NWT Hides the Divine Name as Found in W&H

One of the foremost features of the 1948 Macmillan edition of the W&H Greek text is the careful identification and indication of ?Quotations From the Old Testament.? In addition to listing these passages and phrases ?together with references to the places from which they are derived? on pages 601-618, they are ?marked by uncial [ ALL CAPITAL ] type in the text.? So, by observing where W&H used this special ?uncial? typeface, readers can easily spot OT quotations and (if they desire) look up the source in the back. This feature of the W&H text is invaluable in ?determining where the inspired Christian writers have quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures,? yet it does not appear in KIT .

Many translators, such as William F. Beck (The New Testament in the Language of Today: An American Translation), have incorporated this feature into their English translations. Why didn?t the NWT?

Could it be that KIT omits the special uncial typeface in order to omit or hide the unique, divine name of the Sovereign LORD of the universe? In the W&H text this name is identifiable in quotations by a special type. Ancient Hebrew scribes also identified this name using special typefaces in the manuscripts they produced. Modern readers of English translations such as Beck?s can also easily locate this name in the OT quotations in the NT. Readers of the NWT, however, are unaware that some uses of the distinctive name of the Supreme Deity are obscured in the translation they use.

Why was W&H not listed as a J-Document? Surely, it qualifies far more than some of those listed. The special typeface employed by W&H (but omitted in KIT) makes it easy for anyone to ?determine the identity to give to kyrios and theos, and make appropriate use of the personal name.? Consider the following quotations from the LXX:

• 2Th 1:9 ??from before the LORD and from the glory of his strength, at the time he comes??
• He 1:10 (the Father to the Son) ?You, at the beginning, O LORD, laid the foundations??
• 1P 2:3 (speaking of the rejected Stone) ?you have tasted that the LORD is kind.?
• 1P 3:15 ?But the LORD (who is Christ) you must sanctify??

The W&H text makes it clear that these are OT quotations and that LORD appears in them. If the average JW were to discover this, what might happen? If the WT translator(s) had followed the "Jehovah" translation rule and translated these quotations using ?Jehovah,? the truth would get out. They couldn?t have that! So they removed the W&H special uncial (ALL CAPITAL) typeface that identified quotations containing the divine name, thus effectively hiding the divine name from those claiming to stand for it.





Watchtower, stop hiding the name!

NWT@Cutlip.Org

--

Just make sure i understand correctly, the westcot and hort shows that the nt writers quoted ot passages pertaining to yahweh, and applied them to jesus?  If this is the case, it would be very interesting to get all of the nt vss containing the divine uncials together.

S

"The name that can be named is not the enduring and unchanging name" (I Ching).



Could it be that our Source/God is bigger than names?



Bigger and greater than the things-named -- which manifest from it?





j

Absolutely Correct!

NWT@Cutlip.Org

--

Believe in the Trinity you evil Watchtower people......or die baby!!!!!

Gumby

Hey Gumby,

You brought up Trinity, not me! I just listed some Bible verses which quote the OT and apply the Name to Jesus. You remember him? The guy with the Name Above Every Name!

Should facts be threatening? I don't see why.

--

 

This actually has nothing to do w trinity.  This is more a duality, a bilocation, bi-entity, dualist, dualism.  From a purely historical angle, i find this very interesting. 

S 

SS....quit gettin so spiritually sentimental on me ya bastard and become a bitter bible guy like me....will ya?

The guy with the Name Above Every Name!

Should facts be threatening? I don't see why.

Good point! Why don't you look up the "facts" on just WHERE this name came from and see if it didn't originate BEFORE the hebrew/jews....and had a pagan backround. His name was BELOW other gods when he first started out......he got 'bigger' as time went on Start with the "Ugarits"

Gumby

Hey gumbabble

I'm not becoming a believer or anything.  This is another nail in the wt coffin.  See?  If this is true, it means that they messed more w the bible, and are further from following it than the churches are.  It doesn't mean that the bible is true.  That's another discussion entirely. 

Hey wanna go to a catholic church?  Just kidding.

S

My lil piece of proof that they messed with the bible is John 1:1 and when you ask them about this they get all mad when they can't really explain it. John 1:1 in many other bibles refer to the Word being God. Ex. In the beginning was the Word, Word was with God, Word WAS God!....NWT says for the last part, The Word was A god. And like many people besides me says. If most of the bible (NWT) makes it very clear that Jehovah is THE ONLY TRUE GOD and then in John 1:1 is says WORD=JESUS was A god. Does that make Jesus a false god. You can't have 2 gods if only one is true. Ask them about this and they say Jesus was a lesser god. SO he still must be false if only one is true. So then they would have to rewrite the scripture to say "The Word was A LESSER GOD" but that would still make the other scriptures wrong that says Jehovah is the only true god..So then it would have to read a little something like this...The Word was  A LESSER FALSE GOD. Not in a million years would they change the bible to read that, but that's basically what they're saying with what they have written.

Just got a copy of the S.T. Byington The Bible in Living English* from Randall Watters [thanx Randy!].

  I did research on Byington and I have much respect for him as a human being as well as a translator without an agenda. Here is his version of

John 1:1

 At the first there was the Word, and the word was where God was, and the Word was God.

Can anyone give me feedback on this?

 

*I'm still trying to figure out what the WT$ is planning to do with this translation seeing that it still holds the rights but is still out of print..

gespro -maintaining...

I had ordered a book from ebay by a fellow it was called "Held in the Watchtower", well along with that book a he sent me a couple of publications about the subject here.  One called "A field Service Encounter", and one about the tetragrammaton called "The New World Translation and Hebrew Versions" Book 1 & 2".

Well I just started reading these, and was surprised that the words of Paul were ones used to refer to Yahweh in the old testement were actually used to refer to Jesus.  I had to reread several parts, and am still trying to digest this.  I was unaware of this completely.  I've been out of the JW's now for 3 years and had read alot on the WTS but this I had never heard. 

Thanks for the discussion here.  I came here immediately when I started reading to see if anyone else was aware of this imformation. 

 

Balsam

Restoration of the Original Sacred Name Bible:

If ye have tasted for yourselves that gracious is YAHVAH, Unto Whom coming near, as unto a living Stone, by men indeed rejected, but with YAHVAH chosen, held in hounour. -- 1 Peter 2:3-4

The first YAHVAH is in a quotations from Psalm 34:8. The first YAHVAH is a living Stone rejected by men but chosen by God ... the identical Stone that the builders rejected has become the main Cornerstone.

Jesus Christ is the YAHVAH rejected by men but chosen by God!

 

William F. Beck (The New Testament in the Language of Today: An American Translation):

Surely you have tasted that the LORD is good (Ps. 34:8). Come to Him. He is the living Stone whom men rejected but God selected as precious. -- 1 Peter 2:3-4 

NWT@Cutlip.Org

--

Holy Name Bible:

Here "Yahweh" appears in a quotation from Isaiah 2:10, 19, 21. The Yahweh who is coming and whose "presence" is awaited by His Saints is obviously the LORD Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ is the Yahweh whose "presence" believers await!

William F. Beck (The New Testament in the Language of Today: An American Translation):

NWT@Cutlip.Org

--

Could someone please tell me which OT scripture I Peter 3 v 15 comes from?  I have tried to find it but can't.

Thanks for an interesting thread.

laurelin inquired:

Could someone please tell me which OT scripture I Peter 3 v 15 comes from?  I have tried to find it but can't.

Thanks for an interesting thread.

dear laurelin:

The short answer is Isaiah 8:12-14. Here's a post "cut and pasted" from another thread you might want to check out.

