1. 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!

The New World Tranlsation of the Holy Scriptures

Discussion in 'Biblical Debates' started by dan, Jul 19, 2005.

  1. dan

    dan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Messages:
    1,464
    Ratings:
    +96
    What are your thoughts? Do you like it? Do you dislike it? Why? How? When?!?!
     
  2. James the Persian

    James the Persian Dreptcredincios Crestin

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Messages:
    4,416
    Ratings:
    +656
    My thoughts? It's either poorly translated by people relatively unfamiliar with Koine or deliberately mistranslated to support an agenda. I know which one I believe, but I'll let you decide for yourself.

    James
     
  3. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    i like it because its not clouded by the traditions of man
     
  4. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,177
    Ratings:
    +2,930
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    I have not seen it, and not likely to. I already have too many versions.
    Of those I have I prefer the king James version, perhaps because the language is so nice.

    Terry
    _________________________
    Amen! Truly I say to you: Gather in my name. I am with you.
     
  5. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    I don't particularly mind it. It is not my favourite Bible (My favourite bing the LDS KJV because of the foot-notes and becuase KJV English is just enjoyable and funny), and it isn't a particularly interesting version. I guess it's pretty accurate to the old texts, though.
     
  6. Scott1

    Scott1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,303
    Ratings:
    +950
    Same is true for me....
     
  7. niamhwitch

    niamhwitch Celtic Faery Wiccan )O(

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    237
    Ratings:
    +23
    TNWT is the one I grew up with. Its the bible that the Jehovah's Witnesses use and I was raised in a JW household... I wouldnt know if it is more or less correct than any other bible (as far as translation goes). I just know that thats the one I was used to.
     
  8. dhiannian

    dhiannian New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    13
    Ratings:
    +2
    Franz, Frederick who was probably the only one of the 6 "translators" to have actually translated.
    His HIGHLY QUALIFIED stats are;
    21 semester hours of classical Greek, some Latin.

    Partially completed a two-hour survey course in Biblical Greek in junior year.

    Self-taught in Spanish, biblical Hebrew and Aramaic.

    Notice classical Greek not biblical.

    The other 5 had no training in biblical language.
    In 1954 in Scotland he failed a simple test on his Hebrew skills,
    http://www.contenderministries.org/jehovahswitnesses/nwt.php
     
  9. dhiannian

    dhiannian New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    13
    Ratings:
    +2
    More of a paraphrase of the KJV 1611, but with some interesting changes.
    Even more peculiar, these changes often countradict themselves in other parts.
    Check it out.
    Don't take anyone elses word for it, compare, that's when you discover the truth.
     
  10. Quiddity

    Quiddity UndertheInfluenceofGiants

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    19,626
    Ratings:
    +1,275
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Is this the JW version? If it is then it's most likely full of JW traditions...;)

    ~Victor
     
  11. Steve

    Steve Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    500
    Ratings:
    +60
    I wouldnt choose this translation as it has been Translated with an agenda in mind, mainly used by the JW's it commonly mistranslates when the correct translation would contradict their agenda.

    For eg John 1:1 - http://www.equip.org/free/DJ520.htm
     
  12. Steve

    Steve Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    500
    Ratings:
    +60
    Heres another example...



    Heb. 1:8 - This is a verse where God the Father is calling Jesus God: "But about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.'" Since the Jehovah's Witnesses don't agree with that they have changed the Bible, yet again, to agree with their theology. They have translated the verse as "...God is your throne..." The problem with the Jehovah's Witness translation is that this verse is a quote from Psalm 45:6 which, from the Hebrew, can only be translated as "...Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom." To justify their New Testament translation they actually changed the OT verse to agree with their theology, too!

    this eg and more from here

    And this link shows clearly the bias when translating the Greek word "proskuneo" - here
     
  13. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    what traditions would that be ?:)
     
  14. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    Hebrews​
    1:8:







    RS​
    reads: "Of the Son he says, ‘Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.’" (KJ, NE, TEV, Dy, JB, NAB have similar renderings.) However, NW reads: "But with reference to the Son: ‘God is your throne forever and ever.’" (AT, Mo, TC, By convey the same idea.)




