tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12639937864656630722024-03-14T01:13:40.239-07:00Defending The New World TranslationThis website identifies and disputes false charges made against The New World Translation. Find what you are looking for either by using the search box or by clicking the links directly below.Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comBlogger159125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-90829296222060922282016-10-21T13:34:00.000-07:002016-10-21T13:34:25.136-07:00The “New World Translation”—Scholarly and Honest<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
Back in the 16th century, opposers said that Martin Luther’s translation of the Bible was "FULL of falsifications!” They believed they could prove that Luther’s Bible contained “1,400 heretical errors and lies.” Today, Luther’s Bible is viewed as a landmark translation. The book <i>Translating the Bible</i> even calls it “a work of genius”!</div>
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7yq6P3gGpoS6PToTif9X3bbwBY1N3Ku4RTCbN1PuRmbs_Uky011t4RXT941oDmFD1Q9Kf0cXj4L46RKMCmhf-hMH0Z1EcVWS8p0qy-gAMHLKP1sYH7lshYHETJOvGFuFnG9d0vlRfsvg/s1600/2014-03-24+11.29.01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7yq6P3gGpoS6PToTif9X3bbwBY1N3Ku4RTCbN1PuRmbs_Uky011t4RXT941oDmFD1Q9Kf0cXj4L46RKMCmhf-hMH0Z1EcVWS8p0qy-gAMHLKP1sYH7lshYHETJOvGFuFnG9d0vlRfsvg/s1600/2014-03-24+11.29.01.jpg" width="200" /><br />The New World Translation Bible</a></div>
In this 20th century, the <i><a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2014/03/do-jehovahs-witnesses-have-their-own.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">New World Translation</span></a></i> has also been charged with falsification. Why? Because it departs from the traditional rendering of many verses and stresses the use of <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2010/11/gods-name.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">God’s name</span></a>, <a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200273066"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Jehovah</span></a>. Hence, it is unconventional. But does this make it false? No. It was produced with much care and attention to detail, and what may appear unfamiliar represents a sincere effort to represent carefully the nuances of the original languages. Theologian C. Houtman explains the reason for the unorthodoxy of the <i>New World Translation</i>: “Various traditional translations of important terms from the original text have been discarded, apparently in order to arrive at the best possible understanding.” Let us consider some examples of this.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Other Scholars Agree</span></b><br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<div style="text-align: left;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oWQCLWWYF4o/TkLHG8Qf6KI/AAAAAAAAAmw/T0zgU6F3DaI/s200/icon_h3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" naa="true" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oWQCLWWYF4o/TkLHG8Qf6KI/AAAAAAAAAmw/T0zgU6F3DaI/s200/icon_h3.jpg" width="240" /><br />Other Translations Support the NWT</a>Certain unfamiliar terms supposedly invented by Jehovah’s Witnesses are supported by other Bible translations or reference works. At <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/03/luke-2343-punctuation-and-new-world.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke 23:43</span></a>, the <i>New World Translation</i> records Jesus’ words to the criminal executed with him: “Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.” In the original Greek, there were no punctuation marks such as commas; but usually some kind of punctuation is inserted by translators to help with the reading. Most, however, make Luke 23:43 read as though Jesus and the criminal were bound for Paradise that very day. <i>The New English Bible</i> reads: “I tell you this: today you shall be with me in Paradise.” Not all convey this thought, however. Professor Wilhelm Michaelis renders the verse: “Truly, already today I give you the assurance: (one day) you will be together with me in paradise.” This rendering is much more logical than that of <i>The New English Bible</i>. <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/03/what-is-paradise-that-jesus-promised-to.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">The dying criminal could not have gone with Jesus to Paradise that same day</span></a>. Jesus was not resurrected until the third day after his death. In the meantime he was in <a href="http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/what-are-sheol-and-hades/"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Hades</span></a>, mankind’s common grave.—Acts 2:27, 31; 10:39, 40.
