Where does the NWT Bible Falsify?

[Desert Snake]

God in any form does not die. I'm sorry if that does not answer your point as you would like. The sacrifice was TO God, accepted BY God (Jesus' heavenly father).

This is from from false scholarship, Jesus incarnates as literally the Lord, in order to fulfill various things.

A 'secondary', other being, isn't going to do either the Sacrifice, nor directly save, nor have power of the kingdom.

Isn't going to happen, can't happen, and makes no sense because then you aren't worshipping God, you are worshipping a being who doesn't have power of heaven and earth...

 

[Deeje]

Now you're saying two things. If Moses wrote the laws, then that isn't Jesus telling Moses what to say. When does Jesus stop talking to Moses?

You really don't listen, do you?

I am saying that the Logos, (who was Jesus in his pre-human existence,) spoke God's words to Moses. It wasn't Jesus' words, but God's.

Moses wrote down what God told him through his messenger. When the message was delivered, the messenger returned to God. When Jesus finished his mission, he too returned to God. He was able to do that because God resurrected him....unless of course you think that he resurrected himself?

Think back to the Revelation and the chain that carried that message to John....
"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John".

If Jesus is God, why does one part of God have to give him a message to give to an angel to give to John? This time it is Jesus conveying God's revelation to John through an angel. Angels are messengers.....Jesus was God's spokesman. It is not more complicated than that.

The Tetragrammaton isn't in the New Testament at all, that is a terrible argument.

The tetragrammaton is all over the NT, in every quote from the Hebrew scriptures that contains the divine name, the tetragrammaton is there....unspoken but there. To say otherwise is a terrible argument.

An example is in Romans 10:12-17 where Paul quotes the OT twice.

"For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; 13 for “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

14 How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? 15 How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things!”


16 However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” 17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ."

In verse 13 Paul is quoting Joel 2:32, which in the Tanach reads...
"And it shall come to pass that whoever shall call in the name of the Lord shall be delivered, for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be a deliverance, as the Lord said, and among the survivors whom the Lord invites. הוְהָיָ֗ה כֹּ֧ל אֲשֶׁר־יִקְרָ֛א בְּשֵׁ֥ם יְהֹוָ֖ה יִמָּלֵ֑ט כִּ֠י בְּהַר־צִיּ֨וֹן וּבִירֽוּשָׁלִַ֜ם תִּֽהְיֶ֣ה פְלֵיטָ֗ה כַּֽאֲשֶׁר֙ אָמַ֣ר יְהֹוָ֔ה וּבַ֨שְּׂרִידִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה קֹרֵֽא:"

The divine name appears three times in that verse, plainly visible in the Hebrew text. So calling on the name of "the Lord" in Romans 10:13 is calling on Jehovah, not Jesus.

The second quote is from Isaiah 53:1...(Tanach)
"Who would have believed our report, and to whom was the arm of the Lord revealed?

אמִ֥י הֶֽאֱמִ֖ין לִשְׁמֻֽעָתֵ֑נוּ וּזְר֥וֹעַ יְהֹוָ֖ה עַל־מִ֥י נִגְלָֽתָה:"

Again we see the tetragrammaton in the Hebrew text. Every time the Hebrew scriptures are quoted mentioning "the Lord", God's name is there, whether you want to recognize it or not.

This is from from false scholarship, Jesus incarnates as literally the Lord, in order to fulfill various things.

I am afraid that it is your own scholarship that is sadly lacking. You don't listen and you don't check scripture. You are too wrapped up in who you think "the Lord" is, to see who the Bible says he is.

 

[Desert Snake]

You really don't listen, do you?

I am saying that the Logos, (who was Jesus in his pre-human existence,) spoke God's words to Moses. It wasn't Jesus' words, but God's.

Moses wrote down what God told him through his messenger. When the message was delivered, the messenger returned to God. When Jesus finished his mission, he too returned to God. He was able to do that because God resurrected him....unless of course you think that he resurrected himself?

Think back to the Revelation and the chain that carried that message to John....
"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John".

