There were many inconsistent renderings of the logos and the Ho Theos. Sometimes they were rendered as Jesus, sometimes as Jehovah. There were also several instances that a simple word was added or deleted, which caused the scripture to have a different meaning.
Deceiving new Bible studies. The stunning craftiness of WTBT again.
by hamsterbait 20 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
LouBelle
maddie - you are so right - they claim the only change is they put in gods' name and that was drummed a lot from the stage - I mean what difference would it really make then.
sneaky bastards (I can say that hey)
-
destructo-girl
This takes me back to when I was a fresh new bible study. I was started on the Knowledge book.
I remember how they used to say how the NWT was so much better than the other translations, that historians and scholars prefer to use the NWT. I always preferred the poetic flowery language of my old King James to be honest, but I did as I was told and studied with the NWT, because it was a 'better' translation.I thought every tiny thing coming from the Society sparkled like a diamond - it was so clearly Truth and nothin' but.(why couldn't EVERYone see that? lol) I thought I was smart to have chosen the 'correct' religion "...oh yes, you are really studying 'berean-style' and finding out The Truth for yourself! You are progressing nicely and so intelligent, why, you pick-up on these Truths right away!" Stroke, stroke and you have a new baptism candidate that's just swallowed all the lies without a burp! I can still barely believe I believed some of it - was not born into it - I chose it.
lol that's me, that's EXACTLY me! I can't believe I was so gullible.
-
WTWizard
I remember when I was studying in the late 1980s, they were bashing the King James version. Besides putting Jehovah back in the Bible, the witlesses told me that the King James version had more than 20,000 other errors and the New World Translation was perfect (at least substantially). Now I know that they were telling me a lie: the King James version was put together by a religious group that only wanted the Bible to be common. The New World Translation, however, was put together by a cult that only wanted to serve its own nefarious purposes.
-
BluesBrother
I wonder what a Bible would be like if it were translated by agnostics who had absolutely no preconceived beliefs about what the verses should mean?
My thought is that any translator approaches the task with set views on what the doctrines of the Scriptures are . When he meets a verse that is "difficult" to reconcile with those beliefs, what does he do? Will he change his belief? Unlikely. ..He more likely will stretch his creative mind to find a form of words that will agree with what he just knows the writer must have meant.
Phil. 2.6 .
K J V..."Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:"
N I V ...."Who, being in very nature God,did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,"
or N W T "Who , although although he was existing in Gods form gave no consideration to a seizure, namely that he should be equal to God"
-
blondie
***
w917/15p.4ANewWorldIsAtHand!***Before God’s promised new world becomes a full-scale reality, the present "world," or "system of things," must come to its end. Concerning this, Jesus Christ’s disciples asked: "Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?" (Matthew 24:3, KingJamesVersion) As the more accurate NewWorldTranslation puts it, Jesus’ followers asked: "Tell us, When will these things be, and what will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?"
***
w8511/1p.29Part1—ModernStewardshipofGod’sSacredWord***Turning to Appendix 1A, we find the title: "The Divine Name in the Hebrew Scriptures." Under this title, the appendix shows that the NewWorldTranslation renders YHWH as Jehovah all 6,827 times that it occurs in the traditional Hebrew text. It also adds 146 warranted restorations, making a grand total of 6,973 times that the name Jehovah appears from Genesis to Malachi. No other Bible translation gives this rightful place to Jehovah’s name. That alone makes the NewWorldTranslation superior to all others.
***
km12/98p.8par.2OfferingtheNewWorldTranslation***Some people may respond, "I already have a Bible. I don’t need another one." Our challenge is to help them see that the NewWorldTranslation is not just another Bible. It is a literal translation in today’s language that accurately captures the sense of the original text. One aspect of its superiority can be demonstrated by comparing the renderings of such words as "shambles" (KingJamesVersion) with "meat market" (NewWorldTranslation) at 1 Corinthians 10:25.