<br />
<br />
According to <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/08/this-means-or-this-is-estin-at-matthew.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matthew 26:26</span></a> in the <i>New World Translation</i>, Jesus, when instituting the celebration of the <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/04/lords-evening-meal-links-to-information.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Lord’s Evening Meal</span></a>, says of the bread that he passes to his disciples: “This means my body.” Most other translations render this verse: “This is my body,” and this is used to support the doctrine that during the celebration of the Lord’s Evening Meal, the bread literally becomes Christ’s flesh. The word translated in the New World Translation as “means” (<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/08/this-means-or-this-is-estin-at-matthew.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">es·tin</span></a>´, a form of ei·mi´) comes from the Greek word meaning “to be,” but it can also signify “to mean.” Thus, <i>Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament</i> says that this verb “is often i.q. [equivalent to] to denote, signify, import.” Indeed, “means” is a logical translation here. When Jesus instituted the Last Supper, his flesh was still on his bones, so how could the bread have been his literal flesh?<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSUKoJnUY51stJkAI0fpp0REQeF8wbUtbKPsnLMPOdhDsomgRbACpdbcK-yRzF2GYVnyfKhoW27FS0Qiw4vSmk3MHNqvJjoRr0zb9ZU4IhWlNaPvLZSHdg2VxL5jXJ4Z_iWX0EtYcXOCQ/s1600/1-John.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="132" qea="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSUKoJnUY51stJkAI0fpp0REQeF8wbUtbKPsnLMPOdhDsomgRbACpdbcK-yRzF2GYVnyfKhoW27FS0Qiw4vSmk3MHNqvJjoRr0zb9ZU4IhWlNaPvLZSHdg2VxL5jXJ4Z_iWX0EtYcXOCQ/s200/1-John.jpg" width="200" /><br />John 1:1c - NWT is Not Alone</a><a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/06/john-11-links-to-information.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">At John 1:1 the New World Translation reads: “The Word was a god.”</span></a> In many translations this expression simply reads: “The Word was God” and is used to support the Trinity doctrine. Not surprisingly, Trinitarians dislike the rendering in the <i>New World Translation</i>. But John 1:1 was not falsified in order to prove that Jesus is not Almighty God. Jehovah’s Witnesses, <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/06/is-new-world-translation-only-bible-to.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">among many others</span></a>, had challenged the capitalizing of “god” long before the appearance of the <i>New World Translation</i>, which endeavors accurately to render the original language. Five German Bible translators likewise use the term “a god” in that verse. At least 13 others have used expressions such as “of divine kind” or “godlike kind.” These renderings agree with other parts of the Bible to show that, yes, Jesus in heaven is a god in the sense of being divine. But Jehovah and Jesus are not the same being, the same God.—<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2014/02/how-does-john-1428-show-that-jesus-is.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John 14:28</span></a>; 20:17.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-BHUOfVsXj8U/UzCVo5KE_BI/AAAAAAAAIMw/FfS2jdifysI/s1600/Jehovah-New-Testament.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="142" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-BHUOfVsXj8U/UzCVo5KE_BI/AAAAAAAAIMw/FfS2jdifysI/s1600/Jehovah-New-Testament.jpg" width="400" /><br />NWT Only Restored God's Name in Places Where the Greek Scripture Writers <b>Quoted</b> it From the Hebrew Text</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><b><br /></b></b>
<b><b><span style="font-size: large;">God’s Personal Name</span></b></b></div>
<br />
At Luke 4:18, according to the <i>New World Translation</i>, Jesus applied to himself a prophecy in Isaiah, saying: “Jehovah’s spirit is upon me.” (Isaiah 61:1) <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/09/does-name-jehovah-belong-in-new.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Many object to the use of the name Jehovah</span></a> here. It is, however, just one of the more than 200 places where that name appears in the <i>New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures</i>, the so-called New Testament. True, no early surviving Greek manuscript of the “New Testament” contains the personal name of God. But <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/07/jehovah-in-new-testament.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">the name was included in the <i>New World Translation</i> for sound reasons</span></a>, not merely on a whim. And others have followed a similar course. In the German language alone, at least 11 versions use “Jehovah” (or the transliteration of the Hebrew, “Yahweh”) in the text of the “New Testament,” while four translators add the name in parentheses after “Lord.” More than 70 German translations use it in footnotes or commentaries.<br />
<br />
In Israel, God’s name was pronounced without inhibition for more than a thousand years. It is the name that appears most frequently in the Hebrew Scriptures (“Old Testament”), and there is no convincing proof that it was unknown to the general public or that its pronunciation had been forgotten in the first century of our Common Era, when Jewish Christians were inspired to write the books of the “New Testament.”—Ruth 2:4.<br />
<br />