If Jesus is God, why does one part of God have to give him a message to give to an angel to give to John? This time it is Jesus conveying God's revelation to John through an angel. Angels are messengers.....Jesus was God's spokesman. It is not more complicated than that.



The tetragrammaton is all over the NT, in every quote from the Hebrew scriptures that contains the divine name, the tetragrammaton is there....unspoken but there. To say otherwise is a terrible argument.

An example is in Romans 10:12-17 where Paul quotes the OT twice.

"For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; 13 for “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

14 How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher? 15 How will they preach unless they are sent? Just as it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news of good things!”


16 However, they did not all heed the good news; for Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” 17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ."

In verse 13 Paul is quoting Joel 2:32, which in the Tanach reads...
"And it shall come to pass that whoever shall call in the name of the Lord shall be delivered, for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be a deliverance, as the Lord said, and among the survivors whom the Lord invites. הוְהָיָ֗ה כֹּ֧ל אֲשֶׁר־יִקְרָ֛א בְּשֵׁ֥ם יְהֹוָ֖ה יִמָּלֵ֑ט כִּ֠י בְּהַר־צִיּ֨וֹן וּבִירֽוּשָׁלִַ֜ם תִּֽהְיֶ֣ה פְלֵיטָ֗ה כַּֽאֲשֶׁר֙ אָמַ֣ר יְהֹוָ֔ה וּבַ֨שְּׂרִידִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה קֹרֵֽא:"

The divine name appears three times in that verse, plainly visible in the Hebrew text. So calling on the name of "the Lord" in Romans 10:13 is calling on Jehovah, not Jesus.

The second quote is from Isaiah 53:1...(Tanach)
"Who would have believed our report, and to whom was the arm of the Lord revealed?

אמִ֥י הֶֽאֱמִ֖ין לִשְׁמֻֽעָתֵ֑נוּ וּזְר֥וֹעַ יְהֹוָ֖ה עַל־מִ֥י נִגְלָֽתָה:"

Again we see the tetragrammaton in the Hebrew text. Every time the Hebrew scriptures are quoted mentioning "the Lord", God's name is there, whether you want to recognize it or not.



I am afraid that it is your own scholarship that is sadly lacking. You don't listen and you don't check scripture. You are too wrapped up in who you think "the Lord" is, to see who the Bible says he is.

Just more nonsense, as the names and words, titles you use have no inherent meaning, because of your interpretation.
Matthew 15:9
Mark 12:11
Hebrews 3:2-5

 

[Spartan]

@Spartan ...
“Divine” means “of or from God.” (Look it up.)
So angels are divine. This planet, our Sun and moon, the stars.... all are “from” God. (“Divine retribution” would be “from God.”)

Adam, before he sinned, was divine.

That's man's version of it. In the spiritual world only God is divine.

 

[Desert Snake]

That's man's version of it. In the spiritual world only God is divine.

I'm not even sure that's mans version of it, I dont believe that, and I believe in many gods. They aren't traditional polytheists, they don't understand this material at all, even in polytheistic sense.

 

[sooda]

Here's why Israel cannot possibly be the "Suffering Servant" of Isaiah chapter 53:

1. The servant of Isaiah 53 is an innocent and guiltless sufferer. Israel is never described as sinless. Isaiah 1:4 says of the nation: "Alas sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity. A brood of evildoers, children who are corrupters!" He then goes on in the same chapter to characterize Judah as Sodom, Jerusalem as a harlot, and the people as those whose hands are stained with blood (verses 10, 15, and 21). What a far cry from the innocent and guiltless sufferer of Isaiah 53 who had "done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth!"

2. The prophet said: "It pleased the LORD to bruise him." Has the awful treatment of the Jewish people (so contrary, by the way, to the teaching of Jesus to love everyone) really been God's pleasure, as is said of the suffering of the servant in Isaiah 53:10 ? If, as some rabbis contend, Isaiah 53 refers to the holocaust, can we really say of Israel's suffering during that horrible period, "It pleased the LORD to bruise him?" Yet it makes perfect sense to say that God was pleased to have Messiah suffer and die as our sin offering to provide us forgiveness and atonement.

