New World Translation: yea, or nay?

[Protester]

Well, I'm not sure about popularity, but the NRSV is used by mainstream Christians in Canada, especially as a pew Bible. It is the only Bible shared by Catholics and Protestants alike, like Anglicans, Lutherans, United Church of Canada, Methodists, etc.

...as far as conservative Baptists are concerned, now the liberal branches may have other thoughts, q.v., What is the Baptist Church and what do Baptists believe? It really looks like the NRSV includes everything but the kitchen sink, q.v., What is the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)? , to make all of the groups you mentioned happy. Apparently some members of the Royal family like it also. But conservative groups, will tend to like literal translations which don't have society's biases influencing the translation. Pegg, just use the search function for the "Lamsa" in Comparing Bible Translations this will give you a conservative view of that version. Translators over the spectrum between conservative and liberal will look at various ancient texts to get a feeling for what is correct, from their perspective of translating the Bible, Why So Many Versions? | Bible.org - Worlds Largest Bible Study Site is a question a lot of people have.

 

[dance-above]

NWT is poo poo.

:yes:

 

[URAVIP2ME]

for those who missed it the first time, What is YHWH? What is the tetragrammaton?
From Star Publishing, but it would be better to find the out-of-print ASV published by Nelson or it's support publishers, 1929 version. Star has a tendency of putting it's theology in at least the middle of the Bible, which many may not agree to. Yes, the ASV is better than the KJV, but then so are some other versions of the Bible as well, Go to the conclusions of Comparing Bible Translations there's a link to it, if memory serves.
As that article points out, the ASV is in electronic form (and one that is put into modern English of it, called the World English Bible) .e.g.,
Isaiah 40
3
The voice of one who calls out,
“Prepare the way of Yahweh in the wilderness!
Make a level highway in the desert for our God.
4Every valley shall be exalted,
and every mountain and hill shall be made low.
The uneven shall be made level,
and the rough places a plain.
5The glory of Yahweh shall be revealed,
and all flesh shall see it together;
for the mouth of Yahweh has spoken it.” 6The voice of one saying, “Cry!”
One said, “What shall I cry?”
“All flesh is like grass,
and all its glory is like the flower of the field.
7The grass withers,
the flower fades,
because Yahweh’s breath blows on it.
Surely the people are like grass.
8The grass withers,
the flower fades;
but the word of our God stands forever.” ---World English Bible
Ah what to say about the NWT ?
You really only need to take a look at one verse, John 1:1 and see who other versions do it, and read how the NWT translates John 1:1
excerpt from, Fall Bible School - Jehovah's Witnesses New World Translation
The Jehovah Witnesses, on the forum, I would hope correct the above if the Ankerberg site misquoted it?

Please notice that the same Greek grammar rule applies at John 1v1 and at Acts 28v6 B. One verse adds the letter 'a' and the other omits the letter 'a'.
So, John 1v1 has more to do with grammar than doctrine.

Did God have a beginning?____
According to Psalm [90v2] God had No beginning.
Only God was 'before' the beginning.
The Word [Jesus] was Not before the beginning as God was before the beginning. Rather, according to Rev. [3v14 B],
Jesus was the beginning of the creation by God.
Isn't God un-created?

 

[Shermana]

I wonder what those same scholars think about the Coptic version of the Greek scriptures?

There is a reason why trinitarians shy away from the Coptic version. This version was translated by 3rd century Christians who lived in Egypt. They spoke the Coptic language and, like English, Coptic uses both definite and indefinite articles. The way they translated John 1 was according to how they understood what John meant.

If you want to know how those early christians understood Johns gospel and how they rendered the verse in John 1:1 you can see it here.

I wonder what those scholars think of all the versions that use "a god" from the 17th-19th centuries. I suppose they don't count because they weren't "mainstream".

 

[Pegg]

I wonder what those scholars think of all the versions that use "a god" from the 17th-19th centuries. I suppose they don't count because they weren't "mainstream".

who cares what they wrote, they were heretics!

 

[URAVIP2ME]

who cares what they wrote, they were heretics!

What scholars comments from the 17th-19th centuries regarding 'a god' ?

Scholar as in meaning a professed believer, or as in secular scholars ?

 

[Pegg]

What scholars comments from the 17th-19th centuries regarding 'a god' ?

Scholar as in meaning a professed believer, or as in secular scholars ?

I think Shermana is asking what the scholars of today think about the translators of the past who wrote the verse as 'a god'

 

[Protester]

Please notice that the same Greek grammar rule applies at John 1v1 and at Acts 28v6 B. One verse adds the letter 'a' and the other omits the letter 'a'.
So, John 1v1 has more to do with grammar than doctrine.

Did God have a beginning?____
According to Psalm [90v2] God had No beginning.
Only God was 'before' the beginning.
The Word [Jesus] was Not before the beginning as God was before the beginning. Rather, according to Rev. [3v14 B],
Jesus was the beginning of the creation by God.
Isn't God un-created?

Actually while I'm not a fan of the Bible that the folks came up with, a surprising liberal translation from conservatives:thud: (See, Comparing Bible Translations--Conclusions )most conservative Christians like notes given for the verses, such as, NETBible: John 1:1 or for that matter NETBible: Acts 28:6 and how you can get Jesus was created, NETBible: Revelation 3:14 (See 4 in the translators notes) is shown to be in error.

Revelation 3:14 ¶ "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ¶ The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:---Scripture Quotations Taken from the NASB


Something in the Public Domain, Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary of 1871 for the verse directly above.

Revelation of John 3:14:

14. Laodiceans—The city was in the southwest of Phrygia, on the river Lycus, not far from Colosse, and lying between it and Philadelphia. It was destroyed by an earthquake, A.D. 62, and rebuilt by its wealthy citizens without the help of the state [TACITUS, Annals, 14.27]. This wealth (arising from the excellence of its wools) led to a self-satisfied, lukewarm state in spiritual things, as Re 3:17 describes. See on Col 4:16, on the Epistle which is thought to have been written to the Laodicean Church by Paul. The Church in latter times was apparently flourishing; for one of the councils at which the canon of Scripture was determined was held in Laodicea in A.D. 361. Hardly a Christian is now to be found on or near its site.
the Amen— (Isa 65:16, Hebrew, "Bless Himself in the God of Amen . . . swear by the God of Amen," 2Co 1:20). He who not only says, but is, the Truth. The saints used Amen at the end of prayer, or in assenting to the word of God; but none, save the Son of God, ever said, "Amen, I say unto you," for it is the language peculiar to God, who avers by Himself. The New Testament formula, "Amen. I say unto you," is equivalent to the Old Testament formula, "as I live, saith Jehovah." In John's Gospel alone He uses (in the Greek) the double "Amen," Joh 1:51,3:3, &c.; in English Version," Verily, verily." The title happily harmonizes with the address. His unchanging faithfulness as "the Amen" contrasts with Laodicea's wavering of purpose, "neither hot nor cold" (Re 3:16). The angel of Laodicea has with some probability been conjectured to be Archippus, to whom, thirty years previously, Paul had already given a monition, as needing to be stirred up to diligence in his ministry. So the Apostolic Constitutions, [8.46], name him as the first bishop of Laodicea: supposed to be the son of Philemon (Phile 1:2).
faithful and true witness—As "the Amen" expresses the unchangeable truth of His promises; so "the faithful the true witness," the truth of His revelations as to the heavenly things which He has seen and testifies. "Faithful," that is, trustworthy (2Ti 2:11,13). "True" is here (Greek, "alethinos") not truth-speaking (Greek, "alethes"), but "perfectly realizing all that is comprehended in the name Witness" (1Ti 6:13). Three things are necessary for this: (1) to have seen with His own eyes what He attests; (2) to be competent to relate it for others; (3) to be willing truthfully to do so. In Christ all these conditions meet [TRENCH].
beginning of the creation of God—not he whom God created first, but as in Col 1:15-18 (see on Col 1:15), the Beginner of all creation, its originating instrument. All creation would not be represented adoring Him, if He were but one of themselves. His being the Creator is a strong guarantee for His faithfulness as "the Witness and Amen."

As the note in NETBible: Colossians 1:15 :
Colossians 1:15 ¶ He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.---Scripture Quotations Taken from the NASB

Firstborn above as the note points out first in rank, not as creatures, having a birth order.

 

[Shermana]

Firstborn above as the note points out first in rank, not as creatures, having a birth order.

The word "Prototokos" means literally "First-thing" or "First-time", it is only used as Pre-eminence in Hebrew for the literal word "Firstborn" in a few places, and in an adoptive sense, still indicating being a "son", a separate and lesser being. Every single time it is used in the Gospels it is used as what it says, the "First-thing", the eldest. Trying to use a Hebrew concept to Greek doesn't fit. To compare to the Hebrew usage, you'd have to say that Jesus was adopted as such.

Even so, if Jesus was the "pre-eminent" (in which this would be the ONLY time in the entire NT the word is used as such), it still says "Among creation". The concept being that he is the "pre-eminent" of all created things still implies he's created. So you're stuck both ways that Jesus was created., whether he was the "First-thing" or the "pre-eminent" among it.

"Beginning of the Creation of G-d" means what it means. The idea that "Wisdom" as an actual personified being was the First created being is even in Proverbs, as well as the "Apocryphal" Wisdom of Solomon.

