Compilation of the bible and the NWT translation source.

by trailerfitter 26 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Billy the Ex-Bethelite
    Billy the Ex-Bethelite

    One of the things that JWs have to ignore is that they teach that after the death of the apostles, all Christians were apostates and certainly have to be excluded from the small number 144,000. The "Christian Greek Scripture" canon wasn't finally selected until around the same time that the trinity was accepted. The same "apostates" that accepted the trinity had determined what writings would be preserved or perish. The All Scriptures Inspired includes some older lists of accepted books, but they are far from being in complete agreement with what is used in Kingdom Halls today.

    The New World Translation Committee was anonymous because they were largely "idiots with an agenda" and their credentials were nonexistant.

  • Wonderment

    Black Sheep:

    Dr. Bruce Metzger: "On the whole, one gains a tolerably good impression of the scholarly equipment of the translators. Some of the translations...are simply indefensible [...]"

    Samuel Haas: "While this work indicates a great deal of effort and thought as well as considerable scholarship, it is to be regretted that religious bias was allowed to colour many passages." (Journal of Biblical Literature, December 1955, p. 283)

    Jason BeDuhn (Ph.D) uses the Kingdom Interlinear when he teaches Greek to his students. He has stated that "the Kingdom Interlinear is the best NT interlinear available."

    Thomas N. Winter: "The translation by the anonymous committee is thoroughly up to date and consistently accurate. (Professor of Greek at the University of Nebraska) Winter has also used the KIT in his classes with his students.

    Edgar Foster: The NWT is a fine translation. In my mind, it is the translation _par excellence_." (Classics Major, Lenoir-Rhyne College)

    Edgar J. Goodspeed: "Strange such good scholars as your people evidently are should not have noticed that apate Mt. 13:22 etc., is now known to mean 'pleasure.'" (Note: Translators offer divergent views with the translation of apate.) Goodspeed is a recognized scholar of NT Greek.

    S. Maclean Gilmore: "The New Testament edition was made by a committee...that possessed an unusual competence in Greek." (Andover Newton Quarterly, September 1966, Vol 7, #1 page 25, 26)

  • Black Sheep
    Black Sheep

    Wonderment ....

    Your first 'reference' doesn't include the name of the publication where he said this, or the page number, or anything else useful to track it down and read it in context. A scan would be nice.

    Your second 'reference' contains this gem .... it is to be regretted that religious bias was allowed to colour many passages.

  • Wonderment
  • Bungi Bill
    Bungi Bill

    Certainly, the academic credentials of the NWT Translation Committee are unimpressive! However, most of its controversial renderings are more to do with doctrinal bias, rather than linguistic incompetence (see Samuel Haas, as quoted above):

    - In other words, F.W. Franz & Co. got it largely right, despite themselves!

    This, though, is not peculiar to just the New World Translation. To a greater or lesser degree, doctrinal bias influences the rendering of certain bible texts in practically all translations of the scriptures. (For example, the Catholic Church's Jerusalem Bible places an extra slant on the bible texts that deal with the roles entrusted to Peter).

    When using any translation of the Bible, caution needs to be exercised - keeping in mind both what texts it was translated from, and what doctrinal background its translators had.


  • trailerfitter

    Okay guys I didn't want to start any frucus about Dr Mantey or the NWT translation. I was trying to find out why I Am getting 2 different bits of informastion. I personally think that history actually is the biggest master of distortion and I do not agree with any organisation that say they are the ultimate and one truth....

  • Aussie Oz
    Aussie Oz

    Please pardon my ignorance... The NWT and bibles in general are not my forte.


    Are not bibles such as the NWT really just adaptions of translations rather than a 'we got hold of the manuscripts and started afresh' translating ourselves?

    I can't see the Watchtower Society doing that. I see them looking at various other translations, looking for what they perceive to be faults and researching what they can alter for their own admitted "in harmony with revealed truth" agenda. Perhaps pouring over some other available manuscript or lexicon so as to select a word they like...


  • Black Sheep
    Black Sheep

    I wouldn't describe Metzger's opinion as 'admiration' after reading that.

  • Wonderment

    Black Sheep: Bruce Metzger, a world-class Presbyterian scholar said many things about the JWs. Most of them were targeted at "exposing" the many errors of JWs. He does not agree with WT theology. He went as far as writing a lengthy essay on how JWs have reduced the greatness of Jesus Christ in their translation.

    ("Jehovah's Witnesses and Jesus Christ," Theology Today, (April 1953 p. 74); see also Metzger, "The New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures," The Bible Translator (July 1964)

    Nevertheless, it is the assumption of some here, that the NWT is rubbish, and that no reputable scholar would ever recognize the alleged scholarship the WT claims. That's where the above quotes comes in. It serves the only purpose of showing that some scholars of his caliber do "recognize" the scholarship of the NWT. Not that he agrees with WT theology. Nor, it should be expected that scholars support the WT theology all the way.

    Here is another one of Benjamin Kedar, Professor Emeritus of The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (highlighting mine):

    "Since several individuals and institutions have addressed me concerning the following matter, I make this statement; henceforth it will be sent instead of a personal letter to anyone appealing to me to clarify my position.

    1) Several years ago I quoted the so-called New World Translation among several Bible versions in articles that dealt with purely philological [pertaining to the study/science of languages] questions (such as the rendition of the causative hiphil, of the participle qotel). In the course of my comparative studies I found the NWT rather illuminating: it gives evidence of an acute awareness of the structural characteristics of hebrew as well as an honest effort to faithfully render these in the target [English] language. A translation is bound to be a compromise, and as such it's details are open to criticism; this applies to the NWT too. In the portion corresponding to the hebrew Bible, however, I have never come upon an obviously erroneous rendition which would find it's explanation in a dogmatic bias. Repeatedly I have asked the antagonists of the Watchtower-Bible who turned to me for a clarification of my views, to name specific verses for a renewed scrutiny. This was either not done or else the verse submitted (e.g. Genesis 4:13, 6:3, 10:9, 15:5, 18:20 etc.) did not prove the point, namely a tendentious [with a purposed aim/biased] translation.

    2) I beg to make clear that I do not feel any sympathy for any sect and this includes Jehovah's Witnesses. Of course, my mistrust is not directed against the individual member of such sect but rather against the organisation that manipulates him and puts forward its dogmas and rules as the ultimate truth. It should be conceded, however, that the groups and organisations that fiercely oppose the witnesses do not behave any better.On the whole, synagogue, church and mosque also tend to exhibit dogmatic arrogance coupled with intolerance of and enmity with other confessions.

    3) I cannot help expressing my deep conviction that the search for truth will never benefit by linguistic quibble. Whether the author using the word naephaesh denoted 'soul' as opposed to body (Lev 17:11) or meant something else, whether 'almah' means 'virgin' or 'young woman' (Is 7:14) is of great interest to philologists and historians of religion; an argument for or against blood transfusion or the virgin-birth of Jesus respectively, cannot be derived from it.

    4) Obviously, it is man's destiny to make the choice of his way a matter of conscience and to the best of his knowledge. There exists no simple set of rules such as could be learned from the mouth of a guru or the pages of an ancient venerable book. Those who pretend to act according to an infallible guide, more often than not interpret the texts in accordance with their preconceived wishes and notions.

    Benjamin Kedar

    Haifa 27.11.95

  • Perry

    Hi Trailfitter,

    I think you will find some of what you are looking for here under "Bibles":

Share this