3. The person mentioned in this passage suffers silently and willingly. Yet all people, even Israelites, complain when they suffer! Brave Jewish men and women fought in resistance movements against Hitler. Remember the Vilna Ghetto Uprising? Remember the Jewish men who fought on the side of the allies? Can we really say Jewish suffering during the holocaust and during the preceding centuries was done silently and willingly?

4. The figure described in Isaiah 53 suffers, dies, and rises again to atone for his people's sins. The Hebrew word used in Isaiah 53:10 for "sin-offering" is "asham," which is a technical term meaning "sin-offering." See how it is used in Leviticus chapters 5 and 6. Isaiah 53 describes a sinless and perfect sacrificial lamb who takes upon himself the sins of others so that they might be forgiven. Can anyone really claim that the terrible suffering of the Jewish people, however undeserved and unjust, atones for the sins of the world? Whoever Isaiah 53 speaks of, the figure described suffers and dies in order to provide a legal payment for sin so that others can be forgiven. This cannot be true of the Jewish people as a whole, or of any other mere human.

5. It is the prophet who is speaking in this passage. He says: "who has believed our message." The term "message" usually refers to the prophetic message, as it does in Jeremiah 49:14. Also, when we understand the Hebrew parallelism of verse 1, we see "Who has believed our message" as parallel to "to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed." The "arm of the Lord" refers to God's powerful act of salvation. So the message of the speaker is the message of a prophet declaring what God has done to save his people.

6. The prophet speaking is Isaiah himself, who says the sufferer was punished for "the transgression of my people," according to verse 8. Who are the people of Isaiah? Israel. So the sufferer of Isaiah 53 suffered for Israel. So how could he be Israel? (website no longer exists)

Isaiah said nothing about Jesus or the Holocaust.

 

[Spartan]

Isaiah said nothing about Jesus or the Holocaust.

Sorry, I don't buy into your anti-Jesus nonsense.

 

[sooda]

Sorry, I don't buy into your anti-Jesus nonsense.

Its not "anti-Jesus" to read the scriptures as they are instead of twisting them into something else.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

This isn't that complicated, that's why it's Jesus's kingdom, not Yahwehs.

No, I agree, it isn’t complicated, at all.

Yahweh is Jesus’ Father, the God of Israel, i.e., the God of the Bible who states clearly at Exodus 20 that He requires ‘exclusive devotion’! Because of His love for mankind, He sent Jesus, His Only-begotten, to be our Savior. (John 3:16)

Daniel 2:44 discloses that the Kingdom is ‘set up’ by the “God of Heaven,” who is Yahweh.

And 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 explains it further, saying God the Father (Yahweh / Jehovah), who gave Christ the authority (Matthew 28:18), will receive the Kingdom back from His Son :

“24Then the end will come, when after he has done away with every ruler and every authority and power, the Messiahv hands over the kingdom to God the Father. 25For he must rule until Godw puts all the Messiah’sxenemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be done away with is death, 27for “Gody has put everything under his feet.”z Now when he says, “Everything has been put under him,” this clearly excludes the one who put everything under him. 28But when everything has been put under him, then the Son himself will also become subject to the one who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.”

You should give the credit to Yahweh / Jehovah.
Jesus did.

 

[Desert Snake]

No, I agree, it isn’t complicated, at all.

Yahweh is Jesus’ Father, the God of Israel, i.e., the God of the Bible who states clearly at Exodus 20 that He requires ‘exclusive devotion’! Because of His love for mankind, He sent Jesus, His Only-begotten, to be our Savior. (John 3:16)

Daniel 2:44 discloses that the Kingdom is ‘set up’ by the “God of Heaven,” who is Yahweh.

And 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 explains it further, saying God the Father (Yahweh / Jehovah), who gave Christ the authority (Matthew 28:18), will receive the Kingdom back from His Son :

“24Then the end will come, when after he has done away with every ruler and every authority and power, the Messiahv hands over the kingdom to God the Father. 25For he must rule until Godw puts all the Messiah’sxenemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be done away with is death, 27for “Gody has put everything under his feet.”z Now when he says, “Everything has been put under him,” this clearly excludes the one who put everything under him. 28But when everything has been put under him, then the Son himself will also become subject to the one who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.”