 

[InChrist]

The word "Prototokos" means literally "First-thing" or "First-time", it is only used as Pre-eminence in Hebrew for the literal word "Firstborn" in a few places, and in an adoptive sense, still indicating being a "son", a separate and lesser being. Every single time it is used in the Gospels it is used as what it says, the "First-thing", the eldest. Trying to use a Hebrew concept to Greek doesn't fit. To compare to the Hebrew usage, you'd have to say that Jesus was adopted as such.

Even so, if Jesus was the "pre-eminent" (in which this would be the ONLY time in the entire NT the word is used as such), it still says "Among creation". The concept being that he is the "pre-eminent" of all created things still implies he's created. So you're stuck both ways that Jesus was created., whether he was the "First-thing" or the "pre-eminent" among it.

"Beginning of the Creation of G-d" means what it means. The idea that "Wisdom" as an actual personified being was the First created being is even in Proverbs, as well as the "Apocryphal" Wisdom of Solomon.

[FONT=&quot]In Colossians Chapter one[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]Jesus is not called the first created of all creation. Nor is he called the firstborn of Jehovah or God?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] I believe the Greek word (prototokos) must be interpreted by its context and in this passage clearly means: preeminent one, heir, supremacy, positional preeminence. He is called “firstborn” because of his position. The first part of verse 15 tells us that he is the image of the invisible God. The next verses (16-18), point out further the meaning of “firstborn” by stating that Christ created all things and that he is supreme and has preeminence over all things. Col. 1:19 says “it pleased the Father that in Him (Christ) all the fullness should dwell.” Then, Col. 2:9-10 states “For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in him who is the head of all principality and power.”, or “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ who is head over every power and authority.”
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I also think one must be consistent, if you are insisting that the word means first created then it would also have to be translated that way a few verses further on in the passage (vs. 18), which does not make any sense. Yet the meaning of preeminence does and I believe this is what Paul was emphasizing.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]He is the image of the invisible God, the (first created) over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the (first created) from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Related to this, the Greek word used in Revelation 3:14 for “beginning” is arche. It is translated as: beginning, corner, magistrate, power, principality, principle rule in the Strong’s Concordance. Arche is the root for the English word architect. This verse does not say that Jesus had a beginning. It indicates as do other scriptures that Jesus Christ is the source, the power, and the Creator who began creation.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]These verses clearly point out the supremacy of Christ as Creator over all of creation.[/FONT]





[FONT=&quot]I do not believe “wisdom personified” in Proverbs chapter 8 has any reference to Christ or Him being a created being at all.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] Since chapters 1-9 are speaking about God’s wisdom personified and how important it is to get, acquire, or possess, wisdom, I believe chapter 8 is also speaking of this same wisdom. I do not see any indication that chapter 8 should be taken to have a different meaning, as referring to the Person of Christ, than chapters 1-7 and 9. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] I have noticed that the Greek word “qanah” used in verse 22 is not the same Greek word (bara) used in Genesis 1:1, 1:21,1:27, 2:3, 2:4, 5:1,5:2, 6:7 or in Isaiah 43:1, 43:7,45:12, 45:18, 48:7.where the text is speaking of God creating the heavens and the earth and individuals.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] The word “qanah” is used elsewhere in Genesis, but not to show the creation of something or someone. Instead, it is translated as “possessor” or “bought” to show ownership. (Gen.14:19, 14:22, 33:19, 47:20, 47:23, 49:30)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] The Hebrew word “asah”, translated- to do, work, make, produce, is not used in Proverbs 8:22[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] This indicates to me that verses 22-31 are speaking metaphorically of God’s attribute of wisdom (His possession as a part of His divine nature), which He has had eternally (verse 23), and which was brought forth (verse 24) to be used in the creation of the universe.[/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Since Christ is the Creator of all things as plainly stated In Colossians, then He is the possessor of this wisdom spoken of in Proverbs..
[/FONT]

 

[Shermana]

The word "arche" in John 1:1 clearly means "beginning". I don't see why its wrong to read it as such for "beginning of all creation", the first thing.

Once again, "Prototokos" means "First-thing/time" as opposed to "Firstborn".

Of course Christ is superior to all other Creation, that doesn't make him the Ultimate Creator though, even if all things were formed through Him. What do you suppose the "through" means?

And "Image of" implies being a separate being. I'm not the image of myself. I am myself. Yashua is the representative. The "Wisdom" spoken of in Proverbs was the First Created Being personified. Yashua, as the "Foreman" of Creation, is similar in ways to what the backwards "Demi-urge" concept was in Gnosticism, it helps to understand Philo's Logos Theology whom his intended audience were well versed with.

