Is the NWT really the most accurate translation of the Bible?

by godsgurl 48 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Is Wikipedia art or information?

  Yes, the Bible can be both, but if it primarily art, then the information
  is not the literal writing, but an overall message from the artist(s).

  As JW's, we were told that the Bible is information. That can be wrong,
  but when people are talking about the information, and not the art, then
  it seems counterproductive to dwell on the art aspect of the whole thing.

  If we are referring to "What went wrong with the building of the Tower of Pisa?"
  we can finish with the great result of their mistake being better than the original
  intent, but first we need to finish the discussion of the questions asked about
  "What went wrong?"
• 

  AuldSoul

  If the Bible is not intended to convey information that is to be understood...

  I didn't say that the Bible wasn't meant to be understood. I said that each person can understand it differently, and that the subjective nature of perception of it does not detract from its being information.

  It would make it no more relevant to Mankind than the Koran or the Mona Lisa or the Sistine Chapel.

  I submit that the Koran and the Mona Lisa and the Sistine Chapel ARE relevant to mankind, that is why these are treasured, revered, and preserved so zealously by mankind. In my opinion, the artistry of the Bible makes it even moreso. But that is my perception.

  ...then the NWT is one group's result of what they beheld.

  I disagree with your conclusion. While there are a wide range of things a poem can be speaking to, and an even wider range of things the words may call to mind, changing the words of the poem to suit one particular perception and to the exclusion of allowance for other perceptions is intentional destruction of the artist's work.

  This destructive act is what the NWT translators committed against the Bible. They attempted to force-fit the text to a preconception of what the text should mean, and have used that altered text to impose that conception on others.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Auld Soul, I really do not disagree with any of your points except one.

  The Koran, the Mona Lisa, the Sistine Chapel, and the Bible books
  are great art, they are relevant to mankind. The books of the Bible
  seem more relevant because they have affected more lives and the
  way they were lived.

  The NWT is a destructive act against the poem or art of the Bible writers.

  I was making a point that they could easily argue that the Bible is
  subjective and that's the take that Fred got out of reading and analyzing it.
  But to tell others that his view of this work is "accurate" in portraying the
  original is despicable.

  Here's where we differ. I see the Bible as the art of conmen. I see it as
  the art of illusion. There is no real underlying information, just art.
  If I had to put an informational message to the Bible it might be,
  "There's one born every minute" or "Religion is a snare and a racket."
  Others see it as a way to make men think of deeper things, perhaps think
  of a purpose in life or doing good to others. I say that Man thinks those
  things anyway, so it is reflected in his art.

  I have no quarrel with you. I enjoy thinking like you. I just have this
  pessimist inside, with his ego inflated ever since he found out he was not
  "in the truth."
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  To keep on target:

  And translating the Bible is continuing the practices of the artists-
  creating more illusion and cons.

  That goes back to making the NWT a beautiful artist's conception.
  The artist is Fred Franz, though. His work did a marvelous job of
  continuing the message that there is one born every minute.

  While he may not have done an accurate job of reflecting the
  original in content, he reflected the original in effect.
• 

  AuldSoul

  Is Wikipedia art or information?

  Often neither. Terry took us on this tangent, once again, through challenging the Bible by presenting a false dichotomy.

  to wit: Either God wants information of a particular specificity preserved for human eyes to perceive or he doesn't.

  He stipulated that it had to be "of a particular specificity" which would not be true of a poem by Lorca translated into English by Robert Bly, for instance, and isn't true of the Bible translated into English either.

  Translational integrity doesn't require a standard of preservation "of a particular specificity", it simply requires an earnest attempt to stay true to the original. On that standard the NWT fails miserably, which was the REAL point under consideration: the NWT.

  Terry stretched the point to the Bible in general, as is his wont, and lost his logical footing in the process. It would be like discussing "What went wrong with the leaning tower of Pisa?" and someone coming into the thread to point up the poor construction practices and faulty premise of towers in general. I showed up the logical misstep.

