• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why do Jehovah's Witnesses change the meaning of John 10:17-18?From the kings james one?

Frank Goad

Well-Known Member
Why do Jehovah's Witnesses change the meaning of John 10:17-18?From the king james one?I think the king james one is right.And the Jehovah's Witness one is wrong.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Why do Jehovah's Witnesses change the meaning of John 10:17-18?From the king james one?I think the king james one is right.And the Jehovah's Witness one is wrong.
What does it say in their version?
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
KJV
17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

JW
17 This is why the Father loves me, because I surrender my life, so that I may receive it again.
18No man takes it away from me, but I surrender it of my own initiative. I have authority to surrender it, and I have authority to receive it again. This commandment I received from my Father.”

There are many translations that say things differently and so I study to see how they stack up.

The difference I do see is: "my" Father vs "the" Father. I think "my" is more accurate.

Although "surrender" my life does have have an understanding as he surrendered to the Father's will, I think "lay down" is still better because it has a sense of authority of his own power and capacity.

Of course the last sentence is the same.

I do this with other version to get a better feel of what was actually said (also looking at the greek on some words)
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Why do Jehovah's Witnesses change the meaning of John 10:17-18?From the king james one?I think the king james one is right.And the Jehovah's Witness one is wrong.
The JWs change the meaning? Where, and from what?
Could you point out where it is different from this.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
KJV
17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

JW
17 This is why the Father loves me, because I surrender my life, so that I may receive it again.
18No man takes it away from me, but I surrender it of my own initiative. I have authority to surrender it, and I have authority to receive it again. This commandment I received from my Father.”

There are many translations that say things differently and so I study to see how they stack up.

The difference I do see is: "my" Father vs "the" Father. I think "my" is more accurate.

Although "surrender" my life does have have an understanding as he surrendered to the Father's will, I think "lay down" is still better because it has a sense of authority of his own power and capacity.

Of course the last sentence is the same.

I do this with other version to get a better feel of what was actually said (also looking at the greek on some words)
If the sentence was originally "This commandment, I receive from the father.", replacing 'the', with 'my', would be to change the word, even though it is still correct context wise.
However, the original reads... ""This commandment, I receive from the father of me." Using 'my father', is the shorter way of saying 'the father of me'..
Two words less. ;)
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Why do Jehovah's Witnesses change the meaning of John 10:17-18?From the king james one?I think the king james one is right.And the Jehovah's Witness one is wrong.
It doesn't matter, as a translation can not convey the original meaning. It can only at best approximate it and sometimes mangle it. Improving a translation is like trying to improve a race car. To improve one aspect you must give up another, because there are limitations to the amount of meaning which can pass through the translation.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Why do Jehovah's Witnesses change the meaning of John 10:17-18?From the king james one?I think the king james one is right.And the Jehovah's Witness one is wrong.
It's important to note that the KJV is not the original Bible, so JWs cannot change its meaning.
The NWT is translated from the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, and not from the KJV, or any other translation.
 
Last edited:

Frank Goad

Well-Known Member
It's important to note that the KJV is not the original Bible, so JWs cannot change it's meaning.
The NWT is translated from the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, and not from the KJV, or any other translation.

Sorry.I thought the KJV bible was the original bible.:)Personally I think it is the best translation for John 10:17-18.But that is just me.:)
 

Nimos

Well-Known Member
Why do Jehovah's Witnesses change the meaning of John 10:17-18?From the king james one?I think the king james one is right.And the Jehovah's Witness one is wrong.
Don't really think that is a huge issue? isn't the meaning the same?

This is the verse from different bibles.

KJV
17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.

ISV
17 This is why the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it back again.

ESV
17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Sorry.I thought the KJV bible was the original bible.:)Personally I think it is the best translation for John 10:17-18.But that is just me.:)
What I am trying to understand is why do you think it's the best, and what difference do you see between that and the one you referenced here?
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
The difference I do see is: "my" Father vs "the" Father. I think "my" is more accurate
Yes, true

Although "surrender" my life does have have an understanding as he surrendered to the Father's will, I think "lay down" is still better because it has a sense of authority of his own power and capacity
Yes, true

Of course the last sentence is the same
And confirming both your explanations

This commandment I received from my Father
Beautiful, I love this
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Why do Jehovah's Witnesses change the meaning of John 10:17-18?From the king james one?I think the king james one is right.And the Jehovah's Witness one is wrong.