    Which rendering is harmonious with the context? The preceding verses say that God is speaking, not that he is being addressed; and the following verse uses the expression "God, thy God," showing that the one addressed is not the Most High God but is a worshiper of that God. Hebrews 1:8 quotes from Psalm 45:6, which originally was addressed to a human king of Israel. Obviously, the Bible writer of this psalm did not think that this human king was Almighty God. Rather, Psalm 45:6, in RS, reads "Your divine throne." (NE says, "Your throne is like God’s throne." JP [verse 7]: "Thy throne given of God.") Solomon, who was possibly the king originally addressed in Psalm 45, was said to sit "upon Jehovah’s throne." (1 Chron. 29:23, NW) In harmony with the fact that God is the "throne," or Source and Upholder of Christ’s kingship, Daniel 7:13, 14 and Luke 1:32 show that God confers such authority on him.​

    Hebrews 1:8, 9 quotes from Psalm 45:6, 7, concerning which the Bible scholar B. F. Westcott states: "The LXX. admits of two renderings: [ho the·os´] can be taken as a vocative in both cases (Thy throne, O God, . . . therefore, O God, Thy God . . . ) or it can be taken as the subject (or the predicate) in the first case (God is Thy throne, or Thy throne is God . . . ), and in apposition to [ho the·os´ sou] in the second case (Therefore God, even Thy God . . . ). . . . It is scarcely possible that [’Elo·him´] in the original can be addressed to the king. The presumption therefore is against the belief that [ho the·os´] is a vocative in the LXX. Thus on the whole it seems best to adopt in the first clause the rendering: God is Thy throne (or, Thy throne is God), that is ‘Thy kingdom is founded upon God, the immovable Rock.’"—The Epistle to the Hebrews (London, 1889), pp. 25, 26............so as can be seen the NWT is a very accurate translation always wanting the pure word of truth to be made known

     
  15. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    yes i agree its always best to not take others word for it , its best to discover the truth for ourselves:)
     
  16. Steve

    Steve Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    500
    Ratings:
    +60
    http://www.carm.org/jw/heb1_8.htm Deals specifically with your points just raised.


    .... the context of this verse in Psalm 45 is dealing with a king which would make one wonder why he would be addressed as God. But, it is not uncommon for NT writers to take a verse in the OT that seemingly deals with one subject and apply it to another. They knew something we didn't. In fact, in Ezekiel 28:12-17 is a section that deals with the fall of the devil. Verse 13 says describes how he was in the garden of Eden. Verse 14 says he was the anointed cherub, (v. 15), etc. But the context of this section begins with an address to the king of Tyre (v. 12). Yet, right after Ezekiel is told to write to the King of Tyre he then goes on to describe what the great majority of theologians agree with is a description of the devil's fall. So, we need to look at the context that the writer of Hebrews put Psalm 45:6 into. He addressed it to Jesus. Therefore, Psalm 45 is a Messianic Psalm and must in interpreted in light of the NT, not the other way around.
    Nevertheless, the context of this verse follows:

    "For to which of the angels did He ever say, "Thou are My son, Today I have begotten Thee"? And again, "I will be a Father to Him, and He shall be a Son to Me"? 6And when he again brings the first-born into the world, He says, "And let all the angels of God worship Him." 7And of the angels He says "Who makes His angels winds, and His ministers a flame of fire." 8But of the Son He says, "Thy Throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom, 9Thou hast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above Thy companions. 10And, "Thou, Lord, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of Thy hands; 11They will perish, but though remainest...." (Heb. 1:5-11).

