Question:
Jehovahs Witnesses,do you feel you can prove your doctrines from The King James Version?
2009-11-12 07:53:48 UTC
That being the case,then why don't you use the King James Version alone in your work?Why do you need the very questionable New World Translation?If as Jehovahs Witnesses say The King James Version is the Word of God,why would you need anything else?
Eight answers:
Anthony M
2009-11-12 08:29:25 UTC
The Jehovah's witnesses can't prove anything from a real Bible. The NWT was created to remove the "questionable" parts - the parts, for example in John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God, and the Word was with God" The Word in this case being a reference to Jesus. In the Jehovah's Witness bible, this was changed to "The Word was A God." Bringing the deity of Jesus into question.

I have friends who are ex Jehovah's Witnesses, who showed many other areas of the Bible where they had "corrected" it. - Really quite an eye-opener. Just to make things clear, the Jehovah's Witnesses are NOT Christians. Their beliefs are based on a corrupted version of Christianity.
2009-11-12 11:49:57 UTC
http://www.bible.ca/Jw-NWT.htm

Is the New World Translation a valid version of the Bible?



New World Translation





Question: "Is the New World Translation a valid version of the Bible?"



Answer: The New World Translation (NWT) is defined by the Jehovah's Witnesses’ parent organization (The Watchtower Society) as "a translation of the Holy Scriptures made directly from Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek into modern day English by a committee of anointed witnesses of Jehovah." The NWT is the anonymous work of the “New World Bible Translation Committee.” Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that the anonymity is in place so that the credit for the work will go to God. Of course this has the added benefit of keeping the translators from any accountability for their errors, and prevents real scholars from checking their academic credentials.



The New World Translation is unique in one thing – it is the first intentional systematic effort at producing a complete version of the Bible that is edited and revised for the specific purpose of agreeing with a group's doctrine. The Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watchtower Society realized that their beliefs contradicted Scripture. So, rather than conforming their beliefs to Scripture, they altered Scripture to agree with their beliefs. The “New World Bible Translation Committee” went through the Bible and changed any Scripture that did not agree with Jehovah’s Witness’ theology. This is clearly demonstrated by the fact that as new editions to the New World Translation were published, additional changes were made to the biblical text. As biblical Christians continued to point out, Scriptures that clearly argue for the deity of Christ (for example), the Watchtower Society would publish a new edition of the New World Translation with those Scriptures changed. Following are some of the more prominent examples of intentional revisions.



The New World Translation renders the Greek term word "staurós" ("cross") as "torture stake" because Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that Jesus was crucified on a cross. The New World Translation does not translate the Greek words “sheol,” "hades,” "gehenna," and "tartarus," as "hell” because Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in hell. The NWT gives the translation "presence" instead of “coming” for the Greek word “parousia” because JW’s believe that Christ has already returned in the early 1900’s. In Colossians 1:16, the NWT inserts the word “other” despite it being completely absent from the original Greek text. It does this to give the view that “all other things” were created by Christ, instead of what the text says, “all things were created by Christ.” This is to go along with their belief that Christ is a created being, which they believe because they deny the Trinity.



The most well known of all the New World Translation perversions is John 1:1. The original Greek text reads, “the Word was God.” The NWT renders it has “the word was a god.” This is not a matter of correct translation, but of reading one's preconceived theology into the text, rather than allowing the text to speak for itself. There is no indefinite article in Greek (in English - "a" or "an"). So any use of an indefinite article in the English translation must be added in by the translator. This is grammatically acceptable in English, so long as it does not change the meaning of the text.



There is a perfectly good explanation for why "theos" has no definite article in John 1:1 that does denies the New World Translation rendering. There are three general rules we need to understand to see why.



1. In Greek, word order does not determine word usage like it does in English. In English, a sentence is structured according to word order: Subject - Verb - Predicate. Thus, "Harry called the dog" is not equivalent to, "The dog called Harry." But in Greek, a word's function is determined by the case ending found attached to the word's root. In this verse, there are two case endings for the root "theo" . . . one is "s" (theos), the other is "n" (theon). The "s" ending normally identifies a noun as being the subject of a sentence, while the "n" ending normally identifies a noun as the direct object.



2. When a noun is functioning as a predicate nominative (in English a noun that follows a "being" verb such as "is") its case ending must match the noun's case that it modifies, so that the reader will know which noun it is describing. Therefore, "theo" must take the "s" ending because it is modifying "logos." Therefore, John 1:1 transliterates to: "kai theos en ho logos." Is "theos" the subject or is "logos"? Both have the "s" ending. The answer is found in the next rule.



3. In cases where two nouns appear, and both take the same case endings, the author will often add the definite article to the word that is the subject in order to avoid confusion. John put the definite article on "logos" (the Word) instead of "theos." So "logos" is the subject, and "theos" is the predicate nominative. In English, this results in John 1:1 being read as: "and the Word was God," (instead of "and God was the word").



The most revealing evidence of the Watchtower's bias is their inconsistent translation technique. Throughout the Gospel of John, the Greek word “theon” occurs without a definite article. The New World Translation renders none of these as “a god.” Just 3 verses after John 1:1, the New World Translation translates another case of "theos" without the indefinite article as "God." Even more inconsistent, in John 1:18, the NWT translates the same term as both "God" and "god" in the very same sentence.