John 10:18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of My own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from My Father."

It is different from most of these translations.
The JWs don't like the idea that Jesus was conscious and alive in the Spirit after death and able to "take" back His life. They prefer the passive, "receive" back.
Whether that is accurate I don't know.
I don't think that anyone needs any authority to be resurrected by God however, but someone would need authority to just go and get back into their body and raise it up again.
The scriptures have Jesus and the Father and the Spirit as active at the resurrection but the reference given in the New World Translation shows only one scripture of God raising someone and of course this is enough for a JW who may not notice other scriptures.
But Jesus was involved in raise up His body. (see John 2:19-22)
 

Frank Goad

Well-Known Member
What I am trying to understand is why do you think it's the best, and what difference do you see between that and the one you referenced here?

I like the kjv better.Because it looks like Jesus was alive in spirit form when he died.While the Jehovah's Witness doesn't.But that is just me.:)Also it's because I am Methodist.
 
Last edited:

nPeace

Veteran Member
I like the kjv better.Because it looks like Jesus was alive in spirit form when he died.While the Jehovah's Witness doesn't.But that is just me.:)Also it's because I am Methodist.
Oh, so even though the translations are no different in that text, Note: You haven't up till now pointed out the difference, you just like the KJV better, because you want to be against Jehovah's Witnesses. :) ...because you want to be Methodist. :)

I was going to tell you don't mind the belief in post #13, but I changed my mind. :D
 

Frank Goad

Well-Known Member
Oh, so even though the translations are no different in that text, Note: You haven't up till now pointed out the difference, you just like the KJV better, because you want to be against Jehovah's Witnesses. :) ...because you want to be Methodist. :)

I was going to tell you don't mind the belief in post #13, but I changed my mind. :D

KJV
17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

JW
17 This is why the Father loves me, because I surrender my life, so that I may receive it again.
18No man takes it away from me, but I surrender it of my own initiative. I have authority to surrender it, and I have authority to receive it again. This commandment I received from my Father.”

If you read verses 17 and 18 in the kjv.And the jw one.The wording is not the same.I like how they handled it better in the kjv.:)

I got the bible verses comparison from post 4.
 
Last edited:

nPeace

Veteran Member
KJV
17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

JW
17 This is why the Father loves me, because I surrender my life, so that I may receive it again.
18No man takes it away from me, but I surrender it of my own initiative. I have authority to surrender it, and I have authority to receive it again. This commandment I received from my Father.”

If you read verses 17 and 18 in the kjv.And the jw one.The wording is not the same.I like how they handled it better in the kjv.:)

I got the bible verses comparison from post 4.
Ah. I now get it. Sorry. I zeroed in on verse 18, but I think you are focused on verse 17. Am I right?

A. that I might take it again.
B. that I may receive it again.

Got yah, now. Thank you. :)

Take a look here, and tell me which translation is wrong, if any.
Then please please please answer this question.
According to Acts of the Apostles 2:24; Acts of the Apostles 2:32; Acts of the Apostles 3:15; Acts of the Apostles 13:34; Romans 4:24; 1 Corinthians 6:14; Colossians 2:12; Hebrews 13:20, did God raise up Jesus from the dead, or did Jesus raise himself up from the dead?
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
All translations differ.

The J W's version conforms to their teachings and beliefs.
Why would anyone expect any different.
Because to believe that to be the case, would be to take a closed minded and biased approach without really looking at the facts, and the facts show different.
 

Frank Goad

Well-Known Member
Ah. I now get it. Sorry. I zeroed in on verse 18, but I think you are focused on verse 17. Am I right?

A. that I might take it again.
B. that I may receive it again.

Got yah, now. Thank you. :)

Take a look here, and tell me which translation is wrong, if any.
Then please please please answer this question.
According to Acts of the Apostles 2:24; Acts of the Apostles 2:32; Acts of the Apostles 3:15; Acts of the Apostles 13:34; Romans 4:24; 1 Corinthians 6:14; Colossians 2:12; Hebrews 13:20, did God raise up Jesus from the dead, or did Jesus raise himself up from the dead?

I think.When it says raised up.It is his body.And not his spirit form.:)
 
Top