    To say "God is your throne" doesn't make sense. What does it mean to say, "But to which of the angels did he say, God is your throne." What would that mean? Is God, Jesus' throne? God alone is on His throne and He isn't a throne for anyone else.
    Also worth noting here is verse 10: "Thou, Lord, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of Thy hands..." This is a quote from Psalm 102:24-25 which says, "I say, 'O my God, do not take me away in the midst of my days, Thy years are throughout all generations. 25Of old Thou didst found the earth; And the heavens are the work of Thy hands.'" Clearly, God is the one being addressed in Psalm 102. It is God who laid the foundations of the earth. Yet, in Heb. 1:10, Jesus is called 'Lord' and is said to be the one who laid the foundation of the earth. This becomes even more interesting when we note that in Isaiah 44:24 it says, "Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, and the one who formed you from the womb, "I, the Lord, am the maker of all things, Stretching out the heavens by Myself, And spreading out the earth all alone." If God was laying the foundations of the earth alone, that would mean that either Jesus has to be God, second person of the trinity, who laid the foundation the same as YHWH did, or we have a contradiction in the Bible. Clearly this section of Hebrews is proclaiming that Jesus is God. Therefore, contextually, it is best to translate Heb. 1:8 as, "Thy Throne, O God. . ." and the Father call Jesus God.


    The Watchtower organization denies that Jesus is God. Therefore, it cannot permit any verses in the Bible to even hint that Jesus is God. That is why they choose a translation that does not best fit the context or overall theology of the Bible.


     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
    I am obviously in good company, Scott1, Terry; The truth is that I am fairly new to the Bible.

    From what I know. The KJV is the 'accepted' version and base for us to work on - I am not going to muddy the waters by trying another 'brand':)
     
  18. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    so ,can i ask you steve,who do you think it is that is giving Jesus the aurthority to sit on the throne

    (Matthew 28:18) And Jesus approached and spoke to them, saying: "All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth.​


    (Acts 2:30) Therefore, because he was a prophet and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath that he would seat one from the fruitage of his loins upon his throne,​


    (Revelation 3:21) To the one that conquers I will grant to sit down with me on my throne, even as I conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.



    Is​
    Jesus the "God" referred to at Hebrews 1:8?





    No. The weight of the evidence indicates that it is Jehovah. According to the New World Translation, Hebrews 1:8 says: "But with reference to the Son: ‘God is your [the Son’s] throne forever and ever.’" This shows that Jesus’ throne, his office or authority as a sovereign, has its source in Jehovah the Almighty God.​

    However, believers in the Trinity prefer the Authorized Version, or King James Version, which renders Hebrews 1:8 this way: "But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever." Thus, they feel that Jesus is shown to be the same as Almighty God. Why is this not correct?​

    First, note the context. In many translations, either in the main text or in the margin, Hebrews 1:9 reads, "God, your God, anointed you." This makes it clear that the one addressed in verse eight is not God, but one who worships God and is anointed by him.​

    Secondly, it should be noted that Hebrews 1:8, 9 is a quotation from Psalm 45:6, 7, which originally was addressed to a human king of Israel. Surely the writer of this psalm did not think that this human king was Almighty God and neither did the writer of Hebrews think that Jesus was Almighty God. Commenting on this, scholar B. F. Westcott said: "It is scarcely possible that אלוהים [‘Elo·him´, "God"] in the original can be addressed to the king. . . . Thus on the whole it seems best to adopt in the first clause the rendering: God is Thy throne (or, Thy throne is God), that is ‘Thy kingdom is founded upon God.’"​

    With good reason, therefore, the New World Translation and a number of other translations render Hebrews 1:8 as, "God is your throne." (See An American Translation, Moffatt; also the marginal reading in American Standard Version, Revised Standard Version and The New English Bible.) This makes it clear that the "Son," Jesus Christ, has a God who is higher than he is.​

     
  19. may

    may Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    3,665
    Ratings:
    +110
    maybe ,you may find that rather than muddying the waters it will become clearerand then end up as pure water of truth:)
     
  20. Original Freak

    Original Freak I am the ORIGINAL Freak

    Joined:
    May 6, 2005
    Messages:
    878
    Ratings:
    +109
    So not only do you have to pick the right religion now but you have to pick the right version of the holy text that religion uses? I'm sorry, but I think the odds are against everyone from actually finding the right combination.
     
Loading...