So who here is an expert on Bibles and the many translations of it? Who? Anyone?
Many here say the NWT is not correct.
But if one only goes by the "experts" observations and opinions and no one elses, then most here that blast the NWT because they don't agree, would no doubt not qualify as an expert and that would imply we should not view your opinion? Probably.
Also the most notable differeance in the NWT is the placement of Jehovah's name which has been removed from most Bibles, in the correct scriptures.
The reason it was removed is to cloud the truth of our God who satan hates and then support the many false doctrines that Jesus himself clearly said would be accepted into the churches after he was gone.
In order for those to be taught effectivly such as the trinity, Jehovah would have to be hidden from his true identity to the masses. With his name now removed it would be easier to teach the trinity and it's confusing theories and lies.
Such a simply sounding plan with his name removed, but it has certianly worked.
Satan is the master deciever and by him using humans to remove God's name from most Bibles, he has been able to decieve so many.
Originally posted by galveston75And Satan has done a masterful job in deceiving you JWs into believing that Yahshua is a created angel like himself.
So who here is an expert on Bibles and the many translations of it? Who? Anyone?
Many here say the NWT is not correct.
But if one only goes by the "experts" observations and opinions and no one elses, then most here that blast the NWT because they don't agree, would no doubt not qualify as an expert and that would imply we should not view your o ...[text shortened]... m using humans to remove God's name from most Bibles, he has been able to decieve so many.
The Instructor
I think the NWT is a decent translation except where it has religious bias such as the notorious John 1:1......I personally like the NASB only issue with it is the eschatology bent that it has well at least my Ryery version that I've had since I was 15 the commentary takes a pre trib stance. The translation itself is said to be one of the best word for word translations ever.
Manny
Originally posted by menace71I agree that the NASB is the best literal translation in the English language that I have seen. However, I have not seen any translation that I would say is completely free of minor errors.
I think the NWT is a decent translation except where it has religious bias such as the notorious John 1:1......I personally like the NASB only issue with it is the eschatology bent that it has well at least my Ryery version that I've had since I was 15 the commentary takes a pre trib stance. The translation itself is said to be one of the best word for word translations ever.
Manny
On the other hand, the NWT has many doctrinal errors, because of the bias of those who translated it.
The Instructor
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell Robbie my feer, the original Greek verse indicates that Logos (the Word/ the Reason) is (belongs) to the Cause; and the Reason is a characteristic of God, and the Word (Logos/ the Reason) is God (it can do and create everything). Everything came into existence through His Word, and without Him nothing would be existent amongst everything that exists.
from the perspective of a Greek, do you think that this is an accurate translation or not dear Beetle.
This is the reason why the Orthodox Christians are sure that originally there was Logos/ the Word (and Logos was with God, and Logos was God. Logos existed originally to God. All were made through Logos, and without Logos was not even a single thing that was).
So methinks John says that God/ Logos was existing initially. It occurred not, it was existent from the beginning, for John clarifies that everything that happened, it was not created without Logos. It follows that Logos/ the Word could not in any way be something that God made, due to the fact that for one it existed from the “beginning”, for two it was “without beginning”, and for three because if it was created, there would be even a single creature that was made without Him (himself) -however such a thing exists not. Over here, John says that "…without Him was not even one that was". So, according to this analysis, it follows that JC (Logos incarnated/ Logos that took flesh in order to save the people) is not a creation. And, if it is not created, the Orthodox do accept as a consequence that JC is indeed the Creator, ie God. In fact, they believe that with or without the definite article, JC (God Logos/ the Word) Is with the Father and the Holy Spirit the sole true Triune God.
All the above Orthodox rant is not in conflict with John’s Koine Greek, even when Logos is analyzed from a philosophical, a logical and an existential perspective. However, the sole thing I would change as regards the English translation of the verse is that I would rather use the word "Logos" untranslated instead of introducing the English "Word" 😵
Originally posted by menace71Psalm 83:18
I think the NWT is a decent translation except where it has religious bias such as the notorious John 1:1......I personally like the NASB only issue with it is the eschatology bent that it has well at least my Ryery version that I've had since I was 15 the commentary takes a pre trib stance. The translation itself is said to be one of the best word for word translations ever.
Manny
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
18 That they may know that You alone, whose name is the "Lord",
Are the Most High over all the earth.
If this were a correct version of the Bible then Jehovah's name would be in this scripture where it should be. But instead the name of our Almighty God, Jehovah has been removed and replaced with a title. "Lord" is not a name but a title. Even the scripture itself "whose name" is alone the most high.
Please explain why his name is removed in this version?
Why should we use this or any other Bible who's authors have done exactly what the scripture in Revelation says "NOT" to do and that is to add or take away anything in God's word the Bible?
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75The translators explained in the Preface to the NASB that traditionally, reverend Jews considered the pronunciation of the personal name of God too sacred to pronounce, and so in reading the text of the Hebrew YHWH they substituted for it the noun Adonai, which means "lord" or "master" and in keeping with this tradition they decided to use LORD (printed in capital letters to distinguish it from Lord) for the sacred name, since Jehovah (as used in the KJV sometimes) is not in the Hebrew text.
Psalm 83:18
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
18 That they may know that You alone, whose name is the "Lord",
Are the Most High over all the earth.
If this were a correct version of the Bible then Jehovah's name would be in this scripture where it should be. But instead the name of our Almighty God, Jehovah has been removed and replaced with on says "NOT" to do and that is to add or take away anything in God's word the Bible?
So Psalms 83:18 appears as follows:
That they may know that You alone, whose name is the LORD,
Are the Most High over all the earth.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalms%2083:18&version=NASB
This has also been done by other translations as well.
http://biblehub.com/psalms/83-18.htm
The Instructor
Originally posted by black beetleI need to go to work, ill get back to you on this beetle. suffice to say that there is a different treatment by the apostle of the term theos and it appears to me that the translators have ignored the Greek idiom.
Well Robbie my feer, the original Greek verse indicates that Logos (the Word/ the Reason) is (belongs) to the Cause; and the Reason is a characteristic of God, and the Word (Logos/ the Reason) is God (it can do and create everything). Everything came into existence through His Word, and without Him nothing would be existent amongst everything that exist ...[text shortened]... ould rather use the word "Logos" untranslated instead of introducing the English "Word" 😵