Would it be all-right with you if a translator removes "Jesus'" name completely from the New Testament and replaces it with a substitute, like "Master" throughout?
Wonderment
JoinedPosts by Wonderment
-
13
Would you be OK with someone removing "Jesus'" name from the New Testament?
by Wonderment inwould it be all-right with you if a translator removes "jesus'" name completely from the new testament and replaces it with a substitute, like "master" throughout?.
-
-
Wonderment
-
4
Revised New Jerusalem Bible
by Wonderment infollowing are three excerpts from wikipedia; liturgy.co.nz; & https://newworldtranslation.blogspot.com/2018/05/an-overview-of-revised-new-jerusalem.html hopefully, this will give you an idea of the latest translation effort of the jb.. wikipedia notes: the revised new jerusalem bible (rnjb) is an english translation of the bible published by darton, longman & todd.
the new testament and the psalms,[1] were released in february 2018,[2] with the full bible released in july 2019.
[3] it is a revision of the jerusalem bible and the new jerusalem bible done by the british biblical scholar and ampleforth abbey monk henry wansbrough.
-
-
Wonderment
Following are three excerpts from Wikipedia; liturgy.co.nz; & https://newworldtranslation.blogspot.com/2018/05/an-overview-of-revised-new-jerusalem.html Hopefully, this will give you an idea of the latest translation effort of the JB.
Wikipedia notes: The Revised New Jerusalem Bible (RNJB) is an English translation of the Bible published by Darton, Longman & Todd. The New Testament and the Psalms,[1] were released in February 2018,[2] with the full Bible released in July 2019.[3] It is a revision of the Jerusalem Bible and the New Jerusalem Bible done by the British biblical scholar and Ampleforth Abbey monk Henry Wansbrough.[4] (End of quote)
____________________________________________________________________
And https://liturgy.co.nz/the-revised-new-jerusalem-bible:
The Revised New Jerusalem Bible
The Revised New Jerusalem Bible (New Testament and Psalms
Edited By Henry Wansbrough OSB
(Darton, Longman & Todd, 768 pages)The Jerusalem Bible is an English translation of the Bible published in 1966. It is the text mostly used in Roman Catholic Masses. It was beautifully presented with wonderful notes and introductions. J. R. R. Tolkien was a contributor. It drew on the scholarship of École Biblique, and it kept a strong eye on the French La Bible de Jérusalem of 1956.
Henry Wansbrough OSB, however, contended, “Despite claims to the contrary, it is clear that the Jerusalem Bible was translated from the French, possibly with occasional glances at the Hebrew or Greek, rather than vice versa.” He edited a revision: The New Jerusalem Bible in 1985. [Thanks for the correction].
The New Revised Jerusalem Bible has come out first with the New Testament and Psalms.
The language, concepts and imagery of the original scriptures are presented more accurately by the RNJB than the colloquial approach of many other modern translations.
The message of the Bible is for all people, so care has been taken to avoid traditional male bias of the English language, while remaining faithful to the meaning of the original scriptures.
The book of Psalms is based on the text of the 2010 translation of The Revised Grail Psalms.
Ancient systems of measuring and timing have been replaced by modern, metric equivalents.
The notes, cross-references and book introductions of the JB and NJB are replaced in the RNJB by new materials which reflect the fruit of the most up-to-date and ecumenical scholarship.
I have already reviewed the The Revised Grail Psalms (here and here). I see nothing in the NRJB New Testament translation that would make me prefer it to the NRSV. On occasions when the NRSV and RNJB differ, it is the RNJB that appears to be the poor translation. If they haven’t bothered to produce a Revised New Jerusalem Bible version of the psalter, why did they produce the rest? I confess to a natural aversion to the endless iterations of English-language Bible translations. The introductions and notes may have been updated to more contemporary scholarship than the earlier Jerusalem Bible, but they are also much reduced. So what it looks like we have is a bible that is little different from the NRSV with notes little different to a good NRSV study bible.
If Roman Catholics (who are currently using the Jerusalem Bible) are working towards a new translation to use at Mass and for the Offices, I suggest and hope that – as is already the case in many places – they use the New Revised Standard Version rather than the Revised New Jerusalem Bible. I can see no significant benefits to using RNJB and lots to using NRSV.
