A Kindlier More Gentle Jehovah?

by sparky1 34 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • sparky1
    sparky1

    "For you must not prostrate yourself to another god, because Jehovah, whose name is Jealous, he is a jealous God," EXODUS 34:14 NWT 1984 edition

    "You must not bow down to another god, for Jehovah is known for requiring exclusive devotion. Yes, he is a God who requires exclusive devotion." EXODUS 34:14 NWT 2013 edition

    The word jealous used in this scripture is from the original Hebrew word kan-naw' which strictly means JEALOUS. STRONGS CONCORDANCE 1961 edition gives the meaning for kan-naw' as follows: from 7065;jealous:-jealous. The word kan-naw' is from the root kaw-naw' which carries the meaning of: a prim. root: to be (caus. make) zealous, i.e. (in a bad sense) jealous or envious; -(be) envy(-ious), be (move to, provoke to) jealous(-y), X very, (be) zeal(-ous).

    So although the word kaw-naw' can be nuanced and its meaning can vary slightly according to the context of its use in scripture, the word kan-naw' has a very specific meaning of jealousy and that is all it means.

    How then did the 'scholars' that translated this new NEW WORLD TRANSLATION (2013 edition) make the intellectual jump of converting the word JEALOUS into the phrase 'REQUIRING EXCLUSIVE DEVOTION'? My contention is that it is another case of their intellectual dishonesty and that they try to make the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION fit their doctrines and preconcieved religious notions and interpretations.

    The old saying goes: In the beginning God created man and then man returned the favor.

  • AndDontCallMeShirley
    AndDontCallMeShirley

    How then did the 'scholars' that translated this new NEW WORLD TRANSLATION (2013 edition) make the intellectual jump of converting the word JEALOUS into the phrase 'REQUIRING EXCLUSIVE DEVOTION'?

    1. WT does not have, and never has had, any scholars in its ranks.

    2. Intellect has little to do with anything WT does.

    3. "intellectual dishonesty". Bingo! You've hit upon WT's bread and butter.

  • Apognophos
    Apognophos

    I'm curious, sparky1, how is the new wording a softening of the old wording? Don't they mean the same thing?

  • sparky1
    sparky1

    Mirriam-Webster.com defines Jealous as follows: adjective 1. Intolerant of rivalry or unfaithfulness

    Synonyms: Possesive

    Related words: Controlling, demanding, domineering, grasping,; covetous, envious, invidious, jaundiced;distrustful, mistrustful, suspicious; overprotective, protective. (Taken from M-W.com description of the meaning of jealousy)

    Which contains more emotional impact? The word jealous or the phrase 'requiring exclusive devotion'? At any rate you missed the entire point of my post.

    The self appointed 'scholars' that translated the New World Translation Revised 2013 version are 'bastardizing' the Bible to fit their own preconceived theological viewpoint under the guise of 'modernizing the language' of this translation. George Ricker Berry's INTERLINEAR HEBREW-ENGLISH OLD TESTAMENT on page 371 translates word for word the following: "God a, name his [is] jealous" EXODOUS 34:14. How in the name of intellectual honesty can you change the original phrase,"God a, name his [is] jealous" into "Yes, he is a God who requires exclusive devotion"?

  • objectivetruth
    objectivetruth

    Sparky - You've brought out a very important point..

    Many people don't understand the apparent differences between the Character of Jesus, and that of Jehovah..

    Jehovah is portrayed as a hateful, "jealous", war Mongering God, that loved 1,000's of animals to be sacrificed to him.

    If you really examine the OT as you have done, you will see Two Narratives.

    1. Narrative 1 - Jehovah who is Love, and expects nothing other than following his Simple Laws that are in place for the betterment of Humanity.

    2. Narrative 2 - Man made Laws,Traditions and Rituals which were later further distorted by Creeds & Organizations changing the Bible to suit their agendas.

    An example of this is seen in Animal Sacrifice.. As we know it is scattered all through out The Old Testament. They are said to be "A restful odor to Jehovah" however compare this to what Jehovah says through his True Prophets - Judge for your selves, if the below words speak of a God that demands Animal Sacrifice, or even Enjoys the death of innocent animals.

