Thanks Perry for the link, now checking it out.
Compilation of the bible and the NWT translation source.
by trailerfitter 26 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
punkofnice
Going back to Wescott & Hort
Westcott and Hort founded several occult societies, two of which were The Hermes Club and The Ghostly Guild. These were not merely school-boy projects. They were created at one of the highest learning institutions in the world's largest imperial world-power at that time - Great Britian. Members of these clubs and the occult associations that they went on to found, such as The Society for Psychical Research started the modern New Age movement, became and were prominent members of British Royalty and politics, as well as occupied the highest positions in the Anglican Church including that which is equilavent to that of the Pope in the RCC, the Archbishop of Canterbury. To say that Westcott and Hort were well connected is an understatement.
There seems to be a pattern that the WTB$ likes their occult 'table of Demons'!
-
trailerfitter
Yes I have heard of the Hermes Club.
-
trailerfitter
Here I have found Dr Manteys staement on the WT translation http://www.towerwatch.com/Witnesses/New_World_Translation/dr_mantey.htm
-
Wonderment
Mantey wrote: "But of all the scholars in the world, as far as we know, none have translated this verse [John 1:1] as Jehovah's Witnesses have."
There are numerous lists on the Web showing a number of scholars who translate John 1:1 in a way that Mantey would not approve. Yet, he picks on the NWT. Why is he is silent about those other scholars who go against the grain, he even pretends they don't exist. Not very accurate in anyones book.
Mantey: But John affirmed that "the Word was with (the) God" (the definite article preceding each noun), and in so writing he indicated his belief that they are distinct and separate personalities. Then John next stated that the Word was God, i.e., of the same family or essence that characterizes the Creator. Or, in other words, that both are of the same nature, and the nature is the highest in existence, namely divine.
In other words, although he states‘ that (the Word was God, i.e., was of the same family or essence that characterizes the Creator), he seems to be arguing against describing the Word as "the God," indicating that John believed that the Word and the God are distinct and having separate personalities.’
This argument nulls to some extent the common argument made by many Trinitarians that Christ and God are being identified as one and the same. He goes on to cite some scriptures where quality is emphasized, and identity not the issue. (John 4:24, "God is spirit," (not a spirit); I John 4:16, "God is love," (not a love); I John 1:5, "God is light," (not a light); and Matthew 13:39, "the reapers are angels,") Yes, God is (a) spirit, or God is (a) light, but not God is the light. Mantey talks about Christ having "equality" with the Father, he, however, holds back from calling Christ, the Supreme God.
Notice this statement of his: But if we had no other statement from John except that which is found in John 14:9, "He that has seen me has seen the Father," that would be enough to satisfy the seeking soul that Christ and God are the same in essence and that both are divine and equal in nature.
Yet, he does not translate John 1:1, "the word was God," but "the word was deity [divine]."
-
trailerfitter
excellent. After reading a few other articles on the web things are about as clear as mud!! lol
-
Band on the Run
I am currently reading a bio of Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, ca. 300, not certain. He is famous for his Confessions and City of God. The author points out how limited the available scriptures available to him were. Augustine was from a noble family, well-educated, a late convert to Christianity. He used the Psalms, some of Paul's letters, and only the Gospel of John. He only had a smattering of the psalms, a book to which he was particularly attached. Through his extensive contacts, he was able to collect the entire psalmtry by his death. The bishop in Carthage, the diocese next to his own, had different gospels.
It is easy to see the need for Creeds in this situation. What impressed me was that an orthodoxy did develop with everyone having a different collection of scripture. Reading their letters in the book, the bishops and notable Christians seemed to have a clearer understanding of Christianity than we do today with all the academic scholarship available to us.