Sledgehammer subtlety: The insidious reworking of Micah 6:8

by rory-ks 37 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • rory-ks
    rory-ks

    Micah 6:8 might be - or have been - a favourite verse of many. The verse used to read:

    "He has told you, O earthling man, what is good. And what is Jehovah asking back from you but to exercise justice and to love kindness and to be modest in walking with your God."

    Notice the change in the NWT 2013 revision:

    "He has told you, O man, what is good. And what is Jehovah requiring of you? Only to exercise justice, to cherish loyalty, a nd to walk in modesty with your God!"

    Jehovah is no longer 'asking back,' he is "requiring." No longer to "love kindness," but to "cherish loyalty." And all of this is now finished off with an exclamation mark!

    Now a verse of scripture beloved of many can be invoked whenever the Society wants to hammer home their insistence on loyalty.

    (Just as an aside, I also see that James 5:14 doesn't refer to "older men" any more but, " Is there anyone sick among you? Let him call the elders of the congregation to him." Older men was always a beautifully vague term which could easily be taken literally. Not so any more. Instead the word "elder" is used - and the word "elder" is a Watchtower buzz-word.)

  • Jon Preston
    Jon Preston

    Well well another alterstion made in the scriptures to give a false need for loyalty to the org....and conveniently they have no hebrew interlinear thingy majig to help u see if its true or not....but on your JW app you can look at what ALLL other versions of the Buble portray, including the old NWT.....absoluteky changes the meaning of the verse.

  • Frazzled UBM
    Frazzled UBM

    Good pick-up

  • steve2
    steve2

    Which all goes to show that, as century after century after century rumbles by, and translations proliferate -and then gather dust - and words change their meanings, you can pretty much make "Holy Scripture" say whatever you want it to say to bolster your authority.

    Be wary of people who claim to be "just" following scripture. Whose scriptures? Whose interpretations? And whose meanings? And as for those damn annoying exclamation marks (!!): Did they even exist in written form when the motley jumble of books that were first written and later determined (by men) to be from God?

  • humbled
    humbled

    Great catch, roryks.

    steve 2--YES! Absolutely!

    Next time I hear that Christians NOW know better what the scriptures mean--- this self-interested change to the text will be brought up!

    No way to trust scriptures when you don't know who will wield the pen--today-- and yesterday--and the day before that.....

    Maeve

  • Phizzy
    Phizzy

    The RNWT is obviously more of a travesty than the NWT !

    The changing of Micah is purely to bolster the concept of loyalty, but not to Jehovah, no, this will go in to the mind-controlled JW's reasoning as equating to loyalty to the G.B.

    The rendering of the James scripture(5v14) is just as blatant, they know full well that if the office of the men being referred to was meant, then the word Episkopoi would have been used, but no, the word is Presbiteroi which refers to the Qualities of the men, Older men in spiritual experience and wisdom no doubt, but not officially appointed Episkopoi. Not appointed Elders.

    I wonder if they follow this rule throughout and always render Presbiter as Elder , I bet they don't, it simply would not fit in some contexts, so what is the reason for doing it in James 5v14 ?

    They are so blatant in their evident dishonesty they disgust me.

  • humbled
    humbled

    Phizzy--Another good point--and a problem for their argument for their consistent word-for-word rendering of scripture that was supposed to prop up their claim to superiority of the JW bible.

    What JW will ever know it if they are forbidden to research anything outside or inside the Society's literature?

    O, the poor dumb-bunnies! and I was in that racket, too.

  • fulltimestudent
    fulltimestudent

    Steve2:

    Which all goes to show that, as century after century after century rumbles by, and translations proliferate -and then gather dust - and words change their meanings, you can pretty much make "Holy Scripture" say whatever you want it to say to bolster your authority.

    wide grin!!!!

  • clarity
    clarity

    Rory ...nice catch, thanks for posting it.

    *

    Can't find the scripture that ends with "possibly

    you may be hid in the day of jehoba ......." I wonder

    if they changed that one. ?????

    *

    I was a dub in the early sixties so this heavy duty

    worship of MEN ....... is more than disgusting!

    Hate this cult!

    clarity

  • problemaddict
    problemaddict

    A couple things here. So "require" is actually a perfectly reasonable translation. The transliterated word rendered "require" has LOTS of possible renderings based on context. Alot of bibles subtly render this verse many ways. On the "exercise justice, cherish loyalty, and walk in modesty" front, here are several other translations.

    To do what is right, to love mercy, and to live humbly...

    do justice, love kindness, and walk humbly...

    to act justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly...

    to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly...

    Even Darbys translation uses love goodness, mercy, or loving kindness and to walk humbly.

    Strongs gives the hebrew word translated by the society as "loyalty" a definition of "goodness, kindness, and faithfulness"

    Other instances of the masculine noun also allow for the translation as "loyalty" or "loyal deeds". "cherish" is not to far off the mark from the verb that proceeds the nound translated "loyalty", but in all honesty, it isn't one of the possible definitions Strongs gives. In fact strongs basically says the word means "love, appetite, the act of being a friend". Along those lines.

    So for whatever reason, the society is fine with the word require (seems to be better along the path of real translation), but the phrase "cherish loyalty", seems to have bias in favor of a specific point, even though it isn't exactly taking full liberty. At least that is my take on it.

    Micah 6:8 - NAS – He has told you, O man, what is good; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God?
    Micah 6:8 - BHS – הִגִּ֥יד לְךָ֛ אָדָ֖ם מַה־טֹּ֑וב וּמָֽה־יְהוָ֞ה דֹּורֵ֣שׁ מִמְּךָ֗ כִּ֣י אִם־עֲשֹׂ֤ות מִשְׁפָּט֙ וְאַ֣הֲבַת חֶ֔סֶד וְהַצְנֵ֥עַ לֶ֖כֶת עִם־אֱלֹהֶֽיךָ׃ פ

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit