Romans 10:13 - got owned in a jw study. need help with greek.

by bohm 54 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  bohm

  For reasons i have posted on another topic i have become involved with a study with a rather knowledgeable jw. i try to stay clear of the scripture (im an atheist who have never read the bible so i have desided to agree with his interpretation of the scripture for the sake of argument, HOWEVER to say that when it come to interpretations of the bible, there are also many other ways to think about it, and it require significant research for me to commit to one particular view). We talked about how you know jehovahs witness have the truth and ofcourse the conversation went into the usual topics like using the name jehovah (however, it did end where i felt it should, on jesus selection in 1918, more on that on another thread). He asked me to look up romans 10:13. in context it says:

  1 Brothers, the goodwill of my heart and my supplication to God for them are, indeed, for their salvation. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God; but not according to accurate knowledge; 3 for, because of not knowing the righteousness of God but seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ is the end of the Law, so that everyone exercising faith may have righteousness. 5 For Moses writes that the man that has done the righteousness of the Law will live by it. 6 But the righteousness resulting from faith speaks in this manner: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ that is, to bring Christ down; 7 or, ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ that is, to bring Christ up from the dead.” 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your own mouth and in your own heart”; that is, the “word” of faith, which we are preaching. 9 For if you publicly declare that ‘word in your own mouth,’ that Jesus is Lord, and exercise faith in your heart that God raised him up from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration for salvation. 11 For the Scripture says: “None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for there is the same Lord over all, who is rich to all those calling upon him. 13 For “everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.”

  Well thats pretty darn clear and actually it took me a bit by surprice. Now im trying to study it a bit, and i have downloaded the kingdoms interlinear translation which can be found here: http://www.archive.org/details/WatchTowerBibleandTractSocietyofPennsylvaniaWatchTowerpubs_0

  If you look it up, ofcourse it dont mention jehovahs (is it true none of the olde greek manuscripts contain YHWH?), but instead for the two (bold) occurrences of lord/jehovah use the words: jesus is kupios and kupiou (my pseudo-greek letters). Doing a bit of googling lead me to this statement on shauns research:

  But something that bothers me is in Romans10:13, the JW bible inserted the name "Jehovah" instead of "Lord" which refers to Jesus. Get out your "JW Purple Bible 1969 the Interlinear" and go to Romans10:13 look at the Greek word "Kupiou" it says "Lord", now go to 1 Corinthians 11:26 and 2 Peter 1:2, the same Greek word "Kupiou" is there and it refers to Jesus. There are 237 instances where the name "Jehovah" is inserted instead of "Lord" in the original Greek writings of the New Testament. The Greek word "Lord" had several different ways of spelling it such as , Kupiou, Kupiw, Kupios, Kupiov & Kupios. The word "God" is "OEou" in the Greek writings. Don't believe me, get out that Bible and take a look for yourself, start around Romans chapter 10, and you will see that the Anointed Governing Body has changed the Bible.

  So basically my question is as follows: how rotten is this translation? why was two different versions of kupio* used in the text? does that lead credibility to the watchtowers translation? is this information something that would make an impression on him or should i leave it because i will get burried and have more important things to talk about? (side note: he is going to find a functional definition of blood for the next time!)
• 

  Satanus

  Personally, i wouldn't get into arguing about the greek. That's for greek scholars. However, i would have an issue w the wt refusal to accept the greek nt as it comes, w lord in romans10:13. Blatently changing it by adding the name jehovah discredits them, their bible and their translators for me. I know that a knowledgeable jw will go off on a long speech about how it must have ben there, blablabla. They also claim that jehovah protected his word from opposers, If he protected it, then take it the way that it was protected. 'Course, you will NEVER win by using logic w your jw. If they can't keep jehovah in the nt of their bible, it removes there raison d'etre. It's a matter of emotion, not information for them. You can't win against emotion, unless you can wage a long battle. Good luck w however you handle this.

  S
• 

  Satanus

  Personally, i wouldn't get into arguing about the greek. That's for greek scholars. However, i would have an issue w the wt refusal to accept the greek nt as it comes, w lord in romans10:13. Blatently changing it by adding the name jehovah discredits them, their bible and their translators for me. I know that a knowledgeable jw will go off on a long speech about how it must have ben there, blablabla. They also claim that jehovah protected his word from opposers, If he protected it, then take it the way that it was protected. 'Course, you will NEVER win by using logic w your jw. If they can't keep jehovah in the nt of their bible, it removes there raison d'etre. It's a matter of emotion, not information for them. You can't win against emotion, unless you can wage a long battle. Good luck w however you handle this.

  S
• 

  AnnOMaly

  how rotten is this translation?

  It has its problems. All translations have their problems.

  why was two different versions of kupio* used in the text?

  The rules of Greek grammar determine the ending of kurios, and whether it's kurios, kuriou, kurion or whatever.

  does that lead credibility to the watchtowers translation?

  No.

  is this information something that would make an impression on him or should i leave it because i will get burried and have more important things to talk about?

  'S your call.

  The reason JWs give for replacing 'Lord' with 'Jehovah' is because it's a quote from the OT (Joel 2:32 in this case) which has YHWH in it.
• 

  Satanus

  In rom10:13, perhaps the nt writer followed jewish tradition in not writing the divine name, or perhaps, he decided to apply the quote to jesus. Whatever the case, jws can't get around the fact that 'jehovah' is NOT there in the socalled original greek manuscripts. Since they refuse to accept the bible as it is, it discredits them from the getgo. It removes their org from the serious religion grade and places them in the quack cult category. But then, that's what russel and rutherford were, anyway, even before the org made it's own bible.

  S
• 

  sspo

  If he wants to talk about Jehovah's name, i would say do your research on it and i know you can nail him.

  Agree with the fact that God's name was used 7000 times in the old testament but once jesus showed up in the 1st century, he never used it.

  They will show you the scriptures in Matt 6:9 and John 17:6 and 26 about jesus making his name manifest.... but remind him Jesus even in those scriptures never used Jehovah's name, contrary to JW's that use it every 3 seconds.

  In the New Testament, the Watchtower wrongly translated Gods name in there approx. 230 times even though it's not found in any original manuscripts.

  Their own publications will testify to this point.

  Remind them they broke the rule in Revelation that " IF ANYONE ADDS OR SUBTRACTS TO THE BIBLE , WILL DIE" or something like that.

  Have fun
• 

  sspo

  Once again, remind him that out of all the books written in the new testament by Paul, peter, John, matthew and so on,

  none of them spoke of Jehovah and the importance of using his name. It was never an issue of "true religion".

  Even when Jesus was dying on the cross or torture stake, still did not call on "Jehovah" for help.

  They piss me off and get my blood boiling!
• 

  glenster

  The JWs leaders' motive for removing "Lord"s and putting in "Jehovah"s is to
  replace the "Lord"s in dozens of verses where leaving in "Lord" better suits the
  mainstream view. If the original writers had the JWs leaders' view, it would
  have been important to them to phrase those verses differently for the same
  reasons the JWs leaders have. ("Archangel Michael" would be good, and would
  have made their stance clear even better if it were used instead of "Jesus" or
  "Logos," etc.)
  http://gtw6437.tripod.com/id18.html
  
  The JWs leaders have a less likely case regarding related history in various
  ways, including this one. By their version, the original followers were taught
  by Jesus and the apostles but were strangely non-committal and disappeared
  quickly, followed by another group that removed "YHWH"s and put in "Lord"s in
  various scriptures written in various areas over decades, and what they did
  somehow managed to disappear so remarkably well that there's no record of the
  issue being brought up in the Arian debates later, or by whoever else arguing
  for the original view, which you'd think it would have been.
• 

  jonathan dough

  The NWT is a horrible translation. What they won't tell you is that even in their Insight book they admit that not one single NT manuscript, roughly 5,000, uses the tetragrammaton, or Jehovah. Not one. They claim it was taken out over the years as some evil conspiracy, which is utter nonsense.

  This fellow is not as smart as he pretends to be. You are being mislead and I can prove it. Go to my website at http://www.144000.110mb.com/ where you will find a wealth of facts and proof that disproves this bizarre religion of theirs. It also shows to what a horrible extent they have gone to change the Bible to conform to their theories. I bet he hasn't even explained what that faith really teaches. There is a summary on my web site, you'll see it in the 144,000 section. Look for what they are not telling you, look for the hole, not the doughnut. They don't want you to know what they really teach. Did he tell you that Jesus was/is just an angel, created for a limited purpose in their view? That they teach that no man is judged for his actions in this life (death is the reward for sin) and judgment is only for those acts committed during the 1,000 year reign. Be careful with this person.

  JD II
• 

  Satanus

  An interesting tack to take would be to question the motives of the wt org in adding jehovah to the nt. They like to question everyone elses motives. Question their's. For instance their demotion of jesus and jesus' role in the nt, and in the lives of jws. Their hatred of christians, generally. Their elevation of the gb vis a vis jesus. Jesus is what the nt is all about. Jesus is supposed to be whom christians immitate. In view of all of the above, if jesus was left in place, it would make redundent the wt org.

  S