1. Dublin Ireland
    Joined
    31 Oct '12
    Moves
    14235
    30 May '13 11:56
    Ok, lets hear from you all then. Here's my question.

    Is the New World Translation of the Bible inaccurate?

    This translation is used by the Watchtower Organization
    which oversees all the activities of Jehovah's Witnesses.
    Jehovah's Witnesses claim that this translation of the Holy
    Scriptures is the most accurate.

    I disagree. I think the New World Translation is incorrect
    and does not reflect the true meaning of the original writings.

    What say you?
  2. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    30 May '13 13:032 edits
    Originally posted by johnnylongwoody

    Ok, lets hear from you all then. Here's my question.

    Is the New World Translation of the Bible inaccurate?


    This translation is used by the Watchtower Organization
    which oversees all the activities of Jehovah's Witnesses.
    Jehovah's Witnesses claim that this translation of the Holy
    Scriptures is the most accurate.

    I disagree. I t ...[text shortened]... on is incorrect
    and does not reflect the true meaning of the original writings.

    What say you?
    "If I were to personally recommend a Bible translation, the NIV or the English Standard Version (ESV) would be it. The ESV Study Bible is the one that I use and with the margins and footnotes, I can easily reference the original work in Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew. The New King James (NKJ) Study Bible is also a fine translation. As I said before, I have several translations and I use more than one. But a Study Bible always gives you more and better information on the scriptures and it gives you associated scriptural references from elsewhere in the Bible that have to do with the same subject, topic, or person. An example is in my ESV Study Bible, John 19:25 the Roman soldier’s caste lots for Jesus seamless tunic which fulfilled the prophecy of Him in Psalm 22:18." (Jack Wellman)

    Read more: http://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/five-tips-for-picking-the-best-bible-translation/#ixzz2UmQpQlcx

    Johnny, this summary appears to be accurate and comprehensive. I hope you find it helpful. Bobby
  3. Dublin Ireland
    Joined
    31 Oct '12
    Moves
    14235
    30 May '13 14:30
    Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
    "If I were to personally recommend a Bible translation, the NIV or the English Standard Version (ESV) would be it. The ESV Study Bible is the one that I use and with the margins and footnotes, I can easily reference the original work in Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew. The New King James (NKJ) Study Bible is also a fine translation. As I said before, I hav ...[text shortened]... nny, this summary appears to be accurate and comprehensive. I hope you find it helpful. Bobby
    My question was do you trust the New World Translation
    version of the Bible as used by the JW's.?



    Answer the question. Do you trust it or not?
  4. Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    77354
    30 May '13 14:50
    "Some linguists have examined modern Bible translations—including the New World Translation—for examples of inaccuracy and bias. One such scholar is Jason David BeDuhn, associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University in the United States. In 2003 he published a 200-page study of nine of “the Bibles most widely in use in the English-speaking world.”* His study examined several passages of Scripture that are controversial, for that is where “bias is most likely to interfere with translation.” For each passage, he compared the Greek text with the renderings of each English translation, and he looked for biased attempts to change the meaning. What is his assessment?


    BeDuhn points out that the general public and many Bible scholars assume that the differences in the New World Translation (NW) are due to religious bias on the part of its translators. However, he states: “Most of the differences are due to the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal, conservative translation.” While BeDuhn disagrees with certain renderings of the New World Translation, he says that this version “emerges as the most accurate of the translations compared.” He calls it a “remarkably good” translation."
  5. Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    77354
    30 May '13 14:52
    p. 30A “Remarkably Good” Translation


    ACCORDING to one count, as many as 55 new English translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures were published between 1952 and 1990. Translators’ choices mean that no two read alike. In order to assess the reliability of the translators’ work, Jason BeDuhn, associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff, Arizona, U.S.A., examined and compared for accuracy eight major translations, including the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, published by Jehovah’s Witnesses. The result?


    While critical of some of its translation choices, BeDuhn called the New World Translation a “remarkably good” translation, “better by far” and “consistently better” than some of the others considered. Overall, concluded BeDuhn, the New World Translation “is one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available” and “the most accurate of the translations compared.”—Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament.


