JW's Preach A Different Gospel

[jojom]

There is this repetitive inference made that the NWT is a "bad" translation, altering things to suit our beliefs. Please provide evidence of these translation errors so that we may discuss them.

Don't know about being a "bad" translation, but it is certainly different in different places. Post number 5 points out that the JWs don't believe the Word was God the father, but just another god. As I understand JW belief, it doesn't include the trinity, so it certainly appears they changed the regular rendition of John 1:1 from

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
(other bibles, which equate the Word with Jesus)

To

John 1:1
"1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."
(the NWT bible)

 

[djhwoodwerks]

There is this repetitive inference made that the NWT is a "bad" translation, altering things to suit our beliefs. Please provide evidence of these translation errors so that we may discuss them.

[GALLERY=media, 5390]Letter by djhwoodwerks posted Jun 10, 2015 at 8:16 PM[/GALLERY]

 

[JayJayDee]

Don't know about being a "bad" translation, but it is certainly different in different places. Post number 5 points out that the JWs don't believe the Word was God the father, but just another god. As I understand JW belief, it doesn't include the trinity, so it certainly appears they changed the regular rendition of John 1:1 from

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
(other bibles, which equate the Word with Jesus)

To

John 1:1
"1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."
(the NWT bible)

It is very easy to explain why John 1:1 is translated correctly in the NWT.

If you look at a Greek interlinear, you will see that "God" is translated from "theos". The word "theos" simply means a "mighty" one. It can mean any person or deity who has a position of power or authority over others. Angels, humans and even satan are called "gods" in the scriptures. It is not a title reserved for the Almighty alone.
Jesus said that human judges in Israel were called "gods" by the Father himself. (He was quoting Psalm 82:2-6) So calling Jesus "a god" was not indicating that he was the Almighty, but only that he was divine and had God's power. As the Word (Logos) Jesus, was "with God "in the beginning"....can a person who is "with" someone also BE that someone?
And what "beginning" are we speaking about? An eternal God has no beginning.

There are two individual "gods" (mighty ones) mentioned in John 1:1. When Jesus and his Father needed to be differentiated, this is the only verse in the Bible that makes the differentiation. How does it do that? By the addition of the definite article "THE" which is "ho" in Greek. That makes Jehovah "THE God" and Jesus just a god.

Now if you can read this scripture in a Greek to English interlinear, you will see that the Word is called "theos" and that he was "with ho theos" (THE God) but he was not THE God. The Word was just "theos" (god).

What is lost in mistranslation is assuming that the two are speaking about one God. There are two if you know Greek.

Verse 18 of the same chapter called Jesus the "only begotten god". Can God be begotten? This made some translators uncomfortable, so in the KJV you will find verse 18 rendered as "only begotten Son" But the scripture in Greek clearly says "monogenes theos" (only begotten god). If "theos" is translated "son" in verse 18, then to be consistent, it would also have to be translated "son" in verse 1. That would make it say: "in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was the son". That would convey the correct understanding.

It shows bias towards the trinity when the use of capitals is meant to mislead. It is misleading also when the KJV again demonstrates this bias in translating "I Am" in capitals in John 8:58. No capitals were in the original manuscripts because there is no capitalisation of letters in Greek.

A thorough examination of the text will reveal the truth. We have made such an examination.

 

[JFish123]

There is this repetitive inference made that the NWT is a "bad" translation, altering things to suit our beliefs. Please provide evidence of these translation errors so that we may discuss them.

And here's a few more as well after you look into the previous one though there is a lot more.

1. Jehovah is not a Biblical word. It was created by combining the original Hebrew name for God YHWH and adonai (word used by Jews who didn’t want to say God’s name). The resulting combined word, “Jehovah” has been used for the name God by many groups but it is not found in the Bible. Nowhere do you find the word Jehovah in the original languages, Hebrew or Greek.
And forcing the word Jehovah into the New Testament is simply wrong. When your translators did this they went against thousands of Greek manuscripts of the New Testament; some of which date back to the second century. Instead the New Testament uses the words “Lord” [Greek: Kurios] and “God” [Greek: theos] when talking about God. The writers never used Jehovah, even when quoting the Old Testament. The Greek New Testament source for the New World Translation, Westcott and Hort, never used Jehovah. They used kurios for Lord and theos for God. The Kingdom Interlinear confirms Jehovah was never in the original text. This interlinear published by the Watchtower Organization shows how kurios (Lord) and theos (God) were changed to Jehovah in the English translation. So anyone Stating God’s name was left out of the King James or any other version of the Bible is false.
And some more quick ones...

Numbers 1:52

"Under his own standard" changed to "by his [three-tribe] division."

