New World Translation, is it the best bible translation?

by littlebuddy 177 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Freedom Fighter

  Is it not quite obvious that Rolf Furuli, despite his credentials, is going to toe the party line? Does anyone honestly think that he is going to highlight mistranslations etc that would diminish the credibility of his religious organisation? As we all know that would get him a one way ticket to Shunsville.

  The point is that this guy's comments, support etc are based on a biased viewpoint as disagreeing would no doubt be disastrous for him personally. This clearly limits his professional credibility.
• 

  reniaa

  Fair point freedom fighter

  but that is a two edged sword, if we allow that the denomination of a scholar limits his credibility to be objective you must apply it to all not just the witness ones. Since most bible scholars are religious (their interest in bible scholarship often born from religious origin in belief) and so have christian faith they will natually seek to support their churches theology in regards to the bible.

  Reniaa
• 

  Freedom Fighter

  Exactly - this is why many people have a fundamental problem with religion. The bible appears to mutate or become fluid depending on whatever religious theology is being promoted, which can undermine its authenticity and credibility.

  I always remember a line from the BBC Drama 'The Life and Loves of a She Devil' where a Priest character said, " There are truths, and there are half truths, and there's the bible. " I never forgot that line because it sums up the situation fairly accurately.

  I think that the original bible has been tampered with by many different religions to serve their own purposes. This reinforces how dangerous it is to apply its contents rigidly to critical life situations, e.g. the blood issue.
• 

  OUTLAW

  Reniaa..

  You were asked to come up with unbiased Critics..

  Rolf Furuli is a Jehovah`s Witness..

  Hardly Unbiased..

  One of your other choices..

  Dr.Jason Beduhn..

  Suggests you close your mouth..

  Do you know how to read Koine Greek? If not, then you have no basis to render an opinion, other than to rely on other people who do read Koine Greek." --BeDuhn

  

  More Road Apples from Reniaa..

  ...........................LOL!!...OUTLAW
• 

  TD

  ....I'm not sure I agree with you because I have had christians use the all you need to do is 'know' God to get eternal life and it lacks depth of really knowing as you would someone who you learn to continue knowing through experience.

  Yes, but wouldn't this be a matter of theology as opposed to Greek grammar?

  I know you hate the references to genosko but it is a more of a verb in intent of a continuous knowing contstantly working to take in the knowledge so for me I do not see it as such a weak translation. but I can see why you would dislike the NWT 'taking in knowledge'.

  I don't hate it...My objection is that changing the main verb into a noun and then inserting a new verb that doesn't exist in the original text is an unwarranted liberty.

  You don't translate by plugging in entire definitional phrases. --You'll end up with something that is impossible to translate back into the source language and arrive at anything resembling the original. That is what has happened here.
• 

  Lillith26

  just out of curiousity... did anyone actually check the website I posted earlier??? I'm not a christian, but this site 'has' done the research, it 'has' checked the facts! The NWT has been measured by "real" scholars (the kind with PHD's) and has been found in ERROR!

  Reniaa- You are disturbing my inner peace with your ignorence!
• 

  TD

  ...I would also add that quoting generic definitions for the present active indicative form (ginosko) does not come to grips with the fact that this is not the form that appears at John 17:3.

  At John 17:3, the form is the subjunctive, (ginoskosin) which expresses conditionality. --Action that has not necessarily happened yet and may or may not happen in future. This is expressed in English with words like "May," "Might," "If" etc.

  The best example I can think of which would probably carry the most weight is the superscript in the Kingdom Interlinear: (Which I have no problem with at all)

  "In order that they may be knowing you..."

  Notice how other translations capture the subjuncitve clearly:

  KJV:..that they might know thee..

  ASV:..that they should know thee..

  YLT:..that they may know thee..

  NAS:..that they may know You..

  Rotherham:...that they get to know thee...

  Byington:..that they should know you...

  Among those translations that don't capture the subjunctive this clearly, most at least capture it partially through the use of the infinitive, "To know"

  But as I pointed out, it's entirely lost in the NWT because of the juxtaposition of noun and verb that has happened. --And this is not a matter of doctrine, because a rendering truer to the original would have zero effect on JW theology. It's entirely a matter of obedience to Greek grammar. (Or the lack thereof in this instance.)
• 

  Lieu

  when we find the actual originals, we can THEN prove which is the best Bible translation, and NOT before

  This is my thought on the matter. Until then, they're all in the same inacurracy boat; one no better than the next.
• 

  Lieu

  TD,

  One also haas to watch those 17-18th Century translations. A problem arises when we find that men of those times fancied the 'poetic' as a sign of high breeding and scholarship. This lent to all the occasions of pluperfect - present subjuntives being used in translations.

  I'll wait until someone finds "the oldest" and translates that to English [which of course will be modern Eng]. Until then, I'll use whichever version I happen to have handy.
• 

  reniaa

  hi TD

  I cannot argue on your level of knowledge this site says certain things concerning the wording used.

  http://en.allexperts.com/q/Jehovah-s-Witness-1617/Authority-NWT.htm

  but I agree on one thing the interlinear uses 'know' so it wouldn't be a big issue if NWT used know it's not theology changing for Jw's, but for christians use who 'know' in a specific theological viewpoint that isn't supported biblical on how we should continue growing in both "knowing" knowledge of God and Jesus it's more of an issue for them.

  2 Peter 3:18 (New International Version)

  18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.

  Colossians 1:10
  And we pray this in order that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and may please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God,

  2 Peter 1:2
  Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.

  Reniaa