The Watchtower, therefore, has no hard textual grounds for their translation—only their own theological bias. While New World Translation defenders might succeed in showing that John 1:1 can be translated as they have done, they cannot show that it is the proper translation. Nor can they explain the fact that that the NWT does not translate the exact same Greek phrases elsewhere in the Gospel of John the same way. It is only the pre-conceived heretical rejection of the deity of Christ that forces the Watchtower Society to inconsistently translate the Greek text, thus allowing their error to gain some semblance of legitimacy to those ignorant of the facts.



It is only the Watchtower's pre-conceived heretical beliefs that are behind the dishonest and inconsistent translation that is the New World Translation. The New World Translation is most definitely not a valid version of God’s Word. There are minor differences between all the major English translations of the Bible. No English translation is perfect. However, while other Bible translators make minor mistakes in the rendering of the Hebrew and Greek text into English; the NWT intentionally changes the rendering of the text to conform to Jehovah’s Witness’ theology. The New World Translation is a perversion, not a version, of the Bible.
?
2016-09-25 08:59:18 UTC
The Divine Name within the Old Testament is 4 Hebrew letters, represented in English as 'YHWH.' This is referred to as the Tetragrammaton. Written Hebrew at the beginning had no vowels, and for this reason it's not possible to understand precisely how the Name used to be said. Most brand new pupils suppose is used to be Yahweh, or anything very identical (probably Ya-ha-weh). "Jehovah" is a time period courting from the nineteenth Century. It used to be created via taking the vowels from the Hebrew Adonai ("Lord") and including them to YHWH (or JHVH), generating JaHoVah. The Watchtower recognizes that "Jehovah" is traditionally no longer the right pronunciation of the Name, however contend that due to the fact that it's the conventional illustration of God's Name in English, it's appropriate to preserve utilizing it, despite the fact that it's technically erroneous. The component of the advent to the New American Standard Bible handling God's Name within the Old Testament reads as follows: "In the Scriptures, the title of God is such a lot massive and understandably so. In is unattainable to suppose of religious issues and not using a right designation for the Supreme Deity. Thus essentially the most typical title for the Deity is God, a translation of the fashioned Elohim. One of the titles for God is Lord, a translation of Adonai. There is but yet another title that's chiefly assigned to God as His particular or right title, that's, the 4 letters YHWH (Exodus three:14 and Isaiah forty two:eight). This title has no longer been said via the Jews due to the fact that of reverence for the excellent sacredness of the divine title. Therefore, it's been regularly translated LORD. The simplest exception to this translation of YHWH is whilst it happens in instantaneous proximity to the phrase Lord, that's, Adonai. In that case it's probably translated GOD with the intention to restrict confusion." Notice that the Name has been translated LORD, in keeping with the advent. The oldest and such a lot risk-free Greek New Testament manuscripts all have "Lord" (Greek kurios) at any time when the writer used to be quoting an Old Testament passage containing YHWH. The writers of the New Testament most likely quoted the Greek Old Testament (the Septuagint, or "LXX" for brief), and the overpowering quantity of LXX manuscripts even have kurios rather of YHWH. There are a handful of older LXX manuscripts where the Divine Name looks in a few style of 4-letter translation or transliteration, however those manuscripts don't end up that the LXX at the beginning contained the Name; they simply end up that a few scribes preferred a 4-letter illustration, whilst others favored kurios.
jen
2009-11-12 08:08:17 UTC
From 1870 to 1961, what bible do people think

the Jehovah's Witnesses used?

Why would anyone think the one they use is

not equal to what they always used, except

it is more to the natural speach of today.

The most important thing is being bible students

rather than all messed up with belief systems.
andre
2009-11-12 08:18:03 UTC
who said the KJV is the right one? it was written in the 1600s. no one in the Moses day or Jesus' day said art, thou and whilst. we believe it is God's Word but we found some mistakes that were corrected. we can use the hundreds of translations if u like. do not get off saying that only the KJV is the one to use. a skillful JW can use that version as well
The Jesus
2009-11-12 08:03:56 UTC
Isn't that kind of like using the Hobbit to prove that the Fellowship of the Ring is true?
2009-11-12 12:12:02 UTC
THE JEHOVAHS WITNESSES WROTE THEIR OWN BIBLE.......



" THE NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES"......WHICH WAS WRITTEN BY ELDERS AT THE WATCHTOWER SOCIETY IN THE 1960'S........



THERE IS NO PROOF THAT NONE OF THEM SPOKE HEBREW, LATIN, GREEK IN THE PROCESS OF TRANSLATING THIS "NEW LIGHT OF JEHOVAH"



SECOND......THE WATCHTOWER LOVES TO WORK ON " NEW LIGHT" OF WORDS IN THEIR BIBLE AND WRITES A WHOLE NEW THEOLOGY ABOUT THESE WORDS AND WHAT THEY MEAN......( HALF THE TIME I COULDNT MAKE SENSE......!!!!)



THIS IS WHAT THE WATCHTOWER IS ABOUT.........RE WRITING NEW LIGHT TO THE NEXT GENERATION TO DEVOTE THEIR LIVES TO......



AND TAKE IT TO YOUR DOOR..............
2009-11-12 07:57:30 UTC
You are going to get your door knocked on to death


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...