    Psalm 50:9 "I have no need of a bull from your stall or of goats from your pens,"

    • Psalm 50:7“Hear, O my people, and I will speak; O Israel, I will testify against you. I am God, your God. 8Not for your sacrifices do I rebuke you; your burnt offerings are continually before me. 9I will not accept a bull from your house or goats from your folds. 10For every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills. 11I know all the birds of the hills, and all that moves in the field is mine. 12“If I were hungry, I would not tell you, for the world and its fullness are mine. 13Do I eat the flesh of bulls or drink the blood of goats? 14Offer to God a sacrifice of thanksgiving,band perform your vows to the Most High,

    Proverbs 21:3 "To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice."

    Jeremiah 7:22 "For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices,"

    Isaiah 1:11 ""The multitude of your sacrifices-- what are they to me?" says the LORD. "I have more than enough of burnt offerings, of rams and the fat of fattened animals; I have no pleasure in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats."

    Psalm 51:16 "You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings."

    Psalm 40:6 "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire-- but my ears you have opened -- burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not require."

    Psalm 69:30,31 " 30I will praise the name of God with a song; I will magnify him with thanksgiving. 31This will please the LORD more than an ox or a bull with horns and hoofs."

    Isaiah 40:16 "Lebanon is not sufficient for altar fires, nor its animals enough for burnt offerings."

    Amos 5:22 "Even though you bring me burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them. Though you bring choice fellowship offerings, I will have no regard for them."

    Micah 6:6-8 " 6“With what shall I come before the LORD,and bow myself before God on high? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old? 7Will the LORD be pleased witha thousands of rams, with ten thousands of rivers of oil? Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?”

    Micah 6:8 - Shows Jehovah's True Commandment, and what genuinely pleases him :

    8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

    Jeremiah 7:21 ""'This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: Go ahead, add your burnt offerings to your other sacrifices and eat the meat yourselves!"

  • Apognophos
    Apognophos

    Sorry, I don't know about any "Mirriam-Webster", but I just think the phrases are synonymous and I was wondering why you were accusing them of intellectual dishonesty by saying the same thing in clearer phrasing. That's the whole point of the new revision.

  • sparky1
    sparky1

    "I can't vouch for all the changes, but this seems to take the wind out of the sails of all the hyperbolic claims that the Society was going to dumb down the wording, or make radical changes to the translation. I wholeheartedly AGREE WITH THE CHANGES (capitals mine) I've seen so far, as they reflect modern English usage better, and don't seem to sacrifice accuracy for readability." posted under MY HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE AGM "Apognophos" 10/06/2013

    I can see why you question my post. It seems to me that you have already made up your mind about the NWT 2013 revised edition.Possibly no amount of critical thinking or investigating source material will cause you to see things differently. Merriam-Webster produces one of the most comprehensive and authoritative dictionaries in print and online. At least I try to back up my contentions with material based on facts and reliable sources. I see nothing in your post of 10/06/2013 to prove why the NWT 2013 revised edition is superior to the older version or any other translation for that matter. You only offer your opinion that 'they reflect modern English usage better' and 'don't seem to sacrifice accuracy for readability'. You are of course entitled to your opinion.

    Now a little humor based on your observations and mine:

    Mr. Jones goes to court for murdering his wife whom he loved and trused above all else. He caught her having an affair with his best friend and killed her on the spot. The trial goes as follows:

    Prosecuting Attorney: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. I mean to prove today that Mr. Jones murdered his wife in a fit of JEALOUS rage when he found her making love to another man.

    Defense Attorney: I object, Your Honor.

    Judge: Your objection Mr. Defense attorney?

    Defense Attorney: Yes Your Honor. My client did indeed kill his wife. But he is not guilty by reason that he was showing her that he was "REQUIRING EXCLUSIVE DEVOTION".

    Judge: I see. Thank you for explaining this to me in more understandable, modern English. Case dismissed.

    Prosecuting Attorney: (Under his breath) Oh shit! This job was so much easier when people just said what they meant and dealt with the facts.

    (Apognophos please critique my post on A Sphere is Not a Circle. Your rebuttal MUST contain facts only or opinion backed up by accepted sources)

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    Requiring exclusive devotion is not a normal English phrase. Jealous is a word that people use. Sometimes their word choice is odd just to be odd. It is cult like.

  • sparky1
    sparky1

    Thanks Band on the Run. At least you 'get it'.

  • steve2
    steve2

    Being "jealous" and "requiring exclusive devotion" are not even synonymous terms in modern spoken English. We humans can assess ourselves as "jealous" or not, but would not dare assess ourselves as "requiring exclusive devotion" or not. Talk about using language to describe the "True" God that portrays him as "above" normal human emotion when the ancient texts portrayed him as human-like in his rage and hatred.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit