by Lo-ru-hamah 45 Replies latest watchtower bible
Mouthy:
I loved your scripture and am glad you shared it.
Seek2find:
I completely agree with you about the New World Translation. When we began our exit, the discrepancies of that translation was a very big help.
Although, I have come to the opinion that the main theme of any bible has come through but generally speaking it has been translated to support the beliefs of whomever is translating it.
Loruhamah
I prefer the New World Translation, but my tastes always have run toward the fantasy genre.
Sometimes, Terry, I wish you would take a moment to get your thoughts together that you may melodiously articulate your sense of things.
You're right, my hip is getting sore from the fast draw :)
T.
For me, it depends, on what purpose I am reading the Bible for.
Cursory reading, I like the NIV or NLT.
Indepth Study, I prefer the NASB or the ISV New Testament.
Memorization, I like the KJV, it is somehow easier for me to memorize King James English. Though I would never use it for serious study or preaching.
Translating the bible is a misnomer. There is no "there" there to translate. Instead you have shards, splinters, dumpster retrievals and copies of copies of copies of translated opinions pretending to be actual words and deeds.That's a bit excessive, as this would apply to most if not all ancient books (translating Plato or Aristotle would also be a misnomer by such standards).
Not so fast, Buckeroo (to be spoken with the voice of Sylvester the Cat).....
Neither Plato nor Aristotle are a matter of life and death nor "authentic" worship to the "true" god.
I like to use the example of EUCLID'S work on Geometry. It has been translated into all major languages for over two thousand years and yet, everybody can see it works and everyone works it the same.
Aristotle and Plato essentially give you the blueprint to epistemology. Which is to say; they demonstrate HOW they go about reasoning toward a conclusion so that you may do it too.
The bible, on the other hand, purports many things which are take it or leave it. Variously:
1.It is either a True history or it isn't.
2.It speaks of actual persons and personages or it doesn't.
3.It conveys the mind of God or it doesn't.
4.It is literal or it is metaphorical, or, it is maddeningly both simultaneously or perhaps neither.
5.It represents actual information or it is opinion, myth, semi-legend or ad hoc hearsay. Perhaps all.
So, my point still stands. The bible doesn't actually exist qua the Word of God. It is MISrepresented as all the things it is purported to be and isn't. Consequently, it doesn't matter which translation is more nearly accurate.
Do I over state my point? Or, am I in the zone?
New Jerusalem Bible...love it love it love it.
Took it to the hall for the last year of my attendance, and got about three others to do the same. Great footnotes, timelines and intro's, helps you understand more about what you are reading...all in one place.
I can remember when the New World Translation was first introduced in toto to the Kingdom Hall with its living green color and all the hoopla that ensued.
First off, it is my assertion that the door to door campaign which introduced the mainstream public to an English Translation in the contemporary vernacular (sort of) had an enormous impact on the Christian community.
It knocked them on their collective ass.
Look at the time line of translations.
When did the modern day glut of new translations begin?
Couldn't you say it was a REACTION to the NWT that was the casual moment of response?
Looking back, I see I was taken in by the razzle dazzle. But, what was really happening (unbeknownst to most of us) was that we were seeing FOR THE FIRST TIME how shabby the state of scholarship had been in lacing tradition, hearsay, add-ons, omissions, redactions, etc. into a book represented as HANDED DOWN FROM HEAVEN and entirely INERRANT.
The scales fell from many eyes on that score!
How many of us have gone the entire journey, however?
The state-of-the-art of bible scholarship has demythified (did I coin that word just now?) the inerrancy issue. The bible is highly suspect from start to finish. It may be nothing more than a constantly reworked pile of bones passed off as solid gold.
The NWT is the best possible example of how that has happened repeatedly in history.
It isn't JUST the Watchtower Society which has done violence to the text for their own doctrinal ends. No! Every hand that has ever touched a translation has done exactly the same violence to whatever "integrity" may remain.
Tweaking the text is a game everyone has played! None are innocent of making it "read better" (i.e. the way the translator thinks it SHOULD BE.)
Terry:
Sometimes I am so slow and you seem to be very intelligent, so, I am not following you very well. I guess what I want to ask is, do you think that the bible has any authenticity to it? Do you think that it has any divine authorization and then it has been corrupted by the persons translating it?
I am not trying to argue or anything, I am just curious.
Loruhamah
King James- just classic English Literature
I get the clearest understanding from the NIV....
Gotta put in a plug for
www.biblegateway.com
dozens of translations, wonderful search feature, and it's free!