  I was making a point that they could easily argue that the Bible is subjective and that's the take that Fred got out of reading and analyzing it.

  If that is what Jehovah's Witnesses had done I would have no quarrel with them; except to the degree that they claim to base their dogma on the Bible and prove incapable of demonstrating the Biblical basis for their dogma. Then the NWT would be officially a paraphrase Bible, or an interpretive Bible, which is the category it belongs in. It is not a translation.

  I agree that religion is a snare and a racket. I think many beautiful philosophies have suffered the same fate as Christianity under the powerful hand of elitists who seek to control others through fear and false promise of reward. Religions are evident in every major world philosophy; science, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism ... the effects of religion is always the same: division, separatism, elitism, and ultimately the stunting of human progress.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Liberty

  Terry did a very good job of explaining why there will never be an "absolutely accurate" or "Best" Bible translation and I don't want to be redundant but I can't see how some of you don't get what Terry was saying.

  If I am a brilliant medical doctor and I write a medical text book of my vital truths which will save lives and I am still alive I have a vested interest in and a responsability to making sure it is never mistranslated, used out of context, or falsly interpreted. Living authors do just that and are seen as the final authority on their works. God is believed by many to still exist and it is believed by many that He revealed His vital Truths in the Bible through the direct inspiration of its writers so He has a vested interest in making sure it is never mistranslated, used out of context, or falsly interpreted and yet even with His great powers of omnipotentcy and omniscience He has failed miserably on every count and His "vital" message is lost in confusion among 1000 different fighting sects and He does nothing to correct it.

  If we are left with the confusing turd which is our modern Bible here is your first clue that either God doesn't care or, more likely, just doesn't exist and in either case there is obviously no "urgent life-saving information" there. Vital information would have been clarified and authorized by God, and not been left to a bunch of idiotic shaved apes to figure out for themselves.
• 

  Narkissos

  They attempted to force-fit the text to a preconception of what the text should mean, and have used that altered text to impose that conception on others.

  Imo this is true of many, if not most, Bible translations... the difference is only quantitative.

  However the texts have a strange and powerful way of resisting their translators as well as their authors. And to an extent I feel this also applies to the NWT. (With a few close friends just before I left, I used to say: "The Holy Spirit can work even through the NWT.")

  I think the issue of poetry illustrates acutely what is ultimately the problem of all literary translation, which I would personally sum up as:
  1. It is impossible to translate.
  2. It is impossible not to translate.

  Traduttore, traditore...
• 

  Narkissos

  Liberty, you and Terry are simply introducing the (obviously wrong) premise that there is (or there should be) one purpose behind every text of the Bible, which carries (or should carry) through their transmission, collection and translation.

  Imo the Bible and its translation issues become even more interesting once you drop this premise.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  I can't see how some of you don't get what Terry was saying

  I cannot speak for others, but I do get what Terry is saying.
  I fully agree that the Bible is confusing and doesn't reflect any
  message from God. I think Terry did an excellent job of telling us that.

  Warning:Oversimplification ahead. Do not get upset at the next statement:
  Terry looks at this from a scientific approach while Auld Soul uses a philosophic approach.
  
  I tried to bridge that gap. When people are referring to the accuracy and
  message of the Bible, they are not generally using the philosophy of the
  message being different to different people. They are trying to apply
  an absolute standard to the Bible. I know that this a philosophy in itself, but
  they are looking for objective material in a book that philosophers say is
  subjective.

  Ultimately, the scientist decides that the philosopher may be right, but he still
  sees religion and men applying the objective standard, saying that we just don't
  understand unless we have spirit-direction or bow to some Church or Governing Body's
  special understanding of the objective material.

  Warning:Another Oversimplification ahead.

  I recognize that both Terry and Auld Soul can be right. Depends on your point of
  view. Many look at it one way, while others look at it the other way.
  Is the Bible Art or information first? Most religions have said, INFORMATION FIRST.
  Most scholars have said ART FIRST.