The Hebrew word degal translated as "standard" literally means flag or banner. Since the JWs regard saluting a flag as an act of idolatry, the text has been altered according to their doctrinal bias. (Same revision found in Num. 2:2, 3, 10, 18, 25; 10: 14, 18, 22, 25.)

Matthew 25:46

"Eternal punishment" changed to "everlasting cutting-off."

The Greek word kolasis translated "punishment" indicates continuous torment, but the NWT revision suggests "termination," as the JWs promote the doctrine of annihilationism regarding condemned souls.

 

[JayJayDee]

[GALLERY=media, 5390]Letter by djhwoodwerks posted Jun 10, 2015 at 8:16 PM[/GALLERY]

This link did not work.

If you have examples please post them one at a time.

 

[JFish123]

It is very easy to explain why John 1:1 is translated correctly in the NWT.

If you look at a Greek interlinear, you will see that "God" is translated from "theos". The word "theos" simply means a "mighty" one. It can mean any person or deity who has a position of power or authority over others. Angels, humans and even satan are called "gods" in the scriptures. It is not a title reserved for the Almighty alone.
Jesus said that human judges in Israel were called "gods" by the Father himself. (He was quoting Psalm 82:2-6) So calling Jesus "a god" was not indicating that he was the Almighty, but only that he was divine and had God's power. As the Word (Logos) Jesus, was "with God "in the beginning"....can a person who is "with" someone also BE that someone?
And what "beginning" are we speaking about? An eternal God has no beginning.

There are two individual "gods" (mighty ones) mentioned in John 1:1. When Jesus and his Father needed to be differentiated, this is the only verse in the Bible that makes the differentiation. How does it do that? By the addition of the definite article "THE" which is "ho" in Greek. That makes Jehovah "THE God" and Jesus just a god.

Now if you can read this scripture in a Greek to English interlinear, you will see that the Word is called "theos" and that he was "with ho theos" (THE God) but he was not THE God. The Word was just "theos" (god).

What is lost in mistranslation is assuming that the two are speaking about one God. There are two if you know Greek.

Verse 18 of the same chapter called Jesus the "only begotten god". Can God be begotten? This made some translators uncomfortable, so in the KJV you will find verse 18 rendered as "only begotten Son" But the scripture in Greek clearly says "monogenes theos" (only begotten god). If "theos" is translated "son" in verse 18, then to be consistent, it would also have to be translated "son" in verse 1. That would make it say: "in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was the son". That would convey the correct understanding.

It shows bias towards the trinity when the use of capitals is meant to mislead. It is misleading also when the KJV again demonstrates this bias in translating "I Am" in capitals in John 8:58. No capitals were in the original manuscripts because there is no capitalisation of letters in Greek.

A thorough examination of the text will reveal the truth. We have made such an examination.

Sorry can't let this one go
This is the truth about John 1:1
So the Watchtower argues that since the second occurrence of theos ("God") in John 1:1 has no definite article ("the") it this refers to a lesser deity who simply has godlike qualities. But must theos ("God") without the ho ("the") refer to someone less than Jehovah? By no means!
The Greek word 'Theos' without the definite article 'ho' is used of Jehovah Himself in the New Testament with the exact same Greek construction used in John 1:1. Indeed, the "Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature" used in most Seminaries states the truth, that the word theos is used "quite predominantly of the True God, sometimes with, sometimes without the article." An example of this is in Luke 20:38, where we read of Jehovah, "He is A GOD, not of the dead, but of the living.
Secondly, everyone has observed how inconsistent the Watchtower Society translates occurrence is theos ("God") without the article. It's been noted that there are 282 such occurrences in the New Testament. At 16 places the NWT has (similar to its translation of John 1:1) either a god, god, gods, or godly.
16 out of 282 means that the NWT translators were faithful to their translation principle only 6% of the time. In other words, in the great majority of occurrences of theos without the article in the New Testament, the Watchtower did NOT translate it as "a god." Their choice to translate John 1:1 this way shows their extreme theological bias against the absolute deity of Christ shown throughout the Bible.
Did you know that if the Watchtower was consistent in translating other verses like they did in John 1:1, we'd have some very strange sounding verses? For example:
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of A GOD." (Matthew 5:9)
"There came a man who was sent from A GOD whose name was A JOHN." (JOHN 1:6)
What does it say to you that the Watchtower translates the above verses correctly, but then sticks an indefinite article in John 1:1 in reference to Christ: "a god"? Are you sure you want to trust in the New World Translation?
Did you know that the overwhelming majority of credible Greek scholars in the world say the Watchtower Society is absolutely wrong and even deceptive in its translation including in John 1:1?
And finally, since the Watchtower Society claims that the phrase 'ho theos' ("the God") is not used of Jesus Christ in the New Testament, while in Fact, John 20:28, Matthew 1:23, and Hebrews 1:8 DO USE this phrase of Jesus Christ

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Why would they even dare to quote a spiritualist? Do JW's know who Johannes Greber was?