    BeDuhn noted, too, that many translators were subject to pressure “to paraphrase or expand on what the Bible does say in the direction of what modern readers want and need it to say.” On the other hand, the New World Translation is different, observed BeDuhn, because of “the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal, conservative translation of the original expressions of the New Testament writers.”
  6. Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    77354
    30 May '13 14:53
    As to this feature of uniformity, note what Hebrew and Greek commentator Alexander Thomson had to say in his review on the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures: “The translation is evidently the work of skilled and clever scholars, who have sought to bring out as much of the true sense of the Greek text as the English language is capable of expressing. The version aims to keep to one English meaning for each major Greek word, and to be as literal as possible. . . . The word usually rendered ‘justify’ is generally translated very correctly as ‘declare righteous.’ . . . The word for the Cross is rendered ‘torture stake’ which is another improvement. . . . Luke 23:43 is well rendered, ‘Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.’ This is a big improvement upon the reading of most versions.” On the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, the same reviewer made this comment: “The New World Version is well worth acquiring. It is lively and lifelike, and makes the reader think and study. It is not the work of Higher Critics, but of scholars who honour God and His Word.”—The Differentiator, April 1952, pages 52-7, and June 1954, page 136.
  7. Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    77354
    30 May '13 15:02
    Worth reading...


    http://jehovah.to/xlation/ho.html
  8. Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    77354
    30 May '13 15:07
    An interesting comment by an anonymous person. Not a JW...

    "While unfortunately some persons have an opinion of Jehovahs Witnesses that may not be favorable for one reason or another, IMHO I have to say that this translation impresses me with its accuracy. I have seen over the past 20 or 30 years how Bible versions in general have began to become more and more "sterilized" and "politically correct" bending to public opinion instead of what the writers may have been trying to say. As an example I have to agree that Gods Name has been removed altogether from most modern translations.

    Look in most old book stores at any older Bible and you will usually see Gods Name (Jehovah, Yaweh, YHWH) in quite a few scriptures. These are all but non-existent today.

    I have to say I admire this translation (and the translators) for sticking to their guns, so to speak, and restoring Gods Name to the Bible where it is so prominent in the ancient Hebrew scripts and some in the New Testament as well.

    As a side note, I've read some of these other reviews and am pretty surprised at the obvious bias in the tone of the review. I'm of the opinion that a person can read pretty much any translation and get the idea of what Gods Will is. For some of these reviews to be as spiteful and hateful as they are says more about the reviewers "agenda" and not about the actual accuracy of the translation."

    Peace.
  9. Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    77354
    30 May '13 15:10
    From another:

    "This translation is truly a scholarly translation. One that does not reflect bias. Indeed, when one examines the evidence, it stands out for its consistency and literal word for word translation. This means that anyone wishing to hear, in Modern English, what the original texts truly said should look into this translation.

    I heard the charges against this Bible translation, so I investigated it from that aspect. I was personally looking for bias from the Jehovah's Witness according to their creeds. Yet I did not find any such bias. Anywhere. I could write an entire thesis on this topic, but here are just a couple of examples using the Divine Name, YHWH.

    I found that in this translation, at Job 6:4, and 1 Timothy 2:10, they used "God" and "Almighty" respectively. Although, the Greek Septuagint, Latin Vulgate, Elias Hutters Greek Translation and William Robertsons Greek Scriptures Translation, they could have laid claim by those manuscripts and translation to use "Jehovah" instead of "God" and "Almighty".

    But the Jehovah's Witnesses translators didn't do that. Those were only a couple of examples. The translators showed themselves students (Or scholars) of textual criticism, and stuck to what they believe the archetype would have stated when showed the evidence. I tend to agree with them in those incidences. What is of further note, that they did not use "Jehovah" in that incident (among others) in the Christian Greek Scriptures. When one examines the evidence as found in this translation for themselves, they find that the translators did not give themselves over to such bias so easily, but using true, scholarly techniques attempted to render in this translation what the archetype truly stated.

    I then began to look beyond mere evidence of bias, and examine the scholarly nature of this work. I must say that I was thoroughly impressed. It's insistence on using a literal word for word translation of each term, where possible, reflects not only that the NWT does not show bias, but that the original thoughts are carried over in an extremely impressive manner. One can gain a truer understanding of the Hebrew lingual process, as well as thought processes. Of course, this is demonstrated in doctrinal matters that they translate words such as "ne-phesh'" as "soul" rather than trying to decide and interpret for themselves (as some other translations do) whether the word should be life, soul, spirit, etc. Again, that does not show bias, because it is only translating, consistently, the one word from Hebrew, into one other word. It doesn't mean that the reader cannot decide for himself what the text is saying.

    In addition other non-doctrinal Hebrew idioms colloquialisms are captured and brought to life as well as can be done in Modern English. I highly recommend ones go to their Kingdom Halls and order the larger edition with references and footnote. I use that copy greatly in my studies in textual criticism.