You should give the credit to Yahweh / Jehovah.
Jesus did.

Yeah, you're not getting that you just presented a oneness of god, argument, I take it...

 

[Desert Snake]

There's only one Kingdom of God, ...

Jesus is in Kingship, in the Kingdom of God...

There's One God, concerning the Kingship, of God.

The other gods aren't in Kingship, and often are just called Angels, anyway, in other words Jesus is King also, of the Kingdom.

That's why Jesus is called Lord.

 

[Desert Snake]

In other words, you'd better start with the jesus is an angel, arguments, because you're running out of other options.

 

[YoursTrue]

I disagree, ...
This must be a self Sacrifice, because Jesus incarnated as Human.
John 10
Only God can make this sacrifice.

God sacrificed his only-begotten SON. Not himself, although Jesus was as close as any child can get to his father. And -- his Son on earth was human. Even in his flesh, he prayed to his Father. God does not die. His son died and God his Father accepted his sacrifice. Luke 22:7 Then came the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed.

 

[Milton Platt]

So What are the Places Where the JW Bible is Falsifying the Translation of the Original Greek and Hebrew Texts?

This is such an overwhelmingly common complaint about the NWT, that I would like to examine all such examples. But, obviously, If I'm swarmed with too many examples, it will be very difficult to discuss them all.

I have seen that John 1:1c is the most-accused verse for 'falsifying,' but I know from an intensive study of my own that the NWT is one of the very few Bibles which translates it properly according to John's own usage: 'a god.'

So disregarding John 1:1c and the fact that the translators have explained in the NT itself why they have replaced the word for 'Lord' found in the oldest existing texts with 'Jehovah,' what else is found in the NWT which is falsely translated?

One at a time, please.

There are no original manuscripts......so trying to figure out what the original meanings were is just an endless back and forth of different people's interpretations.

 

[YoursTrue]

I disagree, ...
This must be a self Sacrifice, because Jesus incarnated as Human.
John 10
Only God can make this sacrifice.

Jesus knew what was to happen to him, that he would be put to death. He went willingly to his death. This does not mean that God in any part died. Jesus died. God stayed alive.

 

[YoursTrue]

There are no original manuscripts......so trying to figure out what the original meanings were is just an endless back and forth of different people's interpretations.

Words and meanings change over time anyway. So most of us have to rely upon a translation and scholarship, we can choose which translation we would use.

 

[Milton Platt]

Words and meanings change over time anyway. So most of us have to rely upon a translation and scholarship, we can choose which translation we would use.

Right. Just my point. There is no absolute standard for knowing what is right, or even why some stories should be in the Bible and others should not. Everybody just picks what they like. If there is a god, he is terrible at communication.

 

[Deeje]

There is no absolute standard for knowing what is right

Oh but there is. The Bible is not ambiguous on anything. It is clear cut and specific. Interpretation is the problem. Every person who takes it upon themselves to put their own spin on scripture, will not end up with the truth. You have to read the Bible for what it actually says...not what you think it says. This is why research into the meaning of original language words is helpful.

or even why some stories should be in the Bible and others should not.

There is always a reason for their inclusion or exclusion. Not everything Jesus did and said was recorded. (John 21:25) The Bible therefore is what we need to know...not necessarily what we want to know.

Everybody just picks what they like. If there is a god, he is terrible at communication.

Actually he is a brilliant communicator.....he just doesn't talk to everyone. We show God by the way we think, act and live if we are the sort of person he wants to know. We ourselves are not attracted to people in whom we see traits that are negative or offensive. Why should God be any different?

 

[Desert Snake]

God sacrificed his only-begotten SON. Not himself, although Jesus was as close as any child can get to his father. And -- his Son on earth was human. Even in his flesh, he prayed to his Father. God does not die. His son died and God his Father accepted his sacrifice. Luke 22:7 Then came the day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed.

That's weird.

 

[Desert Snake]

Also you have some hypocrisy going on, refer to G-d's interaction with Abraham.