New World Translation: yea, or nay?

[Mark2020]

all bible translators render Adonay (Kyrios in greek) as Lord.

I know. I meant the literal meaning. Not the point anyway.

of course it is. We can read it in the hebrew texts and we can see the tetragrammaton in the text. Go to the Hebrew Interlinear and read it yourself

Your links don't work.
Anyway I was referring to the pronunciation not the letters.

 

[Mark2020]

We are diverting from what we were discussing here.
How come he couldn't translate such a simple verse?

 

[Pegg]

We are diverting from what we were discussing here.
How come he couldn't translate such a simple verse?

'off topic' comes to mind



but here's a question for you, King James authorized a bible version, so could he translate the scriptures?

 

[Pegg]

i thnk the links are corrected now.

if not, look up 'scripture 4 all online interlinear'

 

[Mark2020]

'off topic' comes to mind

I think this topic is about the NWT.
This is about the linguistic skills of the guy who was "authorised to examine a translation and determine its accuracy and recommend its acceptance in the form in which it is submitted. "

And he can't even translate this:
(Genesis 2:4[KJV]) These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

I don't really see it off topic.

For your question about King James, was he all this:
"authorised to examine a translation and determine its accuracy and recommend its acceptance in the form in which it is submitted." ?

 

[Pegg]

I think this topic is about the NWT.
This is about the linguistic skills of the guy who was "authorised to examine a translation and determine its accuracy and recommend its acceptance in the form in which it is submitted. "

And he can't even translate this:
(Genesis 2:4[KJV]) These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,

I don't really see it off topic.

For your question about King James, was he all this:
"authorised to examine a translation and determine its accuracy and recommend its acceptance in the form in which it is submitted." ?

the NWT is based on the hebrew and greek text by Westcott and Hort (1948 Reprint) a literal word-for-word translation interlinear.

So the fact is that the translation committee used that as the basis for their text and for that reason, they did not need to all be scholars themselves. They only needed to understand the original words and re-write the literal translation into readable English.


And Brother Franz was able to authorised to examine a translation and determine its accuracy and recommend its acceptance in the form in which it is submitted." ? because he understands what the hebrew words mean, he understood their context within the text and he could give the ok on how the committee rendered the interlinear into modern english. So yes, i would say bro Franz did a fine job of that.

Go to this online interlinear and you'll see that it has already been translated 'word for word' literally by hebrew scholars. So if you wanted to make your own english version, you could do that quite easily enough by basing your version on an interlinear.

 

[Mark2020]

the NWT is based on the hebrew and greek text by Westcott and Hort (1948 Reprint) a literal word-for-word translation interlinear.

So the fact is that the translation committee used that as the basis for their text and for that reason, they did not need to all be scholars themselves. They only needed to understand the original words and re-write the literal translation into readable English.

So you are admitting it wasn't a translation?

I can see "Rendered from the Original Languages" under the title "NWT of Holy Scriptures".

By the way, Westcott and Hort published "The New Testament in the Original Greek"

Check this:
This is the first part of the Forward of 1984

IT IS a very responsible thing to translate the Holy Scriptures from their original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek into modern speech. Translating the Holy Scriptures means rendering into another language the thoughts and sayings of Jehovah God, the heavenly Author of this sacred library of sixty-six books that holy men of long ago were inspired to write down for our benefit today.
That is a very sobering thought. The translators of this work, who fear and love the Divine Author of the Holy Scriptures, feel toward Him a special responsibility to transmit his thoughts and declarations as accurately as possible. They also feel a responsibility toward the searching readers who depend upon a translation of
the inspired Word of the Most High God for their everlasting salvation.
It was with such a sense of solemn responsibility that over the course of many years this committee of dedicated men have produced the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. The entire work was originally released in six volumes, from 1950 to 1960. From the start it was the desire of the translators to have all these volumes brought together into one book, inasmuch as the Holy Scriptures are in actuality one book by the One Author. While the
original volumes contained marginal references and footnotes, the revised one-volume edition, released in 1961, contained neither footnotes nor marginal references. A second revision was released in 1970 and a third revision with footnotes followed in 1971. In 1969 the committee released The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, which presented under the Greek text published in 1881 by Westcott and Hort a literal word-for-word translation into English.

Anyway, if it were based on the Westcott and Hort text, which is close to the Nestle-Aland New Testament (the basis for the NT of NIV), how come there are a lot of differences between the two?

 

[Mark2020]

... i would say bro Franz did a fine job of that.

I disagree.

