i have noticed some posters (with frustration) asking for information regarding the nwt in various language editions.
here is a list of some of the nwt revised language editions published so far:.
albanian; arabic; armenian; chinese traditional 2017; danish 2017; dutch-netherlands 2017; estonian; haitian creole; italian 2017; korean 2014; modern greek 2017; norwegian 2017; portuguese 2015; romanian; russian; swahili 2017; swedish 2017; ukrainian; vietnamese.. not yet published: .
slimboyfat,
You may be right that the WT is holding back from releasing the NWT in these three popular languages.
I doubt very much that their delay is due to technical difficulties in the translation process. The may have put less people to work on these languages, comparatively speaking. Releasing the Spanish version, in particular, will be costly.
i have noticed some posters (with frustration) asking for information regarding the nwt in various language editions.
here is a list of some of the nwt revised language editions published so far:.
albanian; arabic; armenian; chinese traditional 2017; danish 2017; dutch-netherlands 2017; estonian; haitian creole; italian 2017; korean 2014; modern greek 2017; norwegian 2017; portuguese 2015; romanian; russian; swahili 2017; swedish 2017; ukrainian; vietnamese.. not yet published: .
Thank you so much for pulling this up for us Dreary weather. I missed that page. I should have come to you first. LOL!
i have noticed some posters (with frustration) asking for information regarding the nwt in various language editions.
here is a list of some of the nwt revised language editions published so far:.
albanian; arabic; armenian; chinese traditional 2017; danish 2017; dutch-netherlands 2017; estonian; haitian creole; italian 2017; korean 2014; modern greek 2017; norwegian 2017; portuguese 2015; romanian; russian; swahili 2017; swedish 2017; ukrainian; vietnamese.. not yet published: .
Jehovah’s Witnesses have been successful in attracting members of other churches in the Western world, mainly Catholic.
Here in the US, JWs hardly make a convert from Evangelical Protestants. Their growth comes from immigrants mainly.
JWs have a dismal record in countries where Islam predominates. With the exception of a few countries like Japan, Philippines, and Korea, their record in making converts in the Middle and Far East are very poor. Even in Israel, after so many decades in presence there, they have only like 15 hundred publishers. In Bangladesh, they only have one publisher for every 7 thousand people (7,000).
i have noticed some posters (with frustration) asking for information regarding the nwt in various language editions.
here is a list of some of the nwt revised language editions published so far:.
albanian; arabic; armenian; chinese traditional 2017; danish 2017; dutch-netherlands 2017; estonian; haitian creole; italian 2017; korean 2014; modern greek 2017; norwegian 2017; portuguese 2015; romanian; russian; swahili 2017; swedish 2017; ukrainian; vietnamese.. not yet published: .
slimboyfat,
I obtained the info directly from the jw.org website. The info is scattered, I don’t think it is in one page though.
i have noticed some posters (with frustration) asking for information regarding the nwt in various language editions.
here is a list of some of the nwt revised language editions published so far:.
albanian; arabic; armenian; chinese traditional 2017; danish 2017; dutch-netherlands 2017; estonian; haitian creole; italian 2017; korean 2014; modern greek 2017; norwegian 2017; portuguese 2015; romanian; russian; swahili 2017; swedish 2017; ukrainian; vietnamese.. not yet published: .
smiddy3,
The NWT is available in Urdu language (Pakistan); Indonesian (Revised Edition - 2017), and Arabic, as noted above (Qatar & Saudi Arabia both use Arabic.)
I see no NWT in Bangladesh in their language Bengali. Very few Witnesses there (perhaps less than 300 publishers in a land with 163 million people). The Witnesses have hardly a presence in Bangladesh.
i have noticed some posters (with frustration) asking for information regarding the nwt in various language editions.
here is a list of some of the nwt revised language editions published so far:.
albanian; arabic; armenian; chinese traditional 2017; danish 2017; dutch-netherlands 2017; estonian; haitian creole; italian 2017; korean 2014; modern greek 2017; norwegian 2017; portuguese 2015; romanian; russian; swahili 2017; swedish 2017; ukrainian; vietnamese.. not yet published: .
keinlezard:o It sound very strange to me ... we heard of French revised version since two or three years ...
What I see on the jw.org/fr[ench] website is the édition révisée - 1995 NWT with References - with black cover. The Revised Edition comes in Gray color.
i have noticed some posters (with frustration) asking for information regarding the nwt in various language editions.
here is a list of some of the nwt revised language editions published so far:.
albanian; arabic; armenian; chinese traditional 2017; danish 2017; dutch-netherlands 2017; estonian; haitian creole; italian 2017; korean 2014; modern greek 2017; norwegian 2017; portuguese 2015; romanian; russian; swahili 2017; swedish 2017; ukrainian; vietnamese.. not yet published: .
I have noticed some posters (with frustration) asking for information regarding the NWT in various language editions. Where are they?
Here is a list of SOME of the NWT REVISED Language Editions published so far:
Albanian; Arabic; Armenian; Chinese Traditional 2017; Danish 2017; Dutch-Netherlands 2017; Estonian; Haitian Creole; Italian 2017; Korean 2014; Modern Greek 2017; Norwegian 2017; Portuguese 2015; Romanian; Russian; Swahili 2017; Swedish 2017; Ukrainian; Vietnamese.
NOT YET PUBLISHED:
Afrikaans; Finnish; French; German; Polish; Spanish; Tagalog.
You will noticed that three major languages -- French; German and Spanish editions have yet to appear in the Revised Editions. Perhaps we’ll get to see them published this year.
sharp-witted and well-educated eastern orthodox philosopher and theologian david bentley hart, now a fellow at notre dame, has produced a nt translation (yale univ press 2017) that is causing a major stir.
one-man translations are pretty rare any more, but this one is making a real splash, largely because it does not surrender to the group/translation committee mentality.. .
even though it's been out only a few months, it's already been reviewed several times in well-known publications.
I too want to say, thanks!
steve2: Regarding translations by one man (I know of none by women) compared to a group of men: One of the pitfalls is that groups tend to have a moderating influence on the finished product whereas lone translators are free to play out their idiosyncratic reasonings.
Me: There have been several translations published by women.
"idiosyncratic reasonings" as they may be, it is this freedom that has made possible the valuable contributions to the genre these lone translators have made. Both type of translations (made by committees and individuals) have their pluses and minuses. It brings balance to the world of interpretation, where large committees have the upper hand, but are sort of obliged to do their translations with selected constituents in mind.
I think that both types of translations can be useful with the right mindset.
i was curious regarding jeremiah 10:16 and jeremiah 51:19. it reads as follows (roughly, including the portion of jacob) in in over 12 different translations (i will be using the nkjv):"the portion of jacob is not like them,for he is the maker of all things;and israel is the tribe of his inheritance.the lord of hosts is his name.".
and now i will read it in the rough, hebrew translation found in any interlinear bible:.
"not (adv) like them (pro), the portion (noun) of jacob (noun), for (conj) [is] the former (verb), of all (noun), he (pro) [things] and israel [is] the staff (noun) of his inheritance (noun) the lord (noun - the hebrew word used is yahweh/jehovah) of hosts (noun) [is] his name (noun).".
Aaron,
The biblical expression "the portion of Jacob," being not clear to the modern reader, has moved some Bible versions to simplify it. The allusion is to the God of Jacob in contrast to vain idols of the nations. It is used as a descriptive title for God Almighty. This is no reference of Jesus Christ. The verse itself ends with this: "Jehovah of Armies is his name." Below a sample of other versions concurring with this conclusion:
NEB: God, Jacob’s creator, is not like these...
GNT: The God of Jacob is not like them...
ERV: But Jacob’s God is not like the idols.
GW: Jacob’s God isn’t like them.
ICB: But God, who is Jacob’s Portion...
LB: But the God of Jacob is not like these foolish idols.
NCV: But God, who is Jacob’s Portion...
NRSV: Not like these is the Lord, the portion of Jacob...
VOICE: The portion of Jacob, the Eternal One...
NIRV: The God of Jacob is not like them.
seeing a trinity thread.. can a jw apologist explain what (not who) is jesus?.
prior to the creation of everything 13.7 billion years ago (draw close book), jehovah created jesus as his firstborn, his only-begotten.. there was nothing else - no stars, no dust, no matter - just jehovah - and then, just jehovah and jesus.
so, what was jesus?.
freeman: "That said, I happen to know that there are literally legions of true scholars in this field that do not share your particular view [i.e. David_Jay’s], but rather lean more in my direction and present understanding."
Lots of scholars make weird assumptions because they too get emotionally tangled with the traditional religious standpoint where they do not want to give in to another viewpoint. Dr. James White is an example of one trinitarian apologist willing to argue publicly to prove others wrong. White’s assumption on the the Greek en is flawed. All one needs to do to verify whether his claim that en means eternity or not is by using a Greek-English Concordance in order to compare how the verb form was used throughout the NT.
The Greek ēn appears 315 times in the Greek text (Englishman’s Concordance), so right away we can observe that the majority of such ocurrences have nothing to do with Jesus‘ eternity claim. The verb eimí the source word for en is so common that for anyone to claim it means ‘eternity’ it would require that everyone else linked to the en be also eternal. Preposterous is such claim!
En is linked to a lot of individuals and things known not to be eternal. I pointed out that in Matt. 1:18 the verb form en was connected to the origin or birth of Jesus. No eternity there.
I also mentioned John 15:27, where according to Jesus his disciples were with him from the beginning (obviously the start of his ministry) = literally, "that from beginning with me you are." Both esté in John 15:27 and en of John 1:1 have their root in eimí. So does the "I am" of John 8:58 (I am) where it is used simply to express existence. The concept of eternity is not required in any of these texts. The concept of eternity is read into those verses by trinitarian believers.
In Revelation 17:8, it is said that "the wild beast that you saw was, and yet is about to ascend out of the abyss, and it is to go off into destruction." Should we claim the beast was eternal?
A.T. Robertson, a trinitarian, said under Doubtful Imperfects: "Hence we need not insist that ἦν [en] Jo. 1:1 is strictly durative always (imperfect). It may be sometimes actually aorist [which views the whole of the verbal action as a single, unitary event] also." (A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research) (Page 883)
