Hypocrites are so PROUD of their deceptive excuses!
New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures...
by Joliette 109 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
brotherdan
Nice retort, CrazyJW.
-
theMadJW
Thanks! heh
-
brotherdan
That was sarcastic, Crazy.
-
theMadJW
Thanks ANYWAYS!
-
PSacramento
Ahh, yes- the same toothless defense of all the poor translations. Never heard THAT one before!
You ARE correct, to an extant- "ALL translations are biased, this every scholar agrees. The NWT is no different."
For- our bias is for TRUTH!
Yes, and I am sure that the OTHER translators felt/feel the same way.
Like I said, nothing different at all.
-
Chalam
theMadJW Ah, that explains it; thus the common translation (main customer being church-people) translate it to fit your dogma!
The list clearly shows no version has the word "Ghost" as you have accused but all have the words "Spirit" as the Hebrew dictates. Any of these translations are easily far more accurate that the NWT.
"Active force" is a poor paraphrase at best and the only ones who subscribe to it are those who worship the god of the WT.
Blessings,
Stephen
-
theMadJW
You've heard the saying about Opinions, haven'tya?
Your is completely baseless- unless Gods really IS the Triune Sadist of CHURCHianity, and His Name HASN"T lasted forever- as He said it WOULD!
But, then, you are just being a good little churchoid; your pastor will be SO proud of you!
-
theMadJW
No more cheap excuses?
-
allelsefails
I know I'm a few days late on this, but if you're still around......
I understand the arguement of adding "Jehovah" in the NT where it quotes from the OT and the OT uses Jehovah. (I personally would put that in the footnote instead of changing the text.)
However the problem is that the explanation only applies to half or two-thirds of the places where Jehovah is substituted for the greek "kyrios" EVERY one of those places (NOT quotes from the OT) is guesswork and bad translating. Again if you "THINK" they meant Jehovah, but every manuscript says "Kyrios" you should put that in your reference footnote, but do not presume to change the word of God to fit your Dogma. (Which I agree with - by the way - I'm a Unitarian, But I don't believe I need to CHANGE the bible to prove it.)
Thanks - Allelsefails