Also remember this priciple. Just because the society translated it, doesn't mean it is INcorrect either. Don't feel like if you think they did something right you shoul beat yourself up about it. Sometimes our personal feelings can have us throwing out the entire things as ludicrous.
I am doing research... but I need help!
by ILoveTTATT 11 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Bobcat
ILoveTTATT:
This verse is interesting:
Matthew 2:2
1950: saying: "Where is the one born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when we were in the east and we have come to do him obeisance."
1961: saying: "Where is the one born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when [we were] in the east, and we have come to do him obeisance."
1984: saying: "Where is the one born king of the Jews? For we saw his star [when we were] in the east, and we have come to do him obeisance."
The Greek text simply says, "We saw his star in the east." "In the east" is ambiguous as to whether it applies to "we" or "his star." The NWT chose to go with "we" (which is the translator's perogative). This is why the "[when we were]" was inserted.
The NICNT-Matthew commentary (R. T. France, p. 59) renders it, "We saw his star when it rose." The associated footnote reads:
2. The singular of anatole ["star" - Bobcat] is used here and in v. 9 for the "rising" of a celestial body, as distinct from the plural in v. 1 and in 8:11; 24:27 for the "[place of] rising [of the sun]," the East. The singular can be used for the East, as in Rev. 21:13, but not normally with the article (BDF 253[5]; . . . it is in any case most unlikely that Matthew would use singular and plural so close together in the same sense. If Num. 24:17 underlies Matthew's account, the use of anatello in the LXX there requires the meaning "rising" here.
The Society's rendering is linguistically possible, but the idea the WT wants to convey is that the magi were in the east (Babylon?) saw a star in the West, and followed it till it led them to Herod.
The NICNT commentary understands it to mean that the magi saw a rising star that somehow connotated a new West-land king (a not uncommon practice), and proceeded to search for the location. They went to Jerusalem, to the then royal family (Herod's) to inquire about it.
The Society views the star as a ploy of Satan. Matthew's text gives it no such evil connotation.
See my post on this thread.
(Editor formatting seems to be inop)