(End of quote from website listed above.)
______________________________________________
https://newworldtranslation.blogspot.com/2018/05/an-overview-of-revised-new-jerusalem.html
Sunday, May 13, 2018
An Overview of the Revised New Jerusalem Bible 2018
This Bible was released this year (2018), and claims to be a formal equivalent (literal) Bible, it is also a gender inclusive Bible. For instance, Matthew 4:4 reads, "A human lives not on bread alone" which feels awkward to me. However, the NJB had "human being" at this verse, (the JB had the more recognizable form "man"). The RNJB is however more of a gender-inclusive Bible than the NJB. As a result, this Bible will be rejected by conservative Catholics in favor of the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition or the Douay-Rheims Bible. See my comments below on gender inclusiveness.
For those who don't know already, the RNJB is a revision of the New Jerusalem Bible which was introduced in 1985, which itself was a revision of the The Jerusalem Bible from 1966...which itself was the English version of the French La Bible de Jerusalem.
This Bible does not bear the Imprimatur and the Nihil Obstat.
The Psalms is not a revision of the previous New Jerusalem Bible, but rather, it is the Revised Grail Psalter. Hence, unlike its predecessors, the Divine Name Yahweh is substituted by LORD.
The inside cover states that this Bible is not to be sold in the United states or Canada, but I had no problem purchasing it with my Prime membership here in the US.
Here are some sample translations for comparison:
Jerusalem Bible 1966 (JB) Matthew 2:2 "We saw his star as it rose and have come to do him homage."
New Jerusalem Bible (NJB) "We saw his star as it rose and have come to do him homage."
Revised New Jerusalem Bible (RNJB) "For we saw his star at its rising and have come to worship him."
JB John 16:7 "Still, I must tell you the truth: it is for your own good that I am going because unless I go, the Advocate will not come to you"
NJB "Still, I am telling you the truth: it is for your own good that I am going, because unless I go, the Paraclete will not come to you"
RNJB "Still I am telling you to truth: it is good for you that I am going, because unless I go, the Paraclete will not come to you"
JB Hebrews 1:6 "Again, when he brings the First-born into the world, he says: Let all the angels of God worship him."
NJB "Again, when he brings the First-born into the world, he says: Let all the angels of God pay him homage."
RNJB Again, when he brings the First-born into the world, he says: Let all the angels of God worship him."
JB 1 Corinthians 13:1 "If I have all the eloquence of men or of angels, but speak without love, I am simply a gong booming or a cymbal clashing."
NJB "Though I command languages both human and angelic -- if I speak without love, I am no more than a gong booming or a cymbal clashing."
RNJB "If I speak in the tongues of human beings and of angels but do not have love, I have become a sounding bronze or a cymbal clashing."
The JB and NJB use "only son" for MONOGENHS QEOS/hUION at John 1:18 however the RNJB uses "only-begotten Son." [The better Greek texts have "God" here, not "son."]
JB Revelation 5:10 "and made them a line of kings and priests, to serve our God and to rule the world."
NJB "and made them a line of kings and priests for God, to rule the world."
RNJB "and made them a kingdom and priests for God, And they will reign on earth."
JB Acts 20:28 "Be on your guard for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you the overseers, to feed the Church of God which he bought with his own blood."
NJB "Be on your guard for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you the guardians, to feed the Church of God which he bought with the blood of his own Son."
RNJB " Be on your guard for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you the guardians, to feed the Church of God which he bought with the blood of his own Son.
JB Romans 9:5 "They are descended from the patriarchs and from their flesh and blood came Christ who is above all, God for ever blessed!"
NJB "To them belong the fathers and out of them, so far as physical descent is concerned, came Christ who is above all, God, blessed for ever."
RNJB "To them belong the fathers and from them, according to the flesh, came Christ who is above all, God be blessed for ever."
At 2 Peter 2:4, the JB and NJB have "the underworld" while the RNJB has Tartarus
JB Matthew 5:22 "...anyone who is angry with his brother will answer for it before the court; if a man calls his brother 'Fool' he will answer for it before the Sanhedrine; and if a man calls him 'Renegade' he will answer for it in hell fire."
