Interestingly the foreword has since been revised to Watchtower speak
Could you clarify:is the KIT still in print?
Why did the WTS ever bother to release the KIT?
by AK - Jeff 26 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
ozziepost
-
moggy lover
Ozzie: The original ' 69 edition is no longer in print. The later, ' 85 edition, though not officially out of print, is virtually impossible to obtain freely. It takes a lot of hard looking and asking around. The trick that the WTS used was restricting the printing run.
At the same assembly that the revised KIT was released we saw the release of the "Reasoning" book. With the WT following at that time topping the 2.5 mill mark, the printing of the "reasoning book" was put at 2mil, thus ensuring a fair distribution to all. The KIT, however was limited to less than 1 mil copies, with no reprints. [The Reasoning book was reprinted, with revisions -naturally- in ' 89 for additional converts]
With the population of the WTS currently standing at 6 mil, the possibility of finding a copy is even more remote, unless the WTS allows another print run, which appears unlikely.
I am not entirely sure why the WTS published the KIT back in ' 69. But possibly there was a need for being up to date. Remember that the WTS already had an Interlinear on the market, called the "Emphatic Diaglott" first published by the Society in 1902, reprinted, without changes in 1942. Although the author, Benjamin Wilson had an Anti-trinitarian bias, his version was ultimately unsatisfactory.
For instance, despite his interlinear portion rendered Jo 1:1 as "a god was the logos" his actual translation admitted to "And the Logos was God" Freddy obviously felt that a thorough WT leaning interlinear should be released.
However, having said that, there seems to be another reason. To give the impression to the R&F at least, that the WTS is an open, Bible organisation, with scholastic pretensions, and with nothing to hide. Like all the conjuring tricks employed by the WTS, the perception is different from the reality. Simultaneous with its release, there was also a deliberate attempt to downplay its significance, in that the R&F were never actually encouraged to use the book in any meaningful way. No WT study used it, except insofar as to make an incidental reference to some obscure point of WT doctrine.
No witness was educated in its structure, nor enlightened on its ability to make the NT text more accessable to the reader. In fact, other than the use of Jo 1:1 to show the "need" for the "a god" rendering, and that the Greek "Parousia" at Matt 24:3 means "presence" the majority of the R&F were unaware of its contents. In fact we on JWD would be far more knowledgable abouts its subject matter than they. Having obtained a copy, it then lies, like a slowly ticking bomb, unused, in a JWs library shelf.
Significantly it is not logged into the WT CD Rom library in either the ' 04 or ' 05 editions
It seems appropiate to point out that the original ED published in 1902 had a larger print run than the current KIT. Which ironically means that that book is easier to obtain than the KIT. [Actually, the WTS copyright on the ED has expired, putting it into the public domain. Some months ago Altlantis made it available for download on JWD.] The original KIT has also now been made available by Atlantis on a current thread.
Cheers
-
RR
The KIT was to replace the Diaglott, an interlinear used by the Society since the days of C.T. Russell, it apparentlt didn't catch on, I don't know any Witness who uses it. The Diaglott is only used by Bible Students and Christadelphians.
In fact, despite the Society telling Witnesses to stay away from the evil Slave Class, the Society did business with them, selling them the Diaglotts, their only customers for thje books.
RR
-
truthsearcher
This would explain why I have been loaned a copy of the KIT by a JW, and it is in near pristine shape. I have to refrain myself from getting out the highlighter and outlining the blatant mistranslations! (Although, maybe this would be a good idea.....hmmm.....) I think it has received more use from me than it ever had with a JW.
I would like to obtain my own copy for counter-cult work. I know it is available as a download but does anyone have a lead to a copy of the actual book?
-
AK - Jeff
Interesting - I had been a dub forever it seems - but I did not even recall a 're-release' of the KIT in '85. Don't know how I missed that. I do have an 'original' purple copy in my Lib. And now a digital format in my 'puter files, thanx to another poster here.
I think Moggy is prob right - they released this thing to give an aire of intellectual scholarship to the NWT. I imagine, unknown to me as a brainwashed dub at the time, that by '69 the 'real Bible scholars' had had time to take the NWT to pieces, and there may have been some fear that some dubs would read the exposes - thus a tool to counter. More of Freddy's paranoia I suppose.
Jeff
-
AK - Jeff
Try this link for a hard copy, Truthsearcher.
Jeff
-
seek2find
Jeff, I've wondered about this also. I wonder if someone up there (Bethel) maybe decided long ago that they would release the real truth in a few obscure places in the literature, so that if someone ever said "Why did you deceive me?" They could respond that the real truth had been in the publications, they just didn't read them. Most of the literature that the Society has ever published has gone un-read and is sitting on shelfs collecting dust,or in the landfills. I bet that a least half of the people who are Baptized witnesses have never read one of the Societys books from cover to cover. seek2find
-
juni
Dang it! I should've kept my purple, pristine, published KIT!! I would've mailed it to the highest bidder here!
Juni
-
Justahuman24
When I was a JW, about a year ago, there was a sister who had a copy of the 1969 edition. She lent it to me for a few days. But I wanted to own a copy and I talked to the elder I studied and told him I'd like a copy. I was told it was going to be hard to get but it wasn't. I ordered it through the congregation and it was easy for me to get it because I was in college then and I took a New Testament Greek course so I told them that it would help me lol. I like learning languages and everyone in the Cong. knew that. I also took 3 semesters of French and I know Spanish. I only took two semesters of New Testament Greek. I still have the copy of the KIT '85 edition.
Sidenote - Interestengly enough, my New Testment Greek when we were reading John 1:1 kinda supported the WTS translation of it. Well, not the translation per se but the argument that the second "theon" without the definite article should not read "the Word was God" bcz since it doesn't have the definite article, it becomes an adjective so she said it could or should be translated "godlike" or "divine" but not God with a capt. G or implying that the Word was the same God Jesus worshipped nor "a god". I always found it interesting. And my prof. was a buddshist. She wasn't even a Christian. And she said that she was aware that there was a big debate among scholars as to how to translate John 1:1 because their beliefs biases the way the translate the text.
justahuman - but super nonetheless
-
unhappy
we've got one in our library - I'm going to treat it like gold from now on. thanks for the reminder jeff
bernadette