Do you know why the NWT starts verse 2 of Daniel ch. 1 with the words "In time..." which are not in the original Hebrew text nor in any of the English translations I checked?
Has it to do with supporting their 607 b.C.E. doctrine?
Behemot
NWT translation of Daniel 1:2 and 607
by behemot 28 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Leolaia
Interesting.
I see no support for "in time" either. I think the motive is less 607 BC and more an interest in easing the reference to the third year of Jehoiakim in v. 1 with the fact that Jehoiakim remained king for several more years.
-
bite me
I just looked that verse up because it just sounded funny for it to say that. That is a good question, why does it say it? I dare ...dripple dog dare.. anyone still attending their organization to ask that. Just say something like you were wondering why the verse is quoted that way.
Also if you can do me a favor.. find out why they use the word utensils instead of articles. Articles makes more sense then utensils. Utensils is more or less tools and gear. Whereas articles can be anything.. which would make more sense. Just curious. :-)
Dan. 1:2 (NKJV)
2
"......with some of the articles of the house of God, which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the articles into the treasures house of his god."
If you put the word utensils there it just sounds like tools and nothing else. Aside from that, putting In time... does not make sense. Please find out what the meaning behind that is, if anyone can, thanks!
-
Narkissos
I hadn't noticed (or didn't remember).
Completely unwarranted indeed. It's the middle term of a series of three consecutive imperfects, wyçr, wytn, wyb'y(m), indicating successive actions -- not necessarily in immediate succession but certainly not implying a particular delay either.
-
Narkissos
bite me,
kly is a very generic term -- close to "stuff" in colloquial English... it can apply to furniture, vessels, or weapons depending on the context.
-
bite me
I think I have to get me one of those translations. :-)
-
bite me
I think I have to get me one of those translations. :-)
-
still_in74
i recently came across a 1961 edition of the NWT. I have to examine some changes from the 184 version. Any advice on where to start?
-
z
the reference to the third year of Jehoiakim in v. 1 with the fact that Jehoiakim remained king for several more years.
Leo is right on!!!!..... the Hebrew bshant shalosh........ in the third year
-
scholar
behemot
The answer to your question is simple for it aptly demonstrates the brilliance and superiority of the NWT over all other Bible translations. The pertinent phrase in Daniel 1:2 "In time" renders the literal Hebrew verb "And gave". This verb is the future/imperfect form yiten of the verb natan (give) and when combined with waw properly has the meaning 'and then' or 'in time'. This combination (waw + imperfect=yiqtol) is known as a wayyiqtol. The actual time involved is not specified but is determined by the context which in this case is the preceeding verse one indicating that the action was not immedciate but a succession of events.
Interestingly, celebrated WT scholars have long perceived that the 'third year of Jehoiakim' was not of his reign but of his vassalage which correctly interprets Biblical history. Accurate history means accurate chronology and this perception of matters correctly establishes 607 BCE as the only possible date for the Fall of Jerusalem.
scholar JW