*** w83 4/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers *** (This is posted in 1983)
■ Why, in recent years, has The Watchtower not made use of the translation by the former Catholic priest, Johannes Greber?
This translation was used occasionally in support of renderings of Matthew 27:52, 53 and John 1:1, as given in the New World Translation and other authoritative Bible versions. But as indicated in a foreword to the 1980 edition of The New Testament by Johannes Greber, this translator relied on “God’s Spirit World” to clarify for him how he should translate difficult passages. It is stated: “His wife, a medium of God’s Spirit world was often instrumental in conveying the correct answers from God’s Messengers to Pastor Greber.” The Watchtower has deemed it improper to make use of a translation that has such a close rapport with Spiritism. (Deuteronomy 18:10-12) The scholarship that forms the basis for the rendering of the above-cited texts in the New World Translation is sound and for this reason does not depend at all on Greber’s translation for authority. Nothing is lost, therefore, by ceasing to use his New Testament.


*** w75 10/15 p. 640 Questions From Readers ***
Without wresting the Greek grammar, a translator can render Matthew 27:52, 53 in a way that suggests that a similar exposing of corpses resulted from the earthquake occurring at Jesus’ death. Thus the translation by Johannes Greber (1937) renders these verses: “Tombs were laid open, and many bodies of those buried there were tossed upright. In this posture they projected from the graves and were seen by many who passed by the place on their way back to the city.”—Compare the New World Translation.



"The Word" Who is He? According to John 1962 page 5

*** w76 4/15 p. 231 Insight on the News ***
Event Clarifies Bible
● The recent Guatemalan earthquake affected even some of those already dead. “Time” magazine reports that “several mourners who went to bury their dead in family plots found that the coffins of long-dead relatives had been uncovered by the quake.” Something similar occurred during an earthquake in the Jerusalem area at Jesus’ death. At that time, dead bodies were customarily placed in vaults or chambers cut from Palestine’s soft limestone rock, often in hillsides. A report in the Bible, as translated by Johannes Greber, says that when Jesus died, “the earth quaked, and the rocks were shattered. Tombs were laid open, and many bodies of those buried there were tossed upright. In this posture they projected from the graves and were seen by many who passed by the place on their way back to the city.” Hence, rather than a resurrection, as some Bible translations imply, there appears to have been merely an exposure of the dead to observers, as in Guatemala.—Matt. 27:51-53.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

 

[JayJayDee]

Why would they even dare to quote a spiritualist? Do JW's know who Johannes Greber was?


*** w83 4/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers *** (This is posted in 1983)
■ Why, in recent years, has The Watchtower not made use of the translation by the former Catholic priest, Johannes Greber?
This translation was used occasionally in support of renderings of Matthew 27:52, 53 and John 1:1, as given in the New World Translation and other authoritative Bible versions. But as indicated in a foreword to the 1980 edition of The New Testament by Johannes Greber, this translator relied on “God’s Spirit World” to clarify for him how he should translate difficult passages. It is stated: “His wife, a medium of God’s Spirit world was often instrumental in conveying the correct answers from God’s Messengers to Pastor Greber.” The Watchtower has deemed it improper to make use of a translation that has such a close rapport with Spiritism. (Deuteronomy 18:10-12) The scholarship that forms the basis for the rendering of the above-cited texts in the New World Translation is sound and for this reason does not depend at all on Greber’s translation for authority. Nothing is lost, therefore, by ceasing to use his New Testament.


*** w75 10/15 p. 640 Questions From Readers ***
Without wresting the Greek grammar, a translator can render Matthew 27:52, 53 in a way that suggests that a similar exposing of corpses resulted from the earthquake occurring at Jesus’ death. Thus the translation by Johannes Greber (1937) renders these verses: “Tombs were laid open, and many bodies of those buried there were tossed upright. In this posture they projected from the graves and were seen by many who passed by the place on their way back to the city.”—Compare the New World Translation.



"The Word" Who is He? According to John 1962 page 5
View attachment 10103

View attachment 10104



*** w76 4/15 p. 231 Insight on the News ***
Event Clarifies Bible
● The recent Guatemalan earthquake affected even some of those already dead. “Time” magazine reports that “several mourners who went to bury their dead in family plots found that the coffins of long-dead relatives had been uncovered by the quake.” Something similar occurred during an earthquake in the Jerusalem area at Jesus’ death. At that time, dead bodies were customarily placed in vaults or chambers cut from Palestine’s soft limestone rock, often in hillsides. A report in the Bible, as translated by Johannes Greber, says that when Jesus died, “the earth quaked, and the rocks were shattered. Tombs were laid open, and many bodies of those buried there were tossed upright. In this posture they projected from the graves and were seen by many who passed by the place on their way back to the city.” Hence, rather than a resurrection, as some Bible translations imply, there appears to have been merely an exposure of the dead to observers, as in Guatemala.—Matt. 27:51-53.

What in the heck has this got to do with John 1:1 in the Greek interlinear? Read it for yourself. Interlinear translations are online for all to see.

If all you can do is cut and paste someone else's garbage then you will be added to my ignore list too.
Use your own words.

 

[JFish123]

What in the heck has this got to do with John 1:1 in the Greek interlinear? Read it for yourself. Interlinear translations are online for all to see.

If all you can do is cut and paste someone else's garbage then you will be added to my ignore list too.
Use your own words.

If he agrees with what others post why not save time to rebut with what others state? As long as he agrees with them Maybe cause you can't answer? Ignoring all the questions posed doesn't work in your favor my friend.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

What in the heck has this got to do with John 1:1 in the Greek interlinear? Read it for yourself. Interlinear translations are online for all to see.

If all you can do is cut and paste someone else's garbage then you will be added to my ignore list too.
Use your own words.

Someone else's garbage? The watchtower publishes garbage? Every thing I cut and paste is from WT literature, no other source.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

What in the heck has this got to do with John 1:1 in the Greek interlinear? Read it for yourself. Interlinear translations are online for all to see.

If all you can do is cut and paste someone else's garbage then you will be added to my ignore list too.
Use your own words.

I have read it for myself and it doesn't say "a god" only the JW's kingdom interlinear does. And, Johannes Greber wrote his version of the NT years before the WT, and they choose to use his Bible as reference for theirs. Check it out for yourself, you can find it online.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Notice the claim, "based on the oldest manuscripts." They just hold back the info on who translated them.


The WT tells half truths. They are truthful when they say they used the oldest manuscripts for their translation, they just leave the part out about those manuscripts being translated by a spiritualist who got his translation from the spirit world.

 

[psychoslice]

It doesn't matter what JW's believe, its just what they believe, just like all other religions they have their own interpretation. and for anyone to believe their belief is above others is nothing more than arrogance, for they are the Anti-Christ, those who believe we are separate from God.

 

[jojom]

There are two individual "gods" (mighty ones) mentioned in John 1:1. When Jesus and his Father needed to be differentiated, this is the only verse in the Bible that makes the differentiation. How does it do that? By the addition of the definite article "THE" which is "ho" in Greek. That makes Jehovah "THE God" and Jesus just a god.

Now if you can read this scripture in a Greek to English interlinear, you will see that the Word is called "theos" and that he was "with ho theos" (THE God) but he was not THE God. The Word was just "theos" (god).

No it doesn't: John 1:1 Interlinear: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;

 

[JayJayDee]

Someone else's garbage? The watchtower publishes garbage? Every thing I cut and paste is from WT literature, no other source.

Do you want to discuss or do you just want to rubbish without listening?

 

[JayJayDee]

No it doesn't: John 1:1 Interlinear: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;

Look at the Greek, not the English. It literally reads "in the beginning was the word (ho logos) and the word was with the god (ho theos) and the word was god (theos)." The second "theos" has no definite article, meaning that there is a differentiation between God and his son. Both are divine but only one is "the God".
There is no punctuation or capital letters in Greek either.

In the Interlinears I looked up online, "ton" (ho, the) before the first "theos" is left untranslated. This means that they leave out "ho theos" and just translate "theos". It is Trinitarians bias, pure and simple.

I couldn't get any of them to copy so I could paste them but your link shows the little dash where the "ton" is left out.

 

[Brickjectivity]

So your saying he does this. Ok, I'm listening. What's your proof? Or is it just conjecture of what you think he does. You can't know can you. You can only guess as you can't get in his head. Neither can I. So either side of the discussion seems to be equal does it not?

I'm not getting into anyone's head. He's rewriting material that's already been explored and publishing whatever is sensationalist. He uses Dr as a sales gimmick and to get acclaim. Real doctors produce. To get their degree they write a lot, and they do a lot of research. They write about things that interest them or that need research. They do the work, taking the risk that their work may not be appreciated rather than finding something that's already well worn and sensationalizing it.

 

[savagewind]

Proving everyone wrong about what?

Proving the Bible isn't all right.

 

[savagewind]

You ALL are preaching a different gospel because you are all alright with promoting a corrupted version of scripture. Jesus never said to go make disciples and love DOES become provoked. Love does not provoke. You are ALL provoking God by ignoring the fact that what you are distributing is lying.

If you actually were obeying Jesus as Lord who said, Matthew 7:5 then all these words would never have been born. Millions and millions of words for nothing.

Not you, Mountain climber. (Like you care - I don't believe it)