Go to this online interlinear and you'll see that it has already been translated 'word for word' literally by hebrew scholars. So if you wanted to make your own english version, you could do that quite easily enough by basing your version on an interlinear.

Well, I checked Pro 8:22 on the site that you gave me.
They have "The LORD possessed me" in the translation and "Yahweh /he-acquired·me" in the interlinear, while in the NWT, it is "Jehovah himself produced me".

 

[Mark2020]

Here is the kingdom interlinear translation of Rom 9:5
You be the judge.

And note that εὐλογητὸς (blessed) is an adjective.

 

[Pegg]

So you are admitting it wasn't a translation?

you dont seem to understand what an 'interlinear' is

Its a literal word for word translation of the original languages. It is raw in that it has not had its grammar modified, it is only a 'word for word' translation. Do you understand what that means in terms of the text itself?

I can see "Rendered from the Original Languages" under the title "NWT of Holy Scriptures".

thats right because the westcot and hort interlinear is based on the hebrew and greek manuscripts...it provides the equivalent english words for each word in a line of text.... but it doesnt reword it with english grammar or attempt to translate figures of speech - that is the job of the translators who work off an interlinear translation and what the NWT committee did.

 

[Pegg]

Here is the kingdom interlinear translation of Rom 9:5
You be the judge.

And note that εὐλογητὸς (blessed) is an adjective.

do you not see the 'comma' after "the one being upon all things," The comma signifies a pause in the reading. This is where the doxology begins and now we see Paul giving praise to God himself.

That is how the interlinear, the literal greek reads and as you can see over on the far right side, the body of text that has been translated uses a semi colon point to mark where the doxology begins.

 

[Pegg]

I disagree.
Well, I checked Pro 8:22 on the site that you gave me.
They have "The LORD possessed me" in the translation and "Yahweh /he-acquired·me" in the interlinear, while in the NWT, it is "Jehovah himself produced me".

LORD in captials is where the name of God, the tetragrammaton is located in the original language.

As you could see, Yahweh is in the hebrew text, but when they translate it to english, they dont translate it as Yahweh or Jehovah....they change it so the reader does not use Gods personal name. Why wouldnt they want you to know Gods personal name?



Because then they would have to explain how Gods personal name changed from YHWY/Yahweh/Jevovah to Jesus.

 

[Mark2020]

you dont seem to understand what an 'interlinear' is
...

I have the feeling that you didn't read my whole post.

 

[Pegg]

I have the feeling that you didn't read my whole post.

im finding it hard to pinpoint what you criticism actually is

 

[Mark2020]

do you not see the 'comma' after "the one being upon all things," The comma signifies a pause in the reading. This is where the doxology begins and now we see Paul giving praise to God himself.
...

Compare the interlinear with the translation.
Doxologies aren't used this way anywhere in the NT. εὐλογητὸς always comes first.
Anyway this comma isn't accurate according to:
UBS 4:
5 ὧν οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ Χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.
NA 27:
5 ὧν οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ Χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.
Even if it were there, it should be translated something like:
(Romans 9:5 [KJV]) Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
Which one looks closer?

 

[Mark2020]

im finding it hard to pinpoint what you criticism actually is

Read the quote well. What the KIT was. When and by whom it was published. Hebrew/Greek...

 

[Mark2020]

LORD in captials is where the name of God, the tetragrammaton is located in the original language.
...

Actually I was referring to the verb:
Possessed(Acquired) -> produced

 

[Pegg]

Read the quote well. What the KIT was. When and by whom it was published. Hebrew/Greek...

you might be surprised to know that the WT society have published numerous bibles over the years and if you read any of the following bibles, then you've been reading a WT society publication.

Bibles published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society:
1890, Joseph B. Rotherham’s New Testament, Second Edition
1902, Holman Linear Parallel Edition (with Berean Bible study helps)
1902, The Emphatic Diaglott
1907, Watch Tower Bible (King James Version with Berean Helps) (Bible Students Edition, Berean Bible)
1908, Watch Tower Bible (Berean Bible) (new edition)
1926, The Emphatic Diaglott
1942, King James Version (printed on headquarters presses)
1944, American Standard Version
1969 The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures
1972, The Bible in Living English (Byington)

publishing the interlinear does not mean it was the WT society who first translated it. The Kingdom Interlinear is based on the master text of 'The New Testament in the Original Greek', compiled by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort

 

[Mark2020]

you might be surprised to know that the WT society have published numerous bibles

We are discussing the NWT here.

publishing the interlinear does not mean it was the WT society who first translated it. The Kingdom Interlinear is based on the master text of 'The New Testament in the Original Greek', compiled by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort

I quoted this before:

In 1969 the committee released The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, which presented under the Greek text published in 1881 by Westcott and Hort a literal word-for-word translation into English.