	Jesus Christ, Jehovah's Witnesses, and the J-Documents (split 2 for 1)	10-Jul-04 07:00
	Dear Earnest, Your fourth Scripture, 1 Peter 3:14-15, needs to be viewed in the context of 1 Peter as a whole. Get out your W&H -- the real one, not the KIT. Look at 1 Peter 2:3 where W&H clearly marks this OT quotation from Psalm 34:8. They also list it in the back. Likewise you can check J20 which is Moulton's concordance available at a library near you. It will have both the Hebrew MT and the Greek LXX (numbering is 33:9 in LXX). Another interesting source is Old Testament Quotaitons in the New Testament: A Complete Survey by Gleason L. Archer & C.C. Chirichigno (Moody Bible Institute: Chicago, 1983) ISBN: 0-8024-0236-4, which on page 66-67 lists this as quotation #150 giving the MT, LXX, Gk NT, and English comments in a handy form for comparison. The WT relies on W&H and J20 al the time. So, if they agree this is a quotation and they are further supported by another book specializing in just that one thing, it's very likely a quotation. Even WT champion, Furuli admits, "[I]t is indiputable that the one referred to in 1 Peter 2:3 and 3:15 is Jesus Christ" page 197. No only is 1 Peter 2:3 a quotation, I, myself, with my own eyes, saw the tetragram in this verse in J7, J8, J13, J14, and J20.(As a rule J9 agrees with J7 and J8, but I didn't list it because I neglected to consult it.) For sure, five J-Documents have a tetragram here. Interestingly, the marvelous research staff from the WTS missed each and every one of them. No hint of any footnote appears at 1 Peter 2:3. Why? You know why! This is but another of the many NT verses that call Jesus Christ LORD (or if you prefer, "Jehovah"). The LORD of 2:3 is the Stone of 2:4 which is Jesus Christ. In an attempt at obfuscation, the WT introduced a paragraph break here which does not occur in W&H (of course, in KIT it does!) or any of the dozen English translations I spot checked (some enterprising young JW may be able to locate one if they look hard enough). In W&H, UBS, and NA Greek texts and most English translations no paragraph break appears and the thought flows right into frrom 2:3 to 2:4 -- the LORD is the Stone. In 1 Peter 2:7 the Stone metaphor continues with more OT quotations: "the Stone that the builders rejected has become the head of the corner." To use Furuli's language,  "it is indisputable" that this Stone is Jesus Christ. Yet, in 2:8 this "identical Stone" is "a Stone of stumbling and a rock-mass of offense" -- a quotation speaking of none other than the LORD of the OT in Isaiah 8:12-14 but spoke of the LORD Jesus Christ twice in 1 Peter. (See W&H page 607.)  So, the LORD is the Stone and the Stone is the LORD. Twice? Twice! Now look at 1 Peter 3:14-15. Again Peter quotes from Isaiah 8:12-14 to call Jesus Christ LORD (or "Jehovah"). But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are happy. However, the object of their fear do not you fear, neither become agitated. But sanctify the Christ as Jehovah in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone that demands of you a reason for the hope in you, but doing so together with a mild temper and deep respect. Isaiah wrote: However, the object of their fear do not you fear, neither become agitated. But Jehovah, himself, you must sanctify. Peter took up his quill and copied this line word for word from the LXX as it appears above. Then, to make sure his point was not missed, he took up his quill again and replaced one word. However, the object of their fear do not you fear, neither become agitated. But Jehovah, himself, you must sanctify. However, the object of their fear do not you fear, neither become agitated. But Jehovah (Christ) you must sanctify. J7 and  J8 clearly say, "You must sanctify Christ as Jehovah God in your hearts." (Other J-Documents my as well.) The KIT note chops the full quotation.  May good things come from God to you, NWT@Cutlip.Org --

The use of special uncial typeface to indicate quotations from the Old Testament would have been quite helpful and appropriate in the W&H Greek text of the Kingdom Interlinear Translations. However, I don't think that the reason that custom was not followed was to hide the fact that certain scriptures were quotations from the O.T. and that LORD appears in them.

If we consider the four examples that you gave we will see that not only does the NWT show they are quotations but also gives marginal reference where they come from.

2Th 1:9 ??from before the LORD and from the glory of his strength, at the time he comes?? 

The 1950 edition of NWT has a marginal note on this verse : "Isa 2:21 LXX"

The 1984 Reference NWT has a marginal note on this verse : "Isa 2:21 ftn, LXX". 

The footnote to Isa 2:21 (in the 1984 Reference NWT) reads :

"From before the fear of the Lord [Gr., Kyriou], and from the glory of his strength," LXX. [The Hebrew literally means "the splendor of his superiority".] Compare 2Th 1:9.

He 1:10 (the Father to the Son) ?You, at the beginning, O LORD, laid the foundations??

This passage is clearly a quotation as he contrasts what was said about the angels, and what was said about the Son. All the editions of the NWT (and KIT) show this as a quotation by enclosing it within quotation marks.

In both the 1950 edition of NWT and the 1984 Reference NWT it has a marginal note on this verse : "Ps 102:25"

The 1984 Reference NWT has a marginal note on Ps 102:25 : "Ps 8:3; Ps 8:6; Heb 1:10". 

1P 2:3 (speaking of the rejected Stone) ?you have tasted that the L ORD is kind.?

The 1950 edition of NWT has a marginal note on this verse : "Ps 34:8"

The 1984 Reference NWT has a marginal note on this verse : "Ps 34:8". It also has a footnote which reads :

"The Lord." Gr., ho Kyrios. In a comment on this vs F. J. A. Hort wrote in The First Epistle of St Peter, London, 1898, p.104: "In the Psalm [34:8] ho kyrios stands for Jehovah, as it very often does, the LXX inserting and omitting the article with kurios on no apparent principle. On the other hand the next verse shews St Peter to have used ho kurios in its commonest though not universal N.T. sense, of Christ. It would be rash however to conclude that he meant to identify Jehovah with Christ. No such identification can be clearly made out in the N.T. St Peter is not here making a formal quotation, but merely borrowing O.T. language, and applying it in his own manner. His use, though different from that of the Psalm, is not at variance with it, for it is through the khrestotes ["kindness"] of the Son that the khrestotes of the Father is clearly made known to Christians: 'he that hath seen me hath seen the Father.' "

The 1984 Reference NWT has a marginal note on Ps 34:8 : "Jer 31:14; 1 Pe 2:3"

1P 3:15 ?But the LORD (who is Christ) you must sanctify??

The 1950 edition of NWT has a footnote on the word LORD in this verse :

Sanctify the Christ as Lord, [Aleph]BAVgSyp; sanctify the Messiah our Lord, J18; sanctify the Lord God, Textus Receptus; sanctify Jehovah God, J7,8,12-14,16,17.

The 1984 Reference NWT has a similar footnote on the word LORD : 

"The Christ as Lord," [Aleph]ABC; TR, "the Lord God"; J7,8,11-14,16,17,24, "Jehovah God."

So, when you say regarding these verses, "The W&H text makes it clear that these are OT quotations and that LORD appears in them. If the average JW were to discover this, what might happen?", it beggars the fact that in three of the four examples the NWT makes it clear these are OT references, and in the fourth reference it clearly shows that some manuscripts and Hebrew translations apply this 'LORD' to God/Jehovah. The only reason it is a surprise to some that  NT writers quoted OT passages pertaining to Jehovah, and applied them to Jesus, is that they didn't bother to check the marginal references. It is common practice to identify God's prophets, angels and Son with Jehovah himself as he carries out his purpose vicariously. I doubt this would trouble any unitarian today anymore than it troubled the unitarian Christians in the early Church.

Having established that there was no attempt to hide these quotations in the NWT, the question still remains why the Greek text in KIT didn't follow the pattern in W&H of using a special uncial typeface for these passages. The probable reason to my mind is that the use of a different typeface is exegetical, not textual (i.e. based on the ancient manuscripts which were uncial throughout), and when you start confusing text and interpretation then you end up having 'Jehovah' in the NT and other anomalies.

Earnest

 

 I really  your humo[u]r in that one!

Earnest: when you start confusing text and interpretation then you end up having 'Jehovah' in the NT and other anomalies.

If that was your way of saying "uncle" -- great. And, if not, it was still great!

 

Keep posting,

NWT@Cutlip.Org

--

 

the reasonng bk does some tap dancing around this subject.  I no longer have one but as I recall they attempt to defend themselves by saying that in instances where OT passages that refer to Yahweh are applied to Jesus the writer was just highlighting the 'similarities between the two.'   Then reminding the reader that the NT says Jesus is the "exact representation of His very being". 

The translators of the first two translations above were able to tell this was a lenghty quotation from Psalm 102:25-27 and inserted the divine name. Evidently, the fact that in Hebrews these words are addressed by the Father to his Son caused the NWT translation "committee" to violate the "Watchtower Rule" for "Jehovah" translation. Notice the progression:

Hebrews 1:4 tells us the Son inherited the Supreme Name.

Hebrews 1:6 tells us God cammanded all angels [without exception] to worship the Son.

Hebrews 1:8 tells us the Father calls his Son "God."

Hebrews 1:10 tells us the Father calls his Son "LORD" (i.e. Jehovah).

NWT@Cutlip.Org

--