Hi, again, folks (I've posted 2 times today). My sister (who is also studying with the JW's) found this website. It says it isn't affiliated with any specific religion, but she said that many of the explanations are right in line with the JW's take on things. Do you folks know if this site is really objective? Thanks.
2001translation.com Website?
by lynnmelo 4 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Narkissos
Just had a look at www.2001translation.com
It seems to be heavily influenced by the NWT, especially on inserting "[Jehovah]" into the NT. They do so for instance in Romans 10:13, which is stupid -- but not in 14:7ff (contrary to the NWT).
One funny thing is that they claim to base their OT (which they call "Hebrew Scriptures") on the Greek Septuagint. I wonder how far they will keep it when they reach Jeremiah where the LXX is very different from the Hebrew.
-
Disillusioned JW
Despite what Narkissos posted 16 years ago I notice the following.
Currently https://2001translation.org/ they refer to the OT as "Jewish Era" instead of as "Hebrew Scriptures". The https://2001translation.org/about/faq says "Also, we found the Greek Septuagint text to be possibly more reliable than the Hebrew Masoretic text used by most Bibles. Yet, there are very few English translations of the Greek Septuagint. This translation provides a public service by providing a modern translation from the Greek. Further, much of the Christian Era books may have been originally written in Aramaic (or were at least very early translations). This is important because the Aramaic text fixes some problems and even solves some mysteries, yet most Bibles pay little attention to it."
https://2001translation.org/read/jeremiah says "Septuagint text: This book may read differently to what you’ll see in other Bibles. Why? We use the much older Greek Septuagint manuscripts which we believe are more authentic. These were the manuscripts used by many 1st-century Christians, including the Apostles. Our translation is created by volunteers, and we are always correcting and refining the text. Learn what [brackets] and other insertions mean."
https://2001translation.org/about/divine-name-in-new-testament mentions every place where the translation uses Jehovah, and it says their basis for each usage, and it does not mention Romans 10:13 as being a place where the name Jehovah is used. At https://2001translation.org/read/romans in Romans 10:13 it says "Therefore, everyone that calls on the name of the Lord will be saved!"
https://2001translation.org/about/divine-name-in-new-testament makes a very strong argument for their use of the name Jehovah in the NT. More than 12 years I was wondering if there could be a basis for use of the name Jehovah in the NT due to the Jehovah references mentioned in a section of the Darby translation of the the Holy Scriptures, which mentioned that in many places the NT lacks the definite article proceeding the Greek word for Lord - especially in quotes of the OT where the Greek Septuagint substitutes the Kyrios for YHWH. Likewise I had learned that the Aramaic NT often uses Maryah (notice that word includes "yah" and thus appears to mean "Lord Yah").
-
Disillusioned JW
Regarding Romans 10:13 see also https://2001translation.org/about/divine-name-unreliable where it says it thinks that Joel 2:32 (which is quoted in Romans 10:13) in Hebrew originally said "Then, all that call on the name of the Lord will be saved, said Jehovah", instead of saying "Jehovah (יהוה)" in place of Lord. The reasons it gives for such are impressive.
-
HowTheBibleWasCreated
Actually I need to dig a bit here
The nwt and the 2001 using Jehovah in the NT is counter-productive for non trinitarians. The reason is in places like mark 1 the quotation from Malachi and Isaiah say john prepared the way for Jehovah. Sane issues in Roman 10:13 and numerous other places.
Here is why neither the trinity nor the non-trinitarians are correct:
Christianity like grew out of two movements.Qumran and the man of the lie. The later formed gnosticism and this view of the high god being them Father of Jesus and not Jehovah makes sense in the Pauline epistles and parts of John.
The former Qumran believed in El Elyon as the high god the father. Jehovah as his son and the mother Asherah or in later cases Sophia. The spirit. Note in the earliest christian texts. Jesus is only named Jesus upon his death and ressurection. (See Philippians 2) Jehovah saves. The idea of Jehovah dying and rising goes far back into antiquity to the Baal cycle.