NJB "...anyone who is angry with a brother will answer for it before the court; anyone who calls a brother "Fool" will answer for it before the Sanhedrin; and anyone who calls him "Traitor" will answer for it in hell fire."
RNJB "anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will answer for it before the court; anyone who calls a brother or sister "idiot" will answer for it before the assembly; and anyone who calls a brother or sister "fool" will answer for it in hell fire."
JB Acts 17:18 "Does this parrot know what he's talking about?"
NJB "What can this parrot mean?"
RNJB "What does this word-spinner mean?"
JB Galatians 5:12 "Tell those who are disturbing you I would like to see the knife slip."
NJB "I could wish that those who are unsettling you would go further and mutilate themselves."
RNJB "I wish that those who are unsettling you would do some cutting off."
JB 1 Corinthians 7:36 "Still, if there is anyone who feels that it would not be fair to his daughter (parthenon, virgin) to let her grow too old for marriage, and that he should do something about it, he is free to do as he likes: he is not sinning if there is a marriage."
NJB "If someone with strong passions thinks that he is behaving badly towards his fiance'e and that things should take their due course, he should follow his desires. There is no sin in it; they should marry."
RNJB "If anyone thinks he is behaving badly towards his fiance'e and he is passionate and there is no alternative, let him do what he wishes; he is not sinning - let them marry.
While the JB and NJB has "compatriots" the RNJB has "fellow-citizens" at Luke 19:14. All three Bibles have "corn-fields" at Matthew 12:1.
JB Hebrews 1:1-4 "At various times in the past and in various different ways, God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets; But in our own time, the last days, he has spoken to us through his Son, the Son that he has appointed to inherit everything and through whom he made everything there is. He is the radiant light of God’s glory and the perfect copy of his nature, sustaining the universe by his powerful command; and now that he has destroyed the defilement of sin, he has gone to take his place in heaven at the right hand of divine Majesty. So he is now as far above the angels as the title which he has inherited is higher than their own name."
NJB "At many moments in the past and by many means, God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets; but in our time, the final days, he has spoken to us in the person of his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things and through whom he made the ages. He is the reflection of God’s glory and bears the impress of God’s own being, sustaining all things by his powerful command; and now that he has purged sins away, he has taken his seat at the right hand of the divine Majesty on high. So he is now as far above the angels as the title which he has inherited is higher than their own name."
RNJB "In many ways and by many means in the past, God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us in his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things and through whom he made the ages. He is the reflection of God's glory and the imprint of God's own being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. Now that he has made purification for sins, he has taken his seat at the right hand of the Majesty on high. So he is now far above the angels, as the name which he has inherited is more excellent than theirs."
JB Matthew 1:19 "Her husband Joseph, being a man of honor and wanting to spare her publicity, decided to divorce her informally."
NJB "Her husband Joseph, being an upright man and wanting to spare her disgrace, decided to divorce her informally."
The RNJB here uses "dismiss her quietly" instead of "divorce."
The back cover states: "Ancient systems of measuring and timing have been replaced by modern, metric equivalents." However, I can still find the word "cubit" (Matt 6:27...not modern) and "mile" (Matt 5:41...not metric).
Hebrews 13:10 is used by Catholics as a defense for the Mass, however the footnote in this Bible destroys that argument with "Probably a metaphor for Christ's heavenly sacrifice rather than an Earthly eucharistic altar."
About the word MAN:
As dictionary.com states: a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex:
prehistoric man.
the human individual as representing the species, without reference to sex; the human race; humankind:
Man hopes for peace, but prepares for war.
As for the Bible:
Anthropos is a Greek word which is often meant in a gender-inclusive sense, especially in the plural. However, the use of anthropos has a masculine sense in certain contexts, and the Greek-speaking world of the early Christian era would presume that anyone who is called an anthropos is male. This may be seen in the following examples from the RSV:
Matthew 19:5 "For this reason a man (anthropos) shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'."
Matthew 19:10 "If such is the case of a man (anthropos) with his wife, it is not expedient to marry."
I Corinthians 7:1 "It is well for a man (anthropos) not to touch a woman."
Many other examples could be offered that shows that the word MAN/anthropos has masculine connotations. However, in general usage when "Man" is used in a larger sense, such as "mankind" it is already gender-neutral. (Rev. 14:4)
Conclusion: I have always been a big fan of the New Jerusalem Bible. I have a very worn out copy that I still make use of today. While I have not read the entire New Testament of the Revised New Jerusalem Bible, it is better than most modern Protestant Bibles, but so far as I can see, it is not an improvement over the New Jerusalem Bible. I will still be using my NJB for reading and studying. Posted by Heinz Schmitz at 7:07 AM Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest2 comments:
Timothy O'KeefeOctober 13, 2018 at 6:42 PMFrom the comparisons I've made, the RNJB is not a substantial improvement over the NJB, and its inclusive language is more grating. Regarding the footnotes, I consider the NJB's to be far superior and far more extensive.
ReplyRepliesHeinz SchmitzOctober 14, 2018 at 4:36 AMI agree with you. The NJB will continue to be my "go to" Bible. Since buying the RNJB a half year ago, I never really use it. In fact, I often forget that it is on my shelf.
(End of website page)
-
20
JWs reach new milestone - JW.org reaches 1,000 languages
by Wonderment inbelow is the copied page found in jw.org from nov. 4, 2019:.
the governing body is pleased to announce that a new milestone has been reached in our efforts to make disciples of people of all the nations.
jw.org now has articles, videos, and audio content available in 1,000 languages, including 100 sign languages..
-
-
Wonderment
Brothers & friends:
I can't speak for all of you, but to me the information presented on this page is significant. For one, it exposes some issues which go over the head of a lot of people. Irrespective of whether we like the WTS or not, if we are fair, we give credit where it is due, just like we also reserve the right to make constructive criticisms when the need be.
Last century, the WTS championed religious freedom in the courts worldwide, so the rest of us could gather free of harassment and persecution. We are in debt to the WTS for this. At the same time, I am sincere enough to acknowledge that while the WTS fought for religious freedom in courts on behalf of the worldwide community and its own adherents, they have failed us in the last decades in restricting our own freedom of speech within the congregation itself. That is not good! This is one big factor which explains why so many here are disenchanted (even hateful) with this organization.
That said, I must point out that one thing that stands out in this announcement, as an outside reader, is that many people all over the place love to downplay how inefficient the WT translators are, that they don't know a thing about translation, and so on. But here is the thing, while those critics amount to a big heap reaching the moon, the WTS quietly is proving them wrong. They are doing what others have a very hard time to accomplish. Do you think this is a small matter? Not me.
The WTS is providing Bible material in languages which have no printed characters and scripts. They are creating their own... true, to serve their specific interests, but one cannot overlook the fact that everyone else are likely going to benefit from their accomplishments. How significant is all this? Their efforts to provide sign language in some many languages is amazing. Below, I have put some of their statements in bold which I find particularly interesting, like this one: "In fact, many of those 1,000 languages have no other publications available on the web.”
The website offers a wealth of downloadable material in 1,000 languages. Of these, jw.org’s home page and other pages can be navigated in an unprecedented 821 languages, making it the most widely translated website in the world. Much of the translation is done by well-trained volunteers who work in some 350 remote translation offices around the world.
“Translating into and publishing in so many languages can pose special challenges,” explains Brother Izak Marais, who oversees Translation Services at the world headquarters in Warwick, New York, U.S.A. “At times we wanted to publish in a less common language, but all the characters were not available for that language. So, over the years, we have provided artwork for countless characters and font sets, allowing us to produce printed publications in hundreds of languages. Similarly, we have overcome many challenges to make our publications available in so many languages on jw.org. In fact, many of those 1,000 languages have no other publications available on the web.”
Brother Clive Martin, who oversees the MEPS Programming department added: “One challenge we have faced is how to represent an article in hundreds of languages, with different scripts and layouts, on a single website. For example, 21 of the languages we support are written from right to left. For the 100 sign languages we support, we had to create a unique design that is easy for deaf users to navigate.” (End of quote.)
