NWT inserting Jehovah in the NT (discussing the "J" references)

by AuldSoul 36 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    I wrote most of this in response to Drew Sagan, in a thread that wasn't really about this issue. When I read back over it, I figured it need a thread of its own.

    The first part of the puzzle is in Appendix 1D of the NWT Reference Bible. They list all "237 places where the name Jehovah occurs in the main text of the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures." These "renderings" are based on various sources classed as "J" references. These instances really cannot be classed as renderings at all, since no actual translation of the Greek occurred. They are examples of interpretive paraphrasing.

    These "J" references are from "translations" from Greek into Hebrew spanning many years. But even in these cases, it is patently clear that the Hebrew from Greek was mistranslated if the name YHWH was inserted into the Hebrew, as it could not possibly have appeared in the Greek from which translation was supposedly occurring. For myself, this argument logically nullifies any appeal to the authority of the "J" references on this point.

    However, there is a further nullification line of reasoning. In the Introduction of the Rbi8-E (the NWT Reference Bible) we find the Bibliography for the "J" references. Herein, we discover that the oldest "J" reference used as an authority is J2 and is dated to 1385. This is many years into what the WTS calls the "Great Apostasy", but according to them, the plainly incorrect translation from Greek into Hebrew completed in the year 1385 should be used as an authority for imitating the mistranslation. This is completely illogical on many levels.

    Closer examination of Appendix 1D reveals that manuscripts J1, J2, and J4 are ONLY used with Matthew. J3 is ONLY used with Matthew and Hebrews. J5 and J6 are ONLY used with Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

    Which leaves only ONE "J" reference as primary support for most of the remaining mistranslations. J7, Christian Greek Scriptures in 12 languages, including Heb., by Elias Hutter, Nuremburg, 1599. I say "most of the remaining" because sole reference for some of these instances comes from "translation" work done since the year 1800.

    In the case of Colossians 3:13, the mistranslation is supported solely by J23, a work published in 1975 (the year the world should have ended, again). In Colossians 3:22, the support for the mistranslation comes from J18 (1981) and J22 (1942). Colossians 3:9 is supported by J18 (1981) and J23 (1975).

    Ephesians 6:8 is supported only by J22 (1942) and J24 (1863).

    By far the majority of mistranslations have no older support than J7 (1599), which itself, in turn, served as an authority for the translators of most (if not all) of the other "translations" into Hebrew.

    There is no logical defense for the WTS' position on this blatant mistranslation of Greek into English. Especially in the case of 1 Corinthians 7:17, where they admittedly served as their own authority in deciding to mistranslate the Greek text into English (see Appendix 1D). But, there is an illogical defense. As usual.

    Thoughts?

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Shem Tob is supposed to date back to the early centuries of our common era. The MS is not that old, but the underlying text is said to be.

    George Howard has written interesting books and articles on this.

    Slim

  • uninformed
    uninformed

    Auld Soul,

    Very well written post.

    Funny how they were willing to "add to" or "take away" words and meanings from the Bible when it serves their purpose.

    Question:

    Do you think it is wrong when the quote in Hebrew is YHWH that they place the Name Jehovah in that place? I didnt quite understand your statement.

    Brant

  • jwfacts
    jwfacts

    It is crazy for the WTS to use the J sources as authorities to show YHWH appeared in the original manuscripts. These were 1000 years after Jesus, so no more credible than the NWT in changing the text.

    My mother tried to use the J sources as proof that Jehovah should be in the NT (because she had read it in a Watchtower) but obviously had no idea these were not done until the 1300's on.

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul

    Brant,

    Do you think it is wrong when the quote in Hebrew is YHWH that they place the Name Jehovah in that place?

    Yes, I believe it is wrong to interpret where the name YHWH should go. To me, it is fairly plain that they have inserted the name YHWH in places in the NT where the context makes very clear that Jesus is the person the text refers to.

    Slim,

    Shem Tob is supposed to date back to the early centuries of our common era.

    According to the Introduction to the NWT, the book of Matthew in Hebrew was incorporated as a separate chapter in Tried Stone by Shem-Tob ben Isaac Ibn Shaprut, 1385. The manuscripts are from the 16th and 17th centuries. This is the oldest reference they use; it is classified as J2 and is discussed above. But, Shem-Tob doesn't explain inserting "Jehovah" into Ephesians, does it?

    I am curious: Do you really consider 1385 and example of a year from "the early centuries of our common era?" It is, after all, nearer to us than to Jesus' life...isn't it?

    And that is basically my point. There is nothing to linguistically support calling this replacement of words an act of translation or rendering. Even if Shem Tob did it.

    I haven't read what George Howard has written, however I am certain that IF the WTS could draw on a work from antiquity to support their mistranslation of the Greek Scriptures, they would do so. They do not.

    Respectfully,
    AuldSoul

  • OnTheWayOut
    OnTheWayOut

    I read an entire thesis on the poster's understanding. That is all true. There is no reason to put "Jehovah" into the New Testament. In layman's terms, it is done because it is clear that the writer was quoting a Hebrew scripture which originally had the name in it. Well, if the writer of the Greek wanted it there, it would have been there. The later texts which put "Jehovah" into them have no authority to do so.

    Do you think it is wrong when the quote in Hebrew is YHWH that they place the Name Jehovah in that place?

    I used to think it was okay to put God's name back into the Hebrew Old Testament, but since the name itself is lost to modern pronounciations, perhaps it would be better to transliterate and leave the tetragramaton (forgot how to spell it) in the scriptures. But, (hate to agree with WT) the important thing would be to understand the name, meaning. (Of course, they don't want us to understand the Elohim of the New Testament.

  • Will Power
    Will Power

    Auld Soul love your posts. and my favourite J reference that the WT uses for their footnote in 1 Thes 4:16 when PROVING that Jesus is Michael ... because the Lord* Himself will descend from heaven with a commanding, call with an archangel's voice.... the footnote on the CD Lord = Jehovah (J reference) I have that huge, detailed online book with all the references, instances of the tetramagaton (sp) fascinating. If I were a JW, this info would get me thinking. NWT = Pure pickin & choosin interpretation wp

  • cabasilas
    cabasilas

    Another thing to consider is that the "J versions" were, for the most part, translations by Christian missionaries. They had no qualms in also applying YHWH to Jesus. See:

    http://www.catholic-forum.com/members/popestleo/hiding.html

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul
    Will Power: If I were a JW, this info would get me thinking.

    That is our challenge in a nutshell, eh Will Power? Get them to think.

    cabasilas: They had no qualms in also applying YHWH to Jesus.

    I agree. As was pointed out to me very recently, prior to the two "men" (who the Bible paints as actually being angels) going to Sodom they visited Abraham. Along with a third "man"...named, YHWH.

    Genesis 18:1-5
    And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, And said, My LORD, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant: Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree: And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts; after that ye shall pass on: for therefore are ye come to your servant. And they said, So do, as thou hast said.

    When the two "men" went on to Sodom to find Lot, YHWH remained and Abraham "drew near to him," physically placing himself in closer proximity. Since no man can see the Father and yet live...who was YHWH on this occasion? (Genesis 18-19)

    I certainly think such things should make JWs think. But it is becoming less likely that it will make them think.

    Respectfully,
    AuldSoul

  • jst2laws
    jst2laws
    I certainly think such things should make JWs think. But it is becoming less likely that it will make them think.

    You know better than I do, that the "them" collectively will not think. But the individual 'thinkers' among them, will enjoy discussions like this.

    Jst2laws

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit