NWT Scholars

by homme perdu 166 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Earnest

  I have a high respect for the NWT and regularly defend it on this board when I consider attacks on it are unwarranted. And have seldom had to concede I was mistaken...until Narkissos joined this forum. He does not use hyperbole and gives credit where credit is due, but he clearly has an excellent knowledge of translation and always gives good reasons for his preference. My respect for the NWT remains, as does my respect for Narkissos, but to say that any one translation is "the most accurate" is sheer nonsense as you cannot compare a translation using formal correspondence (NWT) with those using dynamic equivalence. Apples and pears.

  I don't personally know of any current NWT scholars, but Greg Stafford was apparently part of a group of scholars assisting the WTS before he raised his profile. So they exist in the shadowy world where anonymity is paramount ("to give Jehovah the glory"). I believe "scholar" has some knowledge of biblical chronology but nothing he has written suggests he has any knowledge of translation. He will not take up the "Narkissos challenge" because his claims were so extravagant no translation could be supported.

  Earnest
• 

  DaCheech

  toreador and Dawn

  Believe you me, I am deadly serious when I make modest claims about the NWT. Its brilliance can only be appreciated by reading and using it and comparing it with ALL other inferior translations.

  scholar

  BA MA Studies in Religion

  Scholar: Can you explain to me why the Governing Booty has to keep the translators' name anonymous..... But, cannot keep anonymous every person it praises in the lifetime achievement awards articles written in the WT and Awake every couple of issues??????? Please, either accept our challenge or else keep your "scholar" in the Kingdunb Halls
• 

  Corvin

  Scholar:LOL @ Scholar
  Please be assured that we are laughing at you, not with you

  Kindly take the "Narkissos Challenge", else retain the title "fraud".

  BA MA Studies in Religion

  Incidentally, what "studies" did you do?
  It seems plain that there was unlikely much translation work or critical analysis involved in the curricullum.

  Thank you little toe.

  Scholar, I simply do not trust anyone, or their word, when they wear their education and/or religion on their sleeve. Their is something terribly insecure about a person who approaches things that way, and it is my experience that people like you will do or say anything to execute a deception attempting to back up your own personal unfounded beliefs.

  This is kind of funny, but just before I came on line and found this thread, I had the WT's Greek Interlinear cracked open comparing it to other Greek interlinear versions.

  Corvin
• 

  Earnest

  Incidentally, what "studies" did you do?
  It seems plain that there was unlikely much translation work or critical analysis involved in the curricullum.

  "scholar" has previously said ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/43480/613007/post.ashx#613007) :

  I obtained my Bachelor of Arts degree majoring in Religious Studies and Philosophy at Deakin University in Victoria. After that I completed my Master of Arts degree in Studies in Religion at the University of Sydney in New South Wales. This year [2003] I am enrolled in an Honours program in Philosophical Studies at Deakin after which I hope to enroll in a doctoral program post 2004.

  And ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/43480/613186/post.ashx#613186 ) :

  My name is Neil Mc Fadzen. I forgot to mention that I am a certified member of the Golden Key National Honour Society. This can be authenticated by contacting the Branch Office in Sydney, Australia. Enough is said about my academic qualifications. as it is not normal practice to to list publicly one's personal academic record. If you must know you can telephone me and I will give you subject and award details.

  And ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/41020/568668/post.ashx#568668 ) :

  I have several technical Bible commentaries in my library and enjoy the journal faciliies at Sydney University and Moore Theological Theological Library whereupon its my custom to examine and compare the NWT with the latest in biblical scholarship. My resources also attend to Macquarie University which is in the forefront in matters pertaining to textual criticism and studies in New Testament Greek.

  Having said that, I do not think this thread should be about any posters academic qualifications. That is simply a form of intellectual one-upmanship, which Jesus never indulged in. I do think that if "scholar" believes "it is not normal practice to to list publicly one's personal academic record" he should refrain from baiting the members of the forum by listing his credentials.

  Earnest
• 

  Bubbamar

  Its brilliance can only be appreciated by reading and using it and comparing it with ALL other inferior translations

  I see he's not going to provide anything we asked for. As if we have never read it or compared it with other translations. Only he has.

  The only proof I need that the NWT is deceptive is this: The doctrine came first - then the NWT.

  The WTBTS first denied the diety of Christ then changed the Bible to fit. Not the other way around. They came up with the name "Jehovah's Witnessess" then added "Jehovah" to the OT. Not the other way around.

  So if the doctrines are supposedly FROM the bible - How could it be, when the bible they used at the time of formulating the doctrine was - according to them - incorrect?
• 

  DaCheech

  Scholar practices "hit and run" method
• 

  Balsam

  I still use the NWT in talking to witnesses. There are some changes in the scriptures like the addition of the name Jehovah and those scriptures that sort of hint at a trinity are reworded. But that aside JW used other translations to come up with their own. I don't thing there was anything scholarly about it. It is basically their version borrowed from others that they liked. If I run across a scripture that has been changed, I point out other translations. Of course they believe their translations is the only god approved bible there is.

  If they used one of the modern translations life the NIV they would cause less of a stir, because no one outside of JW use the NWT. Why would they?
• 

  Earnest

  The only proof I need that the NWT is deceptive is this: The doctrine came first - then the NWT.

  Bubba, that is true of all translations, which is why it is a good idea to compare translations to get a better grasp of what was originally written.
• 

  ellderwho

  The identity of the NWT is unknown and further, unknowable. .................................... Hence,it is the greatest of all mysteries and will remain so forever.

  Fred Franz, Nathan Knorr, George Gangas, Albert Schroeder, Karl Klein, Milton Henschel.

  Scholar I suggest Purple KIT, that should suffice.
• 

  ellderwho

  I believe "scholar" has some knowledge of biblical chronology

  No, he relies on Wt timetables, which fail miserably.