the NWT Reference Bible is meant to be a literal translation, helping the reader via footnotes, Appendices, and other helps so that the reader gets a flavour of the actual thought patterns used by the most credible manuscript copies, factoring out what are known to be errors in Jewish and Catholic tradition.
New World Translation, is it the best bible translation?
by littlebuddy 177 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Lillith26
Ok Reniaa- in the NWT in Acts- when Stephen was crying out to "god" to be saved he called on Jehovah, but if you read the 'same' passages from your NIV- it will be quite apparent that he was crying out to Jesus! My point here is simple- the name Jehovah does not and was not meant to appear in any of the christian 'greek' scriptures! there was no great apostey (wait are you a JW or a Mormon? lol), the name was not left out by accident/on purpose by 'Satan & his Apostates'! and the new testiment did not need a restoration of the divine name because it was not present in it in the first place!!! ( by the way, the bible gods name was more likely to be pronounced Yahweh in Hebrew- Not Jehovah, so you can smeg off with the whole "but it's pronounced differently all over the world" crap, because if the real God had a name that needed to be spoken it would be universal in nature/unchanging regardless of the language you speak! ).
-
Spike Tassel
Lillith26 makes a number of very controversial claims, which require due diligence
-
Lillith26
I will let another website explain- http://www.4jehovah.org/jehovahs-witness-nwt-errors.php
-
OUTLAW
....lol coffee
does it read as gobbledee gook? Of cause not! it taking cognitive dissonance on your part to a massive degree if you can persuade youselves when you read the fluid but basic wording of the NWT and say it is gobbledegook. When it is clearly a fluent but theologically debated translation.
another lol is who are these scholars you put so much store by? and you guys critisise me as a witness following the GB as overseers. When you guys believe as gospel anything someone with a PHD after their name says.
When I judge a bible translation I compare a few together, I use biblegate online for comparisons and have 4 different bibles at my home I know the NWT is a good translation from my own personal research not becasue I listen to just what the Jws say or indeed what anyone with a college degree says (I recommend anyone do this for themselves).
Reniaa
Reniaa..This is one of the Unbiased scholars you Quoted..
Rolf Furuli..
A Jehovah`s Witness!!
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Rolf Johan Furuli
Rolf Johan Furuli (born 19 December1942 ) is a lecturer in Semitic languages at the University of OsloRolf Johan Furuli (born 19 December1942 [1] ) is a lecturer in Semitic languages at the University of Oslo.
He is currently involved in translation of non-Christian religious texts, and is considered an expert in ancient languages. In 2005, he finished a doctoral thesis suggesting a new understanding of Classical Hebrew. This study has been privately published.
Alongside Norwegian, English and Hebrew, he is able to read Akkadian, Aramaic and Greek.
He is one of Jehovah's Witnesses, and he served as a travelling overseer in the 1970's. He serves as an elder in Oslo.
He has written works about Bible translation and Biblical issues.
Furuli started his studies of New Babylonian chronology in 1984. Based on these studies, he has attempted to defend the view that Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians in 607 BC rather than 587 BC, a view that is officially held by Jehovah's Witnesses.
Here`s another..
Dr.Jason Beduhn..
"Do you know how to read Koine Greek? If not, then you have no basis to render an opinion, other than to rely on other people who do read Koine Greek." --BeDuhn
The very Doctor you Quoted.....Does`nt think you have an opinion!!
More Road Apples from Reniaa..
.......................LOL!!...OUTLAW
-
TD
What is obvious is people on here would rather keep to the fallacy argument over credentials when the proof of the NWT is in it's actual content. Which people are clearly avoiding discussing.
Horsefeathers!
I gave you a good example --John 17:3. I explained in detail what's wrong with it in the NWT.
It is entirely a matter of content and not theology because a better translation would be more in harmony with the JW faith too.
-
reniaa
hi lileth
can you quote the scripture you meant because if it is the one i'm thinking of the word 'God' is totally spurious and added by certain translations and didn't exist in the original transcripts for stephen to refer too.
Reniaa
-
reniaa
hi TD
to be honest when I look at john 17:3 i'm usually conscentrating on the complete separation of the one true God and Jesus which for me is completely afirming the thought of Jehovah being Jesus's father and God.
but on your point of 'knowing' and 'taking in knowledge' I'm not sure I agree with you because I have had christians use the all you need to do is 'know' God to get eternal life and it lacks depth of really knowing as you would someone who you learn to continue knowing through experience. I know you hate the references to genosko but it is a more of a verb in intent of a continuous knowing contstantly working to take in the knowledge so for me I do not see it as such a weak translation. but I can see why you would dislike the NWT 'taking in knowledge'. but..
We have to do more that just know God and Jesus we have to continue to get to know them.
A further comment on this Greek word appears in Word Studies in the New Testament, by Marvin R. Vincent. This says: “Eternal life consists in knowledge, or rather the pursuit of knowledge, since the present tense marks a continuance, a progressive perception.”
Reniaa
-
reniaa
lol outlaw
You show me shock-horror a man with a very creditable list of qualifications so as to be said to be an authority on languages of the bible quite the equal of any you would come up with but discount his degrees and qualifications because he is a witness. Your bias is showing outlaw.
Reniaa
-
Earnest
I have a lot of respect for the NWT but am inclined to agree with TD regarding the translation of John 17:3. There are others on this forum who are far better qualified than I am to talk about the Greek but I do understand English and there is a difference between continuing to know someone and continuing to take in knowlege about a person. You can take in knowledge...learn...about someone from Whos Who, Wikipedia etc, can know every fact about them but still not know them, as you would if you were a friend, lover or family member. Interestingly, the LXX uses the verb gunaika in Genesis 5:25 where "Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived..." so in that example it is clear that knowing is not to do with academic knowledge but with intimacy with a person.
That being said, I continue to find the NWT amongst the best translations when reading for a literal rendition of the original languages.
