Leviticus 5:1 New ..NWT 2013

sherrie11

David Splain "Using delightful words and accurate words of truth." presented his talk at the AGM

They have revised the interpretation of leviticus 5:1

leviticus 5:1 OLD NWT "now in the case that a soul sins in that he has heard public cursing...blah blah.."

"The thought in Leviticus 5:1 is not about profanity"

I have checked the bible in living english and it uses the word imprecation which means

imprecation - a slanderous accusation

accusal, accusation - a formal charge of wrongdoing brought against a person; the act of imputing blame or guilt

I also checked other translations

International Standard Version
"If someone sins because he has failed to testify after receiving notice to testify as a witness regarding what he has observed or learned, he is to be held responsible."

Could they use this scripture to use against family members and associates to speak up in regard to suspected apostates?

He goes on ..

"The original NWT is a masterful, wonderful translation. We should use it for reference. For our meetings, service and study, we should use the revised.

Words change over time.

"You would hardly call a brother with a sunny disposition gay." – David Splain

Lordy LOrdy

Julia Orwell

But what does the NNWT say?

konceptual99

It was never about profanity. It's just how American English uses the word curse.

sherrie11

Julia i was assuming due to the way the speaker announced that cursing wasn't a swear word 'a profanity'. I know one shouldn't assume but i found it interesting that they felt obliged to mention this in the talk. While i am assuming i still think they may go this way with their new interpretation "If someone sins because he has failed to testify after receiving notice to testify as a witness regarding what he has observed or learned, he is to be held responsible." And I assumed because it is an american religion the cursing meant swearing.

I was quoting the GB member who gave the talk in regards to the quote "its not about profanity'

Profanity (also called bad language, strong language, foul language, swearing or cursing) is a subset of a language's lexicon that is considered [by whom?] to be strongly impolite or offensive. It can show a desecration or debasement of someone or something, or show strong or intense emotion. Profanity can take the form of words, expressions, gestures (such as flipping the middle finger), or other social behaviours that are construed or interpreted as insulting, rude, vulgar, obscene, obnoxious, foul, desecrating, or other forms. [ 1 ]

konceptual99 in australia cursing has a completely different meaning. It means cursing someone like wishing them bad luck or some kind of voodoo or spell put on a person.

To me it just confirms this religion is completely made in the US of A

Julia Orwell

Yeah that's what I thought.

sherrie11

thanks love

konceptual99

Yup sherrie11, cursing is pretty much the same in the UK as OZ. It is not used to indicate profanity. Any application in that Bible passage to profanity is an American thing because of how they understand and use the word. I don't think I've ever heard it applied to profanity here.

Phizzy

The Contempory English Version, which I like, and came out about 20 years ago (?) has:

"If you refuse to testify in Court about what you saw, or know has happened, you have sinned and can be punished".

Its taken the W.T a long time to catch up where better (actual) translations have already got to long ago.

Apognophos

2013 NWT:

"If someone* sins because he has heard a public call to testify # and he is a witness or has seen or learned about it and he does not report it, then he will answer for his error.

*Or: "a soul".

# Lit., "a voice of a curse (oath)." Probably an announcement regarding a wrongdoing that included a curse pronounced against the wrongdoer or against the witness in case he failed to testify."

Leviticus 5:1 New ..NWT 2013

Share this