Stupid Watchtower.

by Darkknight757 23 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Darkknight757
    Darkknight757

    February 8-14 AssTower is titled " A living Translation of God's Word."

    Note paragraph 4:

    “4 Despite the clear evidence that the personal name of God belongs in the Bible, many translations completely omit the sacred name of God. In fact, just two years after the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures was released in 1950, the Revised Standard Version was published. That version omitted the name, reversing the policy of the editors of the American Standard Version of 1901. Why? The preface says: “The use of any proper name for the one and only God . . . is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.” That set a pattern for many subsequent translations, English and non-English.”

    So they vilify the ASV bible for not using Gods name. Oh but wait!! Let's look at the full quote!!

    A major departure from the practice of the American Standard Version is the rendering of the Divine Name, the “Tetragrammaton.” The American Standard Version used the term “Jehovah”; the King James Version had employed this in four places, but everywhere else, except in three cases where it was employed as part of a proper name, used the English word Lord (or in certain cases God) printed in capitals. The present revision returns to the procedure of the King James Version, which follows the precedent of the ancient Greek and Latin translators and the long established practice in the reading of the Hebrew scriptures in the synagogue. While it is almost if not quite certain that the Name was originally pronounced “Yahweh,” this pronunciation was not indicated when the Masoretes added vowel signs to the consonantal Hebrew text. To the four consonants YHWH of the Name, which had come to be regarded as too sacred to be pronounced, they attached vowel signs indicating that in its place should be read the Hebrew word Adonai meaning “Lord” (or Elohimmeaning “God”). The ancient Greek translators substituted the work Kyrios(Lord) for the Name. The Vulgate likewise used the Latin word Dominus. The form “Jehovah” is of late medieval origin; it is a combination of the consonants of the Divine Name and the vowels attached to it by the Masoretes but belonging to an entirely different word. The sound of Y is represented by J and the sound of W by V, as in Latin. For two reasons the Committee has returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version: (1) the word “Jehovah” does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew; and (2) the use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom He had to be distinguished, was discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.

    So out of respect for the divine name they omit it from their translation. Why the lies Watchtower???






  • DATA-DOG
  • Darkknight757
    Darkknight757

    Oops didn't see that thread. Still retarded that they would blatantly misquote this translation. Of course it's to be expected at this point.

    Wait did they basically just rehash this from that 2013 article? Lazy

  • fukitol
    fukitol

    the use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom He had to be distinguished, was discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.

    That's basically why Paul never described the God he was trying to distinguish from all the others as YHWH at the Aeropagus, in Acts 17. It would've meant nothing to all those non-Hebrew speakers and so would've been entirely inappropriate. God was the universal father of all and referring to him by his old covenant Hebrew title was no longer appropriate.

  • eyeuse2badub
    eyeuse2badub

    Interesting that jehober could use his super godly powers to make sure that his "written, inspired word" was ACCURATELY preserved down through history but he couldn't see to it that his NAME was properly preserved. So everything in the bible extremely reliable except where the divinely guided copyists omitted his name? lol

    just saying!

    eyeuse2badub

  • sowhatnow
    sowhatnow
    yea, around 10 am i got a text from my mom insisting I read that article, lol
  • Darkknight757
    Darkknight757
    That's nice. Read the article, look up quote: realise is another case of quote mining lol!
  • Beth Sarim
    Beth Sarim

    **God was the universal father of all and referring to him by his old covenant Hebrew title was no longer appropriate.**

    I always wondered why Christ Jesus always addressed his Father as God, but not Jehovah.

  • Darkknight757
    Darkknight757

    He had plenty of opportunity during the Lords Prayer to use the divine name but to be honest, would we address our blood father by his first name? It would be disrespectful. Likewise Jesus wouldn't have used The Fathers personal name in prayer.

    I think that more than anything bugs me about hearing J-dumbs pray. It's not appropriate to use Gods personal name. (Add the fact is wrong in the first place)

  • Athanasius
    Athanasius

    “4 Despite the clear evidence that the personal name of God belongs in the Bible, many translations completely omit the sacred name of God. In fact, just two years after the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures was released in 1950, the Revised Standard Version was published."

    In the above quote the Watchtower is up to their usual scholastic dishonesty. The Revised Standard New Testament was first published in 1946, four years ahead of the NW Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures. In fact the NW Translation committee wasn't even formed until 1947. So Fred Franz had a copy of the RSV NT to consult as he put together the NWT.

    While the RSV Old Testament wasn't published until 1952, the Watchtower doesn't make that clarification. So the Watchtower editors leave the reader with the impression that the NWT was published two years before the RSV. Moreover, the first volume of the NWT Hebrew Scriptures wasn't published until 1953, one year after the complete RSV NT and OT was published.

    Therefore, Fred Franz had a good English version of the Bible to consult as he edited his Bible version to fit JW doctrine.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit