NWT (page 2)

logical

Actually, the NWT Large print reference edition is good for studying, it has all the correct translations BURIED in the footnotes.

>>> http://www.geocities.com/logical_7/index.html

joel

logical,

What you say is true...something I've known for a long time...problem is...most jdubs don't know that...and if they did...they would be as disturbed about it as I was.

The adding of words like [other]...as well as other words in [ ]'s that don't belong...is something else most jdubs are not in tune too!

I still go to the 'Purple' one alot too!

Pax,
joel

Xandit

Anyone familiar withe The Original Bible Project? I've got the first section and it looks pretty good.

amicus.
Your observations on the NWT are interesting but are incorrect. In reference to Acts 21:30, the expression "a running together of the people occurred" correctly translate the verb and the participle concerned. I have found that the NWT does an excellent job in rendering correctly the tenses, mood and voice of the verbs and participles. If you were able to undertake a course in biblical greek you will find as I have that the NWT is a useful instrument in translating Greek to English and vice versa. If you are having some difficulty in using the NWT then by all means compare it with other translations. The NIV is a good readable translation and I use this regularly for my devotional reading. However, in matters of scholarship where accuracy is more important than readibility then the NWT is undoubtedly the 'Rolls Royce' of Bible translations. It is not infallible and is subject as with any literary work to ongoing criticism and revision.

I am somewhat puzzled by the experience of Brother Franz being unable to explain the intricacies of the Greek preposition, 'en' for in to a DO and Gilead graduate. In my experience is somewhat uncommon for any such brother to have any knowledge or competence in such areas. It is a salutary reminder that the brother are not encouraged to engage in pure theological research but only in the use of the Society's publications. I would be somewhat surprised if such brother have ever seen or opened a Greek lexicon. If this is not the case the one must assume that such brothers experience such knowledge by using reference books in the Bethel library. Perhaps, Brother Franz was experiencing some frustration in trying to explain the the theological care in regard to Greek prepositions.

scholar

mommy

Scholar,
Whatever you said just whizzed past my head and hit the wall:) The only thing I caught was your name. So I am writing to say WELCOME! Nice to have you on board:) Please tell me I am not going to need a dictionary for all your posts, if I do then I will run out and get one:) It seems you are very scholary, maybe you can use little words every now and then for little ole me?
mommy

LDH

Mommy,
You're funny!

L.

eyes_opened

lol mommy! And welcome Scholar.

"One Persons Heresy Is Anothers Truth"

Seven

Scholar, Welcome to the board!!

amicus

Hi Scholar,

Your observations on the NWT are interesting but incorrect.

I think my observation was correct. The phrasing used in the NWT at Acts 21:30 is awkward. There is no reason for this awkward wording. Therefore my inference that the translators did a poor job is appropriate. The KJV and NIV do a much better job. Their wording is much more fluid and conveys the same meaning. I don’t need to study biblical Greek to recognize bad English.
My reluctance to use the NWT goes far beyond the instances in which the translators chose sloppy wording in an attempt to strictly adhere to tenses, mood, and voice of verbs and participles. I think all credibility was lost when the decision was made to replace words that clearly had other meanings with the name Jehovah. Beyond that are the passages identified in the footnotes of the NWT (With References) in which words were inserted, omitted or changed at the discretion of the translators to convey a specific thought or meaning.
The idea of the NWT being the “Rolls Royce” of Bible translations is entirely new to me. I’m not an expert on this subject but I have read opinions of those who are. Many scholars wonder why the translators have never been identified, and more importantly, what their credentials are.
If Fred Franz was one of the translators of the NWT, as my friend believes and you seem to believe, what are his credentials? I have seen nothing to indicate that he was ever qualified to undertake such an endeavor.
The conversation that I referred to between myself and the “X-DO, Gilead graduate was private and I choose to not further elaborate on that subject. I was intentionally vague when I mentioned this discussion, only using three of his words “cursory and superficial” (knowledge of Greek), because I had not and still have not, obtained his permission to discuss it. If you or anyone else feels “cursory and superficial” is inaccurate, then please provide F. Franz’s credentials and let us make our own informed conclusions.
I wonder why you doubt that a DO and Gilead graduate has ever “seen or opened” a Greek lexicon? You have, why not them? I would expect this to occur out of curiosity if nothing else.
I am disappointed that brothers are not encouraged to engage in pure theological research but only use the Society’s publications. That to me is the definition of a follower of man not God.
I am interested in any information you could provide to indicate that Biblical Scholars view the NWT as the “Rolls Royce” of bible translations. I am very interested in who the translators of the NWT were, as well as any evidence indicating that they were qualified to undertake a task of such magnitude.
Amicus

NWT

Share this