***
w5011/15pp.441-442par.10SubjectiontotheHigherPowers***But rather than being instructions by the apostle to render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, Romans 13:1-7 has since 1929 been taken by Jehovah’s witnesses to be instructions on rendering to God what belongs to God. Why? Because the expression "the higher powers" is now understood to mean primarily the Most High God and his reigning Son Jesus Christ. Surely there are no powers or authorities higher than these. As rendered by the recently issued NewWorldTranslationoftheChristianGreekScriptures (until 1962 when they realized the NWT had been interpreted incorrectly) Romans 13:1 reads: "Let every soul be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God; the existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God." Jehovah God is the Supreme and Original Authority. He being the Creator of all things, it follows that he is the source of all authority for doing what is right. Because he is supreme and all creation is dependent upon him, no one has the right to question the Most High God on how he uses his authority, even though for a time we may not understand it. He does what he pleases, but what he does is always for good, since there can never be any unrighteousness or untruthfulness in him. "The Almighty is beyond our minds. Supreme in power and rich in justice, he violates no right." "There is one thing God has said; ay, twice have I heard him say it: that power belongs to God." (Job 37:23 and Ps. 62:11, Mo) The fact stands unassailable that Jehovah God is the Chief of the Superior Authorities. Every soul should be subject to him.
***km10/94p.2ServiceMeetingsforOctober***
Offer the NewWorldTranslation in November. Since most people already have a Bible, we need to show why the NewWorldTranslation is superior. Refer to the book "AllScriptureIsInspiredofGodandBeneficial" (pages 327-8, pars. 1-6). Explain why Jehovah’s name is used, and give some examples showing the advantages of using modern language. Point out helpful features in the back of the Bible, such as "Bible Words Indexed," which can be used to locate familiar texts quickly. The "Table of the Books of the Bible" shows who wrote each book and where and when it was written, as well as the time period covered. Refer to Reasoning book (page 59, subheading "Bible prophecy explains the meaning of world conditions"), and discuss how you might start a Scriptural conversation based on John 17:3 and Psalm 37:10, 11, 29. Arrange for capable publisher to demonstrate how the NewWorldTranslation and the book TheBible—God’sWordorMan’s? might be presented in local territory.
-
blondie
http://www.forananswer.org/Top_JW/Scholars%20and%20NWT.htm
The New World Translation
What the Scholars Really Said
The Watchtower and Jehovah's Witness apologists have often cited scholars in support of the New World Translation in general, and particularly its rendering of John 1:1c ("and the Word was a god"). Scholarly citation is a form of an "argument from authority." Such an argument cannot establish the truth or falsity of a given assertion; it can merely lend credence or cast doubt. Sound arguments from authority will consist of an accurate quotation from the scholar in question, which entails insuring that the context of the authority's statements are consistent with the argument being presented, and that contrary statements in the same passage are not removed with creative use of ellipses ("..."). Further, the scholar must be a recognized authority in a field that pertains directly to the assertion being made. When Jehovah's Witnesses produce scholars that support the NWT, we must first establish that the scholar is, indeed, a recognized expert in the field of Biblical Languages, and that he or she has been quoted accurately. When given careful consideration, many of the scholars used by Jehovah's Witnesses do not actually constitute a sound argument from authority. I'm not suggesting that no scholars may be found in support of the NWT or its translation of John 1:1, but these are in the minority and often are not as qualified in their field as the scores of scholars who advocate the traditional translation.
In the chart, below, we will examine how some scholars have been used in defense of the NWT and whether they actually support the Watchtower translation as claimed. It is not my intent to be exhaustive; however I've tried to cover the scholars most often cited; I think you'll find that any omissions will be obscure scholars that are not generally recognized as authoritative in the scholarly community. If you know of a prominent scholar that I've missed, please let me know so that I may include him/her in a future revision of this article.
Index of Scholars (continued)
-
Invetigator74
nomoreguilt:Back in the 70's we had an elder in our congregation that began to compare the NWT to another bible. He and his wife would sit during the meetings and use this bible," In Living English", I believe it was. I believe that was the "The Bible in Living English" by Steven Byington. The WTB&TS first published it for the members in 1972.
-
freydi
Matthew 24:24 KJV
"For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." -
hamsterbait
Blondies post here is soo ironic in light of Leolaia's post on the "presence" and her review of the most recent "generation" change!!
Invisible "coming" invisible "presence" see what the word meant. Invisibility is not implied - unless you were Russell in 1874 - Christ had not arrived. (so he said he arrived invisibly, and was now "present")
HB