Translating "In"

(Bowman's Attacks on the NWT (the New World Translation, the Bible translation by Jehovah's Witnesses) in his Understanding Jehovah's Witnesses)

Translating "In"


Here Bowman admits that the Greek preposition en, which is commonly translated into English as "in," has a number of different meanings. However, he insists that the NWT is often being dishonest when it translates using those other established meanings:

For instance, in 1 John 5:20 the NWT reads in part: "And we are in union with [en] the true one, by means of [en] his Son Jesus Christ." Reading this translation one would never suspect that "in union with" and "by means of" translate the same simple Greek preposition. ....

Again in Colossians 2:6-12 "in him" and "in whom" (en auto, en ho) becomes "in union with him" (v. 6), "in him" (vv. 7, 9), "by means of him" (v. 10), and "by relationship with him" (vv. 11, 12). These variations serve no useful purpose, undermine the unity of the passage, and obscure the passage ....

There are many other passages where in is paraphrased to avoid the otherwise clear meaning of the text. For example, in Matthew 5:19 in becomes "in relation to" so as to avoid the passage's teaching that some who disobey the Law's commandments and teach others to do so will nevertheless be accepted "in the kingdom of heaven" .... - p. 69.

So how does Goodspeed translate the two uses of en at 1 John 5:20 (where the NWT has "in union with" and "by means of")?

"and we are in union with [en] him who is true, through [en] his Son, Jesus Christ."

And yet, according to Bowman himself, trinitarian Goodspeed is a superb scholar worthy of our trust.

How is it, then, that the NWT is to be condemned for its translation which is essentially the same as Goodspeed's??

And again in Col. 2:6-12 how does Goodspeed render the preposition en?

Where the NWT translates en as "in union with him" (v. 6), Goodspeed has "in vital union with him"!

And where the NWT has "in him" (verses 7, 9), Goodspeed has "in him"!

And where the NWT has "by means of him" (v. 10), Goodspeed has "in union with him"!

And where the NWT has "by relationship with him" (v. 12), Goodspeed has "with him"!

So, again, how is it that the NWT is to be condemned for its dishonesty, bias, etc. when the much acclaimed, trinitarian, Bowman-praised Dr. Goodspeed renders it virtually the same? (Also see the IN-WITH study paper.)

And as for Matt. 5:19, Bowman's contention that the NWT has changed the meaning to "avoid the passage's teaching that some who disobey the Law's commandments and teach others to do so will nevertheless be accepted in the kingdom of heaven" is simply untrue! It is understandable why Bowman would want to believe such a thing, but it is not true. All one has to do is read the following verse, Matt. 5:20, (and many other scriptures tell us the same):

"I tell you, then, that you will be able to enter the Kingdom of heaven only if you are more faithful than the teachers of the Law and the Pharisees in doing what God requires." - Good News Bible, American Bible Society, 1978. (Cf. Matt. 7:21-27.)

Or as NT scholar W.E. Vine writes:

"it is further said that only such as do the will of God shall enter into His Kingdom, Matt. 7:21" - p. 625, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1983.