 

[gdemoss]

What do you suppose the "through" means?

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

In the beginning was the Word...And the Word was made flesh

 

[InChrist]

The word "arche" in John 1:1 clearly means "beginning". I don't see why its wrong to read it as such for "beginning of all creation", the first thing.

Once again, "Prototokos" means "First-thing/time" as opposed to "Firstborn".

Of course Christ is superior to all other Creation, that doesn't make him the Ultimate Creator though, even if all things were formed through Him. What do you suppose the "through" means?

And "Image of" implies being a separate being. I'm not the image of myself. I am myself. Yashua is the representative. The "Wisdom" spoken of in Proverbs was the First Created Being personified. Yashua, as the "Foreman" of Creation, is similar in ways to what the backwards "Demi-urge" concept was in Gnosticism, it helps to understand Philo's Logos Theology whom his intended audience were well versed with.

And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on God and saying, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. Then he knelt down and cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not charge them with this sin.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep.” Acts 7:59-60

As Stephen was dying he called on God, saying Lord Jesus… receive my spirit.


Have you ever called on God and asked Him who Jesus really is?


Have you ever asked Jesus Christ if He is God or a created being?

 

[Shermana]

And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on God and saying, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. Then he knelt down and cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not charge them with this sin.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep.” Acts 7:59-60

And Jesus was seated at the Right Hand of the Father. Separate beings. Not just "persons".

As Stephen was dying he called on God, saying Lord Jesus… receive my spirit.

Your point? David is called "Lord" too. And Jesus, as the Savior and Highest Archangel, whom no one comes to the Father except through Him, is the one who receives their Spirits. This episode is ANTI Trinity.

Have you ever called on God and asked Him who Jesus really is?

Yes I have, and since then I've become a "Messianic". (Though I'm not quite in the majority of most "Messianic" theologies).

Have you ever asked Jesus Christ if He is God or a created being?

Yes. And I was shown that he is the First Created Being.

Have YOU asked these things in honest prayer? Something tells me no...

 

[InChrist]

And Jesus was seated at the Right Hand of the Father. Separate beings. Not just "persons".

Your point? David is called "Lord" too. And Jesus, as the Savior and Highest Archangel, whom no one comes to the Father except through Him, is the one who receives their Spirits. This episode is ANTI Trinity.

Yes I have, and since then I've become a "Messianic". (Though I'm not quite in the majority of most "Messianic" theologies).

Yes. And I was shown that he is the First Created Being.

Have YOU asked these things in honest prayer? Something tells me no...

The point is, Stephen was calling on God and addressing Lord Jesus. It was Jesus he was speaking to as God. This passage is not anti-trinity from my perspective at all.

 

[Shermana]

Have YOU asked these things in honest prayer? Something tells me no...

The lack of response to this question only confirms my suspicion.

 

[InChrist]

The lack of response to this question only confirms my suspicion.

Your suspicion is incorrect. I have earnestly prayed and asked God for the truth concerning Jesus Christ and He has most assuredly answered. I will never deny the deity of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I believe very soon everyone will acknowledge who He is, believer and non-believer.


Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Phil. 2:9-11

For the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son, that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him. John 5:22-23

 

[Shermana]

He has most assuredly answered

How did he answer you exactly?

I don't think you understand what "deity" means. Angels have deity.

John 5:22-23 says they are separate beings, it's pretty non-trinitarian.

 

[Shermana]

The point is, Stephen was calling on God and addressing Lord Jesus. It was Jesus he was speaking to as God. This passage is not anti-trinity from my perspective at all.

What translation are you using exactly? KJV? It doesn't say "Calling on G-d". You should really check the Greek before you try using a verse a proof text. Here's what it actually says:

καὶ ἐλιθοβόλουν τὸν Στέφανον ἐπικαλούμενον καὶ λέγοντα· κύριε Ἰησοῦ, δέξαι τὸ πνεῦμα μου.

As you can see, it does not say "Calling on G-d". The KJV added a little embellishment there, like they did with 1 Timothy 3:16.

While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” 60Then he fell on his knees and cried out, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he fell asleep.

It doesn't actually say "Calling on G-d" there. Nice try, the KJV isn't perfect, it has many liberties. Care to get into the Greek or want to retract on that one?

 

[rusra02]

The NWT has been praised by many honest scholars who recognize the care and skill of it's translators. See quote below. This translation is now available in 83 languages, with over 100 million copies printed. It was translated from the original languages by sincere Bible scholars.
"Professor Benjamin Kedar, a Hebrew scholar in Israel, said in 1989: “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.”
Jason David BeDuhn, a professor at Northern Arizona University praised the NWT as "
the most accurate of the translations compared,” and called it a "remarkably good" translation.