There is a website here which makes its living from translating material for customers who have that need:
https://www.tomedes.com/translator-hub/most-translated-website.php
What does he say about the WT efforts? See for yourself.
Also: https://www.pangeanic.com/knowledge_center/which-is-the-most-translated-website-in-the-world/#
https://www.geekinsta.com/what-is-the-most-translated-website-in-the-world/
-
20
JWs reach new milestone - JW.org reaches 1,000 languages
by Wonderment inbelow is the copied page found in jw.org from nov. 4, 2019:.
the governing body is pleased to announce that a new milestone has been reached in our efforts to make disciples of people of all the nations.
jw.org now has articles, videos, and audio content available in 1,000 languages, including 100 sign languages..
-
-
Wonderment
Below is the copied page found in JW.org from Nov. 4, 2019:
The Governing Body is pleased to announce that a new milestone has been reached in our efforts to make disciples of people of all the nations. JW.ORG now has articles, videos, and audio content available in 1,000 languages, including 100 sign languages.
August 2010, Brother Samuel Herd, a member of the Governing Body, releasing the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures in Italian Sign Language (available on jw.org)
Brother Gerrit Lösch, a member of the Governing Body, states: “Our translation work has a long history dating back to the late 1800’s and has increased dramatically in recent years.” Brother Geoffrey Jackson, also a member of the Governing Body, adds: “It took us a little over a hundred years to reach 508 languages in January 2013. But it’s remarkable that in just under seven years we have nearly doubled our translation production—from 508 languages to 1,000.”
The website offers a wealth of downloadable material in 1,000 languages. Of these, jw.org’s home page and other pages can be navigated in an unprecedented 821 languages, making it the most widely translated website in the world. Much of the translation is done by well-trained volunteers who work in some 350 remote translation offices around the world.
“Translating into and publishing in so many languages can pose special challenges,” explains Brother Izak Marais, who oversees Translation Services at the world headquarters in Warwick, New York, U.S.A. “At times we wanted to publish in a less common language, but all the characters were not available for that language. So, over the years, we have provided artwork for countless characters and font sets, allowing us to produce printed publications in hundreds of languages. Similarly, we have overcome many challenges to make our publications available in so many languages on jw.org. In fact, many of those 1,000 languages have no other publications available on the web.”
Brother Clive Martin, who oversees the MEPS Programming department added: “One challenge we have faced is how to represent an article in hundreds of languages, with different scripts and layouts, on a single website. For example, 21 of the languages we support are written from right to left. For the 100 sign languages we support, we had to create a unique design that is easy for deaf users to navigate.”
Commercial websites usually limit their efforts to languages that will be significantly profitable. For Jehovah’s Witnesses, though, profit is not our motive. Our goal is to spread the Bible’s message to all who are eager to hear it in a simple and appealing way.
We praise and honor Jehovah for blessing our diligent efforts to “make disciples of people of all the nations.” We trust that until Jehovah says the work is done, he will continue to grant us the power and resources needed to share the Kingdom message with honesthearted ones worldwide.—Matthew 28:19, 20.
-
-
-
Wonderment
Hey guys, don't be so hard on scholar. A theological viewpoint cannot be solved solely on a Ph.D.
For instance, the NASB, a translation well-respected among Evangelicals presents Jesus at John 8.58 saying, "I am." On the other hand, James Moffatt translates these very words as, "I have been." No one will dispute the academical background of either the NASB Committee, or Moffatt's. The translators of both have Ph. D degrees. Who is right?
Look at the clause in Jn 8.58 again: "BEFORE Abraham was born, I am." Who of us would say in proper English, "Before my son was born, I study parenting."
Interestingly, the NASB early versions had a marginal note for the text conceding that "I have been" was a valid rendering. Did the scholar in the video reveal this? Why did he hide this information from his viewers? It is not only Moffatt who saw a problem in the traditional translation of this verse. More recently, The Eastern / Greek Orthodox New Testament rendered this verse as "I am." The translator believes in the Trinity, so he sets out to make a connection between Jn. 8.58 and Isaiah 41.4 & 46.4. He believes that the name YHWH is applied to Jesus in various places. Nevertheless, he concludes his footnote with these words:
"Apart from these theological considerations, this construction is also fairly idiomatic (John 14:9; 15:27) and could be properly translated as ‘I have been [in existence] before Abraham was [even] born.’ -- See also 9:9 and compare with Micah 5:2," (Brackets his. Emphasis mine.)
We can see then, that theology drove this translator to render the verse as "I am," since he himself acknowledged that there in the text is the presence of an idiomatic clause... a present tense used with a past expression. Other translators have done the same thing here. Not disclosing this fact is dishonest.
The same thing can be said of the other points of discussion in the video. It is up to us to decide which interpretation makes more sense. I respect both scholar, and the guy of the video. But the video scholar kept a lot of things to himself.
-
99
Cite one scripture in the N.T. that chargers Christians to be witnesses of / for Jehovah.....Not one.using K.I ./ WTB&TS
by smiddy3 ini think the wtb&ts publication titled "the kingdom interlinear of the christian greek scriptures" speaks for itself.. the word for word translation of the greek into english.. that publication does not even contain the name or word jehovah either in hebrew letters or greek letters anywhere in the word for word texts.. their is not one scripture in the n.t.
where christians ,followers of jesus christ are instructed to be witnesses of jehovah ,however there are something like twenty scriptures that explicitly state followers of jesus christ are to be witnesses of, for, and about jesus...
-
-
Wonderment
Vanderhoven7: "I would say that the focus of the New Testament is essentially on Jesus Christ."
Essentially, yes, but there are numerous NT statements (as SBF indicated) that would never make sense unless we accept the Jewish background pointing to the Messiah. These point to Jesus being sent by the almighty Jewish God to save the world. (John 3.16) Jesus was to become the "mediator" between God and humankind, not to replace God. (1 Tim. 2.5) Even when Jesus birth was announced, the message was: "He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David." (Luke 1.32, ESV) Although Jesus was bound to receive the utmost attention, he still would not be "the Most High." People of the nations would follow his steps in the name of the Father. All this focus on Jesus Christ happened to the ultimate glory of his Father. (Phl. 2.11)
Vanderhoven7: "I believe that not only is the New Testament Christocentric, but so is the Old Testament."
Sorry, I can not agree with this statement. A few hundred prophecies in the OT pointing to Jesus as the world savior, the Messiah, sent by God, does not result in him receiving more importance than YHWH, whose name appears nearly 7.000 times. (Ps. 83.18) "The nations shall know that I am Jehovah"... over 60x in Ezequiel alone. In the book of Psalms, thousands of references lead us to the almighty God, Jehovah. Christ is addressed in the book prophetically dozens of times, compared to the rest pointing to the universal Father.
Vanderhoven 7: It is not a matter of where we put the emphasis...but where God puts the emphasis.
One thing that people often overlook is that the Jewish people ALREADY were worshipers of God YHWH. They did not need convincing in NT times that God the Father was the Almighty. They were plenty aware of that. But what was the thing missing from the Jewish culture? Assimilating Jesus Christ in their worship schedules under the new arrangement. That's what! Jews of the 1st century did not accept Jesus as their Christ because they were too busy looking for someone to free them from the claws of the Roman empire. Jesus did not solve their problem right away. Actually, Jesus showed no interest in Roman politics. He only talked about God's promises though Him into the FUTURE. So they concluded that Jesus was not their Messiah.
Out of keeping with God's promise to Abraham, there was an urgent need for Jews to open their minds and souls so they could now appreciate what God was doing for them by means of Jesus Christ. If they failed to accept Jesus as God's agent and savior in this new arrangement, they were doomed for destruction. So God put their Jewish lives on the pendant of Jesus' sacrifice. The emphasis was now to bring out the importance to embrace Jesus Christ, and doing so would please the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Repetition was necessary, since Jews were not accustomed to worship their God through a mediator. (John 14.6) In all, we need to look at the New Testament, not through later trinitarian philosophy, but through the OT prophecies leading to God's envoy to save the world.
-
99
Cite one scripture in the N.T. that chargers Christians to be witnesses of / for Jehovah.....Not one.using K.I ./ WTB&TS
by smiddy3 ini think the wtb&ts publication titled "the kingdom interlinear of the christian greek scriptures" speaks for itself.. the word for word translation of the greek into english.. that publication does not even contain the name or word jehovah either in hebrew letters or greek letters anywhere in the word for word texts.. their is not one scripture in the n.t.
where christians ,followers of jesus christ are instructed to be witnesses of jehovah ,however there are something like twenty scriptures that explicitly state followers of jesus christ are to be witnesses of, for, and about jesus...
-
-
Wonderment
The name of God appears nearly 7.000 times in the Hebrew canon. The name of Jesus appears much less than that in the NT. So, numerically, the name of God is of no less importance than the name of Jesus.
Tradition has it that because the exact pronunciation of the name of God (YHWH) is unknown, the name has lost its original importance within the Jewish world. The name of Jesus has taken over the Hebrew tetragramaton in relevance, so it seems.
Now, have you ever wondered if we can be certain how Jesus' name was pronounced 2.000 years ago? I don't think we can say with certainty how Jesus' name was pronounced in Ancient Greek, even though the Greek text SHOWS the vowels used in his name originally. There is even uncertainty how those vowels were originally accented.
Modern Greek is pronounced somewhat differently than Ancient Greek, which means that Greek Christians today may pronounce Jesus' name not EXACTLY as ancients did. Greeks talk about the "reconstruction" of Attic Greek (The Reuchlinian and Erasmian efforts come to mind).
Further, Christians of Germany, France, Italy, Portugal, Spain and a host of other countries don't even bother to do a search in order to ascertain the original pronunciation of Jesus' name. If they did, they will find, that everybody pronounces Jesus' name differently. In fact it is also a futile effort to make everyone pronounce the Hebrew name for Jesus for the majority of Christians today, even if we were certain of the 1st Century Hebrew pronunciation.
What this simply means is that all this NOISE about whether YHWH stands for Jehovah, Yahweh, IAOE, etc. is nonsensical. You will grow gray hairs before you find the true pronunciation of YHWH, or even Jesus name. Oh, you may say, "Wait, we have an idea of how Jesus' name was pronounced because vowels were used in the name."
It does not matter. In the real world, EVERYONE pronounces the name of Jehovah, Jesus and a host of other biblical names differently. If salvation depended on this, none of us had a chance.
What is important is to use the most common pronunciation for these names in our language, exactly as Bible translator Steven T. Byington stated in the Foreword of his version. We may lose favor before Jehovah or Jesus if we fail to acknowledge that Jesus is the way to the Father. (John 14.6) Accepting Jesus is not enough. We have to accept his Father equally as well. (John 5.23) Interestingly, almost every religion gets the simple message of John 3.16 wrong. Some worship only Jehovah and ignore Jesus in their lives. Others focus entirely on Jesus, and dismiss the fact that Jesus said that his Father was GREATER than him. And that his Father was his God. (John 20.17) As stated by a few others, by accepting the NT invitation for Christians to become Jesus' Witnesses, we become Witnesses of Jesus' Father as well. One cannot separate one thing from the other. It was the Father who sent Jesus, his Son, to do the Father's wil as his representative. This concept is repeated time and again throughout the Gospel of John, yet some surfers here seem to ignore this altogether.
Anything less or more is downright lack of basic factual knowledge of language differences, or hypocrisy.
Take your pick!
-
37
How Long Did It Take To Finally Leave The Organization Once You Realized It Was Really Not The Truth?
by minimus init actually took me a few years to finally leave the organization so i was mentally out for a while before i simply stopped all meetings altogether.. how long did it take you to finally make the break?
?.
-
-
Wonderment
blondie: "I left the same day and never went back. Right in the middle of the first day of a circuit assembly. No meetings, assemblies, conventions, memorials, weddings, receptions, funerals, visitation, special events, etc. I have never regretted it. That was 20 years ago."
Was there any particular issue that affected you the most right before your exit?
-
99
Cite one scripture in the N.T. that chargers Christians to be witnesses of / for Jehovah.....Not one.using K.I ./ WTB&TS
by smiddy3 ini think the wtb&ts publication titled "the kingdom interlinear of the christian greek scriptures" speaks for itself.. the word for word translation of the greek into english.. that publication does not even contain the name or word jehovah either in hebrew letters or greek letters anywhere in the word for word texts.. their is not one scripture in the n.t.
where christians ,followers of jesus christ are instructed to be witnesses of jehovah ,however there are something like twenty scriptures that explicitly state followers of jesus christ are to be witnesses of, for, and about jesus...
-
-
Wonderment
The tendency for centuries has been to read Scriptures through modern trinitarian spectacles. Why bring this up?
Well, most people see Christ being emphasized throughout the New Testament, including those Scriptures which show his followers were to be his Witnesses. There is no denying that. Jehovah's Witnesses should be made aware of this.
On the other hand, the Christian Scriptures are a continuation of the Hebrew Scriptures, not a replacement of it.
The Old Testament extolled the name of "Jehovah" over all others, and this was fitting under the Jewish concept. Nonetheless, the OT mentioned prophecies that in due time there would be a ‘Sent One’ from God to bring prosperity to all of earth's inhabitants, such as this one in Ge. 22:18. "And by means of your offspring all nations of the earth
will obtain a blessing for themselves because you have listened to my voice.’” Hundreds of such prophecies made their way into Scriptures foretelling of the time where ‘the Savior of the world’ would show up. After nearly two thousand years after God's promise to Abraham, the Messiah thus appeared. The Jewish people were monotheists, and were accustomed for centuries to the practice of worshiping the one God of the universe, YHWH.Would it be easy for them to now incorporate Jesus the Messiah in their lives? Not really. The Jews had difficulty dropping the old customs of worship in a physical temple, circumcision, Jewish feasts, the Sabbath, and many other Jewish practices. The book of Romans, Galatians. Ephesians, Hebrews, etc. give testimony to this fact.
Hence, it was necessary to repeat time and again how important was Christ now in their lives. Salvation depended upon such acceptance. No easy task for traditional Jews. Jesus thus said: "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
Since the Trinity became established in people's mind, traditional believers ignore the Father, and focus almost entirely on the Son. The many differences found in hundreds of manuscripts reveal the struggle people of that time had between the old Jewish belief of the Father as God, and the philosophical trinitarian belief (usually with Jesus at the top in relevance) of later times.
Thus, it was expected that Christ would receive the spotlight for God's followers. John 3.16 shows that belief in Christ is essential for a Christian. The thing is that the Father was never far away when Christ was to be honored. This is so because the Son was sent as God's representative. The Son was never to replace the Father altogether. The God and Jesus worship pattern was now the new norm. The Jews were already ‘Jehovah's witnesses’ in a sense (not in the WT sense), but now they needed to be ‘Jesus' witnesses’ (but not in the trinitarian sense). To reject Jesus is to reject his Father who sent him.
John chapter eight shows that Jesus was fully dependent on the Father. A Christian has to accept and honor both the Father and his Son, Jesus Christ, equally within the new Christian concept. The Trinity didn't help the people at all, it made matters worse by pushing Greek concepts within the Christian's mold of thinking.
-
52
Ruin those Ruining th Earth
by peacefulpete init has been mentioned before but since we have been discussing environmental issues on another thread, i thought it might be timely to discuss rev 11:18 which has recently become a popular text for those christians concerned about environmental threats of pollution and climate change.
is this passage being interpreted correctly?
did the writer somehow anticipate the modern environmental situation, or did he intend something more in keeping with the bible's general concerns of morality and sin?.
-
-
Wonderment
Matijevic: "About rev 11:18 διαφθείραι=aorist infinitive active, means past tense!"
Please recheck your favorite resource for this statement.
In .... infinitives... the aorist does not tell us the time at which the action happened." (Oxford Grammar of Classical Greek, p. 61. Bold letters added. )
Thus, the context must decide translation. The Greek-English Interlinear ESV New Testament gives the following gloss for διαφθείραι: "to destroy thoroughly."
