid and blunt. Just like you are. Only difference is, though I'm not perfect, I at least really try to be fair and actually honest and really factual in what I'm saying. If anything I've written is incorrect, prove it. In Black and White, Chapter and Verse, as it were. Not just assertions, or hearsay, or rantings, or ad hominems. But for real. And not bitterness from some apostate loudmouth either. "apostate" simply means "falling away", and you did "fall away" from JWs. it is what it is. But answer the "luminaries" thing, as just one of a number of many examples. Yeah sure. whatever.
This pic above (not from the WT) is nearly identical to a Black and White 2' X 4' "visual aid" that my elder dad used in public talks all over during the mid 1960's. There just may be lots of bodies (of watchtower disciples)