Wolfgang Feneberg comments in the Jesuit magazine <i>Entschluss/Offen</i> (April 1985): “He [Jesus] did not withhold his father’s name YHWH from us, but he entrusted us with it. It is otherwise inexplicable why the first petition of the Lord’s Prayer should read: ‘May your name be sanctified!’” Feneberg further notes that “in pre-Christian manuscripts for Greek-speaking Jews, God’s name was not paraphrased with kýrios [Lord], but was written in the tetragram form [YHWH] in Hebrew or archaic Hebrew characters. . . . We find recollections of the name in the writings of the Church Fathers; but they are not interested in it. By translating this name kýrios (Lord), the Church Fathers were more interested in attributing the grandeur of the kýrios to Jesus Christ.” The <i>New World Translation</i> restores the name to the text of the Bible wherever there is sound, scholarly reason to do so.—See <a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1001060076"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Appendix 1D</span></a> in the Reference Bible.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yZhVqfKYWmc/UzCzeIFtmJI/AAAAAAAAIOY/sGXteuDthBM/s1600/YHWH-Dead-Sea-Scrolls.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="120" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yZhVqfKYWmc/UzCzeIFtmJI/AAAAAAAAIOY/sGXteuDthBM/s1600/YHWH-Dead-Sea-Scrolls.jpg" width="200" /></a><a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/09/addressing-question-is-name-jehovah.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Some criticize the form “Jehovah” by which the <i>New World Translation</i> renders God’s name</span></a>. In Hebrew manuscripts, the name appears just as four consonants, YHWH, and many insist that the proper pronunciation is “Yahweh,” not “Jehovah.” Hence, they feel that using “Jehovah” is a mistake. But, in truth, scholars are by no means in agreement that the form “Yahweh” represents <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2009/11/how-was-gods-name-yhwh-pronounced.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">the original pronunciation</span></a>. The fact is that while God preserved the spelling of his name “YHWH” over 6,000 times in the Bible, he did not preserve the pronunciation of it that Moses heard on Mount Sinai. (Exodus 20:2) Therefore, the pronunciation is not of the utmost importance at this time.<br />
<br />
In Europe the form “Jehovah” has been widely recognized for centuries and is used in many Bibles, including Jewish translations. It appears countless times on buildings, on coins and other objects, and in printed works, as well as in many church hymns. So rather than trying to represent the original Hebrew pronunciation, the <i>New World Translation</i> in all its different languages uses the form of God’s name that is popularly accepted. This is exactly what other Bible versions do with all the other names in the Bible.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b><span style="font-size: large;">Why the Harsh Criticism?</span></b></div>
<br />
Luther’s Bible was criticized because it was produced by a man who exposed the shortcomings of the traditional religion of his day. His translation opened the way for ordinary people to see the truth of much of what he said. Similarly, the <i>New World Translation</i> is criticized because it is published by <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/12/jehovahs-witnesses-links-to-information.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Jehovah’s Witnesses</span></a>, who outspokenly declare that many of Christendom’s doctrines are not found in the Bible. The <i>New World Translation</i>—indeed, any Bible—makes this evident.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nkSbdE4dOAY/UzB13JeVZdI/AAAAAAAAILc/6dnO90NseD0/s1600/Ben-Kedar.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-nkSbdE4dOAY/UzB13JeVZdI/AAAAAAAAILc/6dnO90NseD0/s1600/Ben-Kedar.jpg" /></a>In fact, <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/08/how-accurate-is-new-world-translation.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">the <i>New World Translation</i> is a scholarly work</span></a>. In 1989, <b>Professor Benjamin Kedar of Israel</b> said: “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 <i>New World Translation</i>. 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. Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew. . . . Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translating. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the <i>New World Translation</i> any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain.” <b>—March 1, 1991 Watchtower, page 26-30. WTBTS</b><br />
<br />
-------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<strong>For more concerning the New World Translation <span style="color: red;">from JW.ORG</span>, see:</strong><br />
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200274101"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES - Links to Information</span></a> (INDEX; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2004889"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">A “Remarkably Good” Translation</span></a> (w04 12/1 p. 30; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102007409#h=21:2-22:524"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Comments by Greek Scholars</span></a> (g 11/07 pp. 12-14; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/jw-bible-nwt/"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Have Their Own Bible?</span></a> (JW.ORG)<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #3d85c6;"><a href="http://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/changed-bible-beliefs/"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Have Jehovah’s Witnesses Changed the Bible to Fit Their Beliefs?</span></a> </span>(JW.ORG)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/jehovahs-will/new-world-translation/"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Why Have We Produced the New World Translation?</span></a> (JW.ORG)<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>For more </b><strong>concerning the NWT</strong><b> <span style="color: red;">from 'Defend Jehovah's Witnesses'</span>, see:</b><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/07/index-of-links-and-pages-that-defend.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Index of Links and Pages that Defend the New World Translation</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/08/how-accurate-is-new-world-translation.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">How Accurate is The New World Translation?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/01/why-was-new-world-translation-bible.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Why was the New World Translation Bible Printed, and How Accurate is it?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/01/why-did-translators-of-new-world.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Why Did The Translators of the New World Translation Bible Choose to Remain Anonymous?