NWT does fine with its restoral of the Dvine name to the OT. No issue there. The 237 insertions in the NT, however, are adding to the scriptures...Revelation has something to say about that. And, while you are making a point of how people judge theologicially, the WT once admitted that they added the name Jehovah to the NT simply to bolster their non-trinitarian theology.
New World Translation, is it the best bible translation?
by littlebuddy 177 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
DaCheech
I use the Dacheech bible translation, and it says in verse 1:1 bullshit
-
Chalam
Hello Reniaa,
You demonstarte quite ably how people make judgement theologically rather than with translation.
You seem to have forgotten my numerous posts where I quote the original greek and hebrew and compare the NWT "translation" with real bibles!
Numerous times I have shown that the NWT has absolutely no basis to render the original text as they do but do so quite clearly with regards to their own [false] theology.
The Father is not concerned one iota with having His name known to the whole of mankind, but His Son's. Feel free to carry on like the New Testament doesn't exist.
Isaiah 45:22-23 (New International Version)
22 "Turn to me and be saved,
all you ends of the earth;
for I am God, and there is no other.23 By myself I have sworn,
my mouth has uttered in all integrity
a word that will not be revoked:
Before me every knee will bow;
by me every tongue will swear.As for me I am living in New Testament times and have my faith in the blood of the new covenant.
It has been made clear who we are all going to bow to and what name is THE important one.
Philippians 2:5-11 (New International Version)
5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7 but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.Jesus is my Lord. You have made it clear who your's is by placing your faith in the WT and their "bible" which translates the greek for Lord "kurios" as "Jehovah" innumerable times.
As in a previous post, for absolutely no basis of translation they render kurios in verse 11 in the NWT as "Lord", rather than "Jehovah". If they didn't it would read "Jesus Christ is Jehovah" and they certainly couldn't have that!
All the best,
Stephen
-
PSacramento
Well said and well shown Chalam :)
-
JoJoJones
No, no, and then again, no! The New World Translation isn't even actually a 'translation' it's a sectarian paraphrase. How could it be an actual translation when none of the five men who did the translating are Bible scholars in Hebrew and Greek??? Only Fred Franz knew any Greek, because he took two years of it at the University of Cincinatti. After his second year of college he dropped out. How good could his Greek have been after only two years of it in college? None of the other four men knew any Greek, and none of the five men, inluding Fred Franz, knew any Hebrew. And people are supposed to believe the New World Translation is the best translation? Oh, puh-leeze. Personally, I don't want to touch it with a ten yard pole! And, I'm so mad about all the poor people in the so-called "rank and file" who are misled by the NWT!
-
reniaa
lol jojonow tell me what qualifications the early translators had? you know the ones that rendered John 1:1c 'God' when actual SCHOLARS NOW agree with NWT saying it should be either a god, divine or godlike.
That we have modern and better scholars is moot when we also have the problem of theologically driven text which means putting YHWH back in hebrew scriptures will not happen in modern translation among other points where centuries of theology means they cannot make more honest versions of the bible.
look at 'torture stake' a perfectly acceptable honest rendition of the greek word stauros but why don't any bibles put it instead of Cross? THEOLOGY completely. They couldn't put anything else but cross because of theology.
Where there is apparent choice, theology drives the choosing in EVERY bible.
The problem I have with people dissing the 237 times Jw's use jehovah in greek scriptures. Firstly lets discount the 50 or so times that are just quotes from hebrew scriptures, for me it is perfectly acceptable that quotes from hebrew scriptures should also use YHWH if they do.
I do not need Jehovah in greek scriptures too show Jesus is not God scripturally since hundreds of times Jesus is kept totally separate to God Putting YHWH God's name in the bible is not a big deal since it is already there. They haven't done it loads and I know they could have done it in many more places.
What we do know is possibly around the time of writing or not long afterwards YHWH was getting more and more of an issue with men in usage. which is for me that is enough of a reason to show this could be all down to men and nothing to do with God's intention in the greek as well. The precedent is set in the hebrew scriptures, showing that men could be influenced to stop using the biblically inspired word YHWH God's own name in the hebrew changing it deliberately could also fall out in the greek. IMO This would have been discussed scripturally by the writers it is just to big a change if it was meant... 7000 too 0, nope to big.
Reniaa
-
Earnest
Considering how many English translations there are I suggest that for any translation to be described as "the best" it would need to be qualified. The best translation for what? For simply reading and getting the gist of what is being said? In that case the theology of the translator(s) must colour your judgement as to who reflects the thinking and intent of the original writer. Are you looking for the best in a literal translation which adheres to the form of the original languages? In this case I think the NWT has much to recommend it.
However, I do not think there is any translation which is best in every sense. Really, to benefit most it is a good idea to read several translations (from different theological viewpoints) and get the best out of scripture in that way.
-
Lillith26
I no longer 'read' any 'version' of the bible- the 3 times i have read it from cover to cover I read the NWT, NIV and the KJV, in my opinion all of them were wronge to a certain degree! Personally I believe that god had nothing to do with the writting of any 'holy book' and at no time 'chose' one child over the other! I dont even think god has a gender (male or female), or would limit the telling of vital information to just one person who then had to tell everyone else (thats spreading rumours and hearsay by the time we get the information isn't it?).
My advice is- stop looking in books for the answers- take a walk outside and behold the real truth, nature and the creation is god real words, it can not be forged or wrongly translated, it publishes itself and will be here long after we are gone, everything we need to have 'paradise/utopia/nirvana' is right here and right now, we just need to let go of the illusion of control and go with the flow... further more- if everyone slaved for everyone else, no one would be without!
-
DaCheech
reniaa, do you ever give up?
you're a broken record with gabbage
-
jam
interesting, so JW,s believe that their interpretation of the word(stauros) is the only correct meaning
0f the word torture stake..So Jesus was never crucified but executed,because if he was crucified that would
imply he was nailed to a cross. How did I ever become a JW....To me execution do not have the same
meaning as being crucified , the results are the same but to be crucified to me means a mottifing, agonizing
death.You think this is what the writers was trying to tell us..The man died a horrible death does it matter
how he died..