    Among notable Greek scholars, translators and researchers who recognize the work that went into this translation are: Professor Benjamin Kedar of Israel, Jason Beduhn of Northern Arizona University, Department of Humanities Arts and Religion, J.D. Phillips of , Allen Wikgren who was on the New Revised Standard Version committee, Edgar J. Goodspeed, a professor of Greek at the University of Chicago who also translated the New Testament portion of "The Bible an American Translation". Many of these, and further scholars of incredible merit realize that the NWT is a work of sheer brilliance."
  10. Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    77354
    30 May '13 15:14
    Still anothers views:

    "I have a few other favorite translations but this one is at the top of the list for consistent accuracy. It is very literal so you get a flavor of the original Hebrew and Greek in many places. Some people find this literal flavor awkward, but I find it helpful for serious study. If you make a serious effort examine the Hebrew and Greek for yourself, you will appreciate the quality of work that went into this publication. I took some effort to personally compare the NWT with about 20 other English language translations. I especially examined closely the passages where the NWT differs from other common English translations. In almost every case the controversy involves a passage where the Trinity reflex is tapped. Unfortunately for Trinitarians, the JWs and their NWT are spot on in each case. I did not see a bias or slant in the wording in their translation of either the Hebrew or Greek scriptures. I won't go through an exhaustive list, but I will mention John 1:1 as some others have.

    The NWT says and 'the Word was a god' and several other popular translations say and 'the Word was God'. The Greek here is indicating an indefinite/qualitative aspect of the Word. There are numerous ways that a sincere, careful translator, respecting the Greek, could translate such a passage ...

    The Word was a god.
    The Word was a divine being.
    The Word was divine.
    The Word was godlike.
    The Word was a godlike one.
    The Word was a heavenly being.

    The NWT renders John in the very literal 'The Word was a god'. Although shocking to some, it shouldn't be. Jesus is unique in a number of crucially important ways, but he shares his existence as 'a god' with several others mentioned in the Bible. Angels are referred to in this way at Psalms 8:5 (compare Hebrew to the reference made at Hebrews 2:7). Israelite judges are called gods at Psalm 62:6 (compare the Hebrew to Jesus' quote of this at Matthew 10:34). The term god is an ancient way of describing someone as powerful. For those who cry polytheism, polytheism generally means agreeing with or the practice of worshiping more than one God. In the strongest possible terms, the Bible condemns this. Worship is only to be directly to Jesus' Father, the 'Old Testament' YHWH. In most English language translations the personal name of God (typically rendered 'Jehovah' or 'Yahweh' in English) is substituted with 'LORD' or 'GOD' where that name appears in the best, most ancient manuscripts. The NWT faithfully includes the divine name.

    'The Word was God' is extremely misleading. It is definitely not what the Greek is saying at John 1:1. If a serious scholar even attempts to support the tradition of rendering John 1:1 in this manner, he has to abandon the writing style in John's gospel altogether and try to force the usage of other Bible writers or non-Biblical Koine Greek on John. Such efforts are at best very poor scholarship. Even Catholic scholars in the very popular St Joseph Edition of the 'New American Bible' felt compelled to write the following in their comments below John 1:1 - "'With God: the Greek preposition here connotes communication with another. Was God: lack of an indefinite article with 'God' in Greek signifies predication rather than identification." This shows that even Trinitarian scholars see two persons here and that 'The Word' is not being identified as THE God he was with.

    Enemies of the New World Translation have suggested bias, I have not found any verse where this was the case. In fact, the translation is so literal that there is not a lot of room for JW translators to be creative. If you are not a JW hater and carefully examine this translation, you will see that these folks are clearly sincerely attempting to preserve as much of the Greek and Hebrew words and thoughts as possible, without being excessively wordy, in a form that a modern English reader can understand.

    I applaud this excellent translation. The truly wise translator and Bible reader alike will use the NWT as a serious study tool. Other translators / publishers often are more concerned with how many Bibles they can sell so they would never dream of rendering John 1:1 in any way that differs from the traditional and very popular dogma. If you didn't already, now you know the real issues - the money to be lost by those who do translation commercially and the opposition of Trinity fanatics."
  11. Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    77354
    30 May '13 15:19
    J.D. PHILLIPS: (J.D. Phillips was a Church of Christ Minister, schooled in the original tongues).
    "Last week I purchased a copy of your New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures of which I take pride in being an owner. You have done a marvelous work.I was happy, indeed, to see the name Jehovah in it. But you have made a marvelous step in the right direction, and I pray God that your Version will be used to His glory. What you have done for the Name alone is worth all the effort and cost!" ALLEN WIKGREN: (Allen Wikgren was on the New Revised Standard Version committee, as well as on the committee which produced the UBS Greek text). "Independent readings of merit often occur in other modern speech versions, such as.the Jehovah's Witnesses edition of the New Testament(1950)." (The nterpreter's Bible, 1952 Vol. 1 page 99)

    BENJAMIN KEDAR: (Benjamin Kedar is a professor at Hebrew University in Israel). "In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translations, I often refer to the English edition of what is known as the New World Translation. In so doing, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew.Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translation. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain." S.