The KIT was based on the Greek text by Westcott and Hort, not translated by them.
Have a look at these:

Kingdom Interlinear Bible


[youtube]LF193yVDL5Q[/youtube]
Fun with the Kingdom Interlinear Translation part 1 - YouTube


[youtube]r-gQxCDkWZA[/youtube]
The Bible vs The New World Translation - YouTube

 

[gdemoss]

The following is a comparison of 1 Peter 1:11 from a variety of known translations verses the NWT.


New International Version (©1984)
trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.

New Living Translation (©2007)
They wondered what time or situation the Spirit of Christ within them was talking about when he told them in advance about Christ's suffering and his great glory afterward.

English Standard Version (©2001)
inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

International Standard Version (©2008)
They tried to find out what era or specific time the Spirit of the Messiah in them kept referring to when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)
And they searched for what time The Spirit of The Messiah who dwelt in them revealed, and testified that the sufferings of The Messiah were coming, and his glory which was after that;

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
So they tried to find out what time or situation the Spirit of Christ kept referring to whenever he predicted Christ's sufferings and the glory that would follow.

King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when he testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

American King James Version
Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

American Standard Version
searching what time or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that should follow them.

Bible in Basic English
Attempting to see what sort of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them was pointing to, when it gave witness to the pains which Christ would undergo and the glories which would come after them.

Douay-Rheims Bible
Searching what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ in them did signify: when it foretold those sufferings that are in Christ, and the glories that should follow:

Darby Bible Translation
searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ which was in them pointed out, testifying before of the sufferings which belonged to Christ, and the glories after these.

English Revised Version
searching what time or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that should follow them.

Webster's Bible Translation
Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

Weymouth New Testament
They were eager to know the time which the Spirit of Christ within them kept indicating, or the characteristics of that time, when they solemnly made known beforehand the sufferings that were to come upon Christ and the glories which would follow.

World English Bible
searching for who or what kind of time the Spirit of Christ, which was in them, pointed to, when he predicted the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that would follow them.

Young's Literal Translation
searching in regard to what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ that was in them was manifesting, testifying beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glory after these,



NWT
They kept on investigating what particular season or what sort of [season] the spirit in them was indicating concerning Christ when it was bearing witness beforehand about the sufferings for Christ and about the glories to follow these.


The Westcot and Hort is identical to the Textus Receptus for this verse concerning the Greek manuscripts.

ἐραυνῶντες εἰς τίνα ἢ ποῖον καιρὸν ἐδήλου τὸ ἐν αὐτοῖς πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ προμαρτυρόμενον τὰ εἰς Χριστὸν παθήματα καὶ τὰς μετὰ ταῦτα δόξας.

Nominative Case
A noun or pronoun that is the subject of the sentence is always in the nominative case. Likewise a noun that is in the predicate part of a sentence containing a linking verb should also be in the nominative case.

Genitive Case
For the most part, the genitive is often viewed as the case of possession. In more technical terms one noun in the genitive case helps to qualify another noun by showing its "class" or "kind". The genitive case has more uses than most other cases, but in general a noun in the genitive case helps to limit the scope of another noun by indicating its "kind" or "class". It is generally translated into English with a prepositional phrase starting with the word "of". The most common use of the genitive is to show possession (although it does not necessarily indicate actual, literal ownership).
For instance: "the servant of the high priest" (Mark 14:47). The words "of the high priest" are in the genitive case in Greek and modify the word "servant". (In Greek the word "of" is not present, but it is supplied in English in the translation of the genitive case). Here the genitive helps to qualify "which" servant the writer is referring to. It is helping to limit the sphere of all servants to a particular one.
Greek Nouns (Shorter Definitions)

It is clear that spirit is in the nominative case as it is the subject and Christ is in the genitive case as it is a modifier of spirit. It should be translated spirit of Christ.


What I don't understand is why you can't read the NWT and still see that Jesus is God. In John he clearly says destroy this temple and I will raise it up again. I not God or Jehovah or well you pick a name for God. He said that he would do it.

John 8
Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. 57Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? 58Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. 59Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

They took up stones to kill him because he said that he was "I am" See Ex 3:14. Same with John 18:6 when he says "I am" and all the people fall backward.

The NWT is a slap in the face to Gods Word. The Jehovah Witness religion is destroying the lives of everyone that they deceive.