Translations

Faithfulservant said:
depends on what you consider "religious traditions"
Click to expand...
The son of God taught that the traditions of creed-bound men made the commandments and teaching of God to be without power or effect.The endeavour of the New world bible translation commitee has been to avoid this snare of religious traditionalism.Many translations color the thought in support of a preferred religious view, which has been taken for granted, and gone unchallenged and uninvestigated for many years.The primary desire has been to seek not the approval of men but that of God , by rendering the truth of his inspired word as purely and as consistentley as their dedicated abilities make possible.There is no benefit in self deception so i find this to be a good translationbecause it gets back to the original thoughts
 
Mee, can you give an example of what you just said? Verse wise that is.
 
In response to Dor's original question:

I have the KJV, the NIV, and the Latin Vulgate, as well as the NT/Psalms & Proverbs pocket book given to me in boot camp over two decades ago (courtesy of the Gideons). Please forgive my catholic tail...but when you have a caddillac (as my father says), drive it. ;)

I use them all before I answer you all (or y'all, as my wife says). You make me read them all (which is a very good thing).

v/r

Q
 
didymus said:
Mee, can you give an example of what you just said? Verse wise that is.
Click to expand...

The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures is published by Jehovah’s Witnesses to help lovers of God’s Word get acquainted with the original Greek text of the Bible. It contains The New Testament in the Original Greek on the left-hand side of the page (compiled by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort). A literal word-for-word English translation is found under the lines of Greek text. In the narrow right-hand column is the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, which allows you to compare the interlinear translation with a modern English translation of the Bible
so for me i have found the best way to know the original meaning is to do our own research then we can come to an accurate understanding of Gods word
 
I like to use the KJV too, both for reading and for study. If there is something which I want to take a deeper more involved look at then I will take a look at other translations that I can find online too. The church I go to uses the NLV and the NIV which I have no problem with. I think using different translations can serve to give a greater knowledge of the bible.
 
Don't they(Jehovah's Witnesses) claim that the Bible is for the church not for individuals who cant understand it on there own??

mee said:

The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures is published by Jehovah’s Witnesses to help lovers of God’s Word get acquainted with the original Greek text of the Bible. It contains The New Testament in the Original Greek on the left-hand side of the page (compiled by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort). A literal word-for-word English translation is found under the lines of Greek text. In the narrow right-hand column is the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, which allows you to compare the interlinear translation with a modern English translation of the Bible
so for me i have found the best way to know the original meaning is to do our own research then we can come to an accurate understanding of Gods word
Click to expand...
 
What concerns me is that anyone who doesnt believe the bible can stand on its own but have to have other resources written by men to interpret it.. how can they reason their belief system.. Would seem to me that they are not worshipping the same God that I am. I myself allow the Spirit to interpret to me not some men in New York.
 
Dor said:
Don't they(Jehovah's Witnesses) claim that the Bible is for the church not for individuals who cant understand it on there own??
Click to expand...
The new world translation is available to anyone willing to read it.
 
Faithfulservant said:
What concerns me is that anyone who doesnt believe the bible can stand on its own but have to have other resources written by men to interpret it.. how can they reason their belief system.. Would seem to me that they are not worshipping the same God that I am. I myself allow the Spirit to interpret to me not some men in New York.
Click to expand...
your bible that you read was translated by men , the same as the NWT its up to us as individuals to make sure that the translation is as accurate as possible by comparing i for one have many translations
 
When studying the Christian scriptures, I use one Bible that is four translations side by side: KJV, Amplified, NASV, and NIV plus the Bible as translated from the Aramaic Peshitta texts (the Eastern Orthodox Bible). Between the five, I get a pretty good idea of any discrepancies between the verses. I find the Amplified really useful in that it includes the various meanings of Greek and Hebrew terms. It is not very poetic or beautiful though. The NIV or KJV flows better. The Eastern Orthodox one is also quite interesting and useful, especially if used in combination with texts that discuss the Aramaic language and expressions. Bottom line, I let God guide my heart in all matters, so that is my key "interpreter" that guides my reading of the various interpretations. But I do recognize the difficulty of getting the interpretation right linguistically- Greek, for example often had many words with subtle differences in meaning for which English only has one word, whereas Aramaic words frequently have multiple and very different meanings that depend on context and idiomatic expression when English would have several words!
 
The Greek texts support the modern translations. Really it not a case of the newer translations omitting anything, rather it is a case that the KJV translator's put in a lot that was not actually there.

I use around 30 or so different translations in all but the NASB is my main one.

Kiwimac
 
kiwimac said:
The Greek texts support the modern translations. Really it not a case of the newer translations omitting anything, rather it is a case that the KJV translator's put in a lot that was not actually there.

I use around 30 or so different translations in all but the NASB is my main one.

Kiwimac
Click to expand...
yes i agree with that,and it is because of that ,that confusion arises.people are misled into believing that the KJV is the most accurate when it isnt
 
mee said:
yes i agree with that,and it is because of that ,that confusion arises.people are misled into believing that the KJV is the most accurate when it isnt
Click to expand...
Wait a sec your telling me the KJV is the wrong translation when your own group says you cant understand the Bible except what they tell you????
"Only this organization functions for Jehovah's purpose and to his praise. To it alone God's Sacred Word, the Bible, is not a sealed book." The Watchtower; July 1, 1973, pp. 402. Luke 24 44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures....So biblically we can all understand.

Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian congregation as an organization, not to individuals, regardless of how sincerely they may believe that they can interpret the Bible." The Watchtower, Oct. 1, 1967. p. 587.

"We all need help to understand the Bible, and we cannot find the Scriptural guidance we need outside the ‘faithful and discreet slave' organization." (The Watchtower, Feb. 15, 1981.)

"From time to time, there have arisen from among the ranks of Jehovah's people those, who, like the original Satan, have adopted an independent, faultfinding attitude...They say that it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such ‘Bible reading,' they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentaries by Christendom's clergy were teaching 100 years ago..." The Watchtower, August 15, 1981. So, if you think independently, find fault with something the Watchtower says, then you are like Satan. Also, what are the apostate doctrines spoken of in the above quote? Of course, that would be the Trinity, the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit, the physical resurrection of Christ, etc., all things the Watchtower organization denies. So, if you read the Bible by itself, reading it for what it says, without the watchtower guiding you, you will adopt these doctrines.

"All who want to understand the Bible should appreciate that the "greatly diversified wisdom of God" can become known only through Jehovah's channel of communication, the faithful and discreet slave." The Watchtower; 10/1/1994; p. 8. So in other words the only way we can appreciate the word is by listening to what some guys in New York want to say...goes against what Jesus said himself...I will stick with my "bad" translation(KJV) and leave yall the translations that were made to further some guys who wanted their own religion.
 
Doing research I found that Jehovah’s Witnesses are guilty of adding to the word of God by added the divine name YHWH (The Tetragrammaton) in the New Testament where it is never found in the original Greek manuscripts, and blamed the Bible as being corrupted. Their central premise is that Matthew was written in Hebrew but this is entirely false. They added "Jehovah" to the NT 237 times where it is never found.

It is impossible to remove YHWH from the Old Testament, because it is found in every original Hebrew Manuscript. (However, YHWH is never found in any manuscript of the New Testament.)

The American Standard version and Young's Literal Translation, always uses Jehovah when the Tetragrammaton is found in the Hebrew.

Reputable Bibles like the King James version and the New American Standard version do not remove the divine name from the Old Testament.
The King James Version uses "Jehovah" many times: Ex 6:2; Ps 83:18; Isa 12:2; 26:4.

In the "Principles of Translation" section in the introduction of the New American Standard version, it says:

The Proper Name of God in the Old Testament: In the Scriptures, the name of god is most significant and understandably so. It is inconceivable to think of spiritual matters without a proper designation for the Supreme Deity. Thus the most common name for the deity is God, a translation of the original Elohim. One of the titles for God is Lord, a translation of Adonai. There is yet another name for which is particularly assigned to God as His special or proper name, that is, the four letters YHWH (The Tetragrammaton)(Exodus 3:14 and Isaiah 42:8). this name has not been pronounced by the Jews because of reverence for the great sacredness of the divine name. Therefore, it has been consistently translated Lord. The only exception to this translation of YHWH is when it occurs in immediate proximity to the word Lord, that is, Adonai. In that case it is regularly translated God in order to avoid confusion. It is known that for many years YHWH has been transliterated as Yahweh, however no complete certainty attaches to this pronunciation.

If we were given the choice, we would merely insert YHWH every time it is used in the Hebrew Old Testament. If that is what the Holy Spirit chose to use.

As the introduction to the New American Standard confirms, the proper way of spelling YHWH in the English language would be Yahweh, not Jehovah.
Dr. George Howard, who is quoted as proof that Matthew was written in Hebrew also said the proper pronunciation of YHWH was "YaHWeH" and that this is the accepted one by the vast majority of scholars.

Jehovah was popularized by a catholic monk who lived in the 12th century AD. In fact "Jehovah" was never used before this!

JW's also say that the orgininal manuscript of Matthew was in Hebrew as a reason for replacing Jehovah with other names of the Lord and The Spirit. However they have never found a Hebrew manuscript predating the Greek one of Matthew. This is why they consider the bible corrupt and mis-translated.

Its also interesting that they invented a Greek present participle in translating for their NWT to match their meaning. There is no Greek present participle.
 
Faithful,

The word of God is Jesus. The Bible is a collection of words about God written by human beings who were inspired but whose words reflect their human experiences and then when we read them we further interpret them through our own human experiences.

Kiwimac
 
kiwimac said:
The word of God is Jesus. The Bible is a collection of words about God written by human beings who were inspired but whose words reflect their human experiences and then when we read them we further interpret them through our own human experiences.

Kiwimac
Click to expand...
I beg to differ according to scripture . Jesus is the Word.. the Word was with God.. the Word was God = Jesus is God. The bible is the word of God. Two completely different things.

John1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness

2 Peter 3:15-16 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation--as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
 
Ummm, am I missing something or didn't you both (kiwi and Faithful) both just say the same thing???? :confused:

lunamoth
 
Hmm I thought he was saying that Jesus was the word of God..and that the bible was written by men for men.. I was saying that Jesus is the Word and the bible was written by Him through man.. the word of God.
 
Thank you for the clarification, Faithfulservant. Well, I don't see much difference between you on Jesus is the Word, but I can see that you have a difference with respect to Bible interpretation. 'Inspired by God' is not an exacting phrase.

peace,
lunamoth
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top