    MACLEAN GILMORE: "In 1950 the Jehovah's Witnesses published their New World Translation of the New Testament, and the preparation of the New World Old Testament is now far advanced. The New Testament edition was made by a committee.that possessed an unusual competence in Greek." (The Andover Newton Quarterly, September 1966, Vol 7, #1 page 25, 26)

    C. HOUTMAN: Mr. Houtman notes that on the point of translator bias "the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witnesses can survive the scrutiny of criticism." (Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift, [Dutch Theological Magazines] 38 1984, page 279-280)

    WILLIAM CAREY TAYLOR: (William C. Taylor was a Southern Baptist Minister schooled in the original tongues). "Just when the infidel universities of this land thought they had laughed out of court the very name Jehovah, upsurges. "Jehovah's Witnesses". And with considerable scholarship they get out their own New Testament and lo and behold, they put Jehovah into the New Testament two or three hundred times.It ought to be there [in the entire Bible] many times" (The New Bible Pro and Con, 1955 Page 75)

    C. HOUTMAN: Mr. Houtman notes that on the point of translator bias "the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Witnesses can survive the scrutiny of criticism." Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift, [Dutch Theological Magazines] 38 1984, page 279-280

    CHARLES FRANCIS POTTER: "the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures.the anonymous translators have certainly rendered the best manuscript texts.with scholarly ability and acumen." (The Faith Men Live By, 1954, Page 239)

    EDGAR J. GOODSPEED: (Edgar J. Goodspeed was a Professor of Greek at the University of Chicago, and also translated the New Testament portion of "The Bible an American Translation"😉. "I am.much pleased with the free, frank and vigorous translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I can testify." (Personal Letter to Arthur Goux of Brooklyn Bethel, December 8, 1950; See also Watchtower September 1, 1952 page 541, where Goodspeed is quoted as stating that the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures was "an interesting and scholarly work" )

    ROBERT M. MCCOY: "The translation of the New Testament is evidence of the presence in the movement of scholars qualified to deal intelligently with themany problems of Biblical translation." (The Andover Newton Quarterly, January 1963, Vol. 3, #3, Page 31)

    STEVEN T. BYINGTON: (Steven T. Byington translated the version known as "The Bible in Living English"😉. "If you are digging for excellent or suggestive renderings this is among the richer mines." (Christian Century, "Review of the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, November 1, 1950 page 1296)

    JASON BEDUHN: (Jason Beduhn teaches at the University of Indiana). "I have just recently completed teaching a course for the Religious Studies Department of Indiana University, Bloomington. This is primarily a course in the Gospels. Your help came in the form of copies of the Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures which my students used as one of the textbooks for the class."
  12. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86285
    30 May '13 16:101 edit
    Originally posted by galveston75
    J.D. PHILLIPS: (J.D. Phillips was a Church of Christ Minister, schooled in the original tongues).
    "Last week I purchased a copy of your New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures of which I take pride in being an owner. You have done a marvelous work.I was happy, indeed, to see the name Jehovah in it. But you have made a marvelous step in my students used as one of the textbooks for the class."
    Interesting how you know [copy paste] all this, but can't answer my simple question in the "dilemma" thread.
  13. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    30 May '13 17:06
    Originally posted by galveston75
    J.D. PHILLIPS: (J.D. Phillips was a Church of Christ Minister, schooled in the original tongues).
    "Last week I purchased a copy of your New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures of which I take pride in being an owner. You have done a marvelous work.I was happy, indeed, to see the name Jehovah in it. But you have made a marvelous step in ...[text shortened]... my students used as one of the textbooks for the class."
    beautiful
  14. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    30 May '13 17:10
    Originally posted by johnnylongwoody

    My question was do you trust the New World Translation
    version of the Bible as used by the JW's.?



    Answer the question. Do you trust it or not?
    Unqualified to pass judgment. I do, however, appreciate the persistence of an inquiring mind.
  15. Standard memberblack beetle
    Black Beastie
    Scheveningen
    Joined
    12 Jun '08
    Moves
    14509
    30 May '13 18:05
    Originally posted by galveston75
    Still anothers views:

    "I have a few other favorite translations but this one is at the top of the list for consistent accuracy. It is very literal so you get a flavor of the original Hebrew and Greek in many places. Some people find this literal flavor awkward, but I find it helpful for serious study. If you make a serious effort examine the Hebrew a ...[text shortened]... ation commercially and the opposition of Trinity fanatics."
    In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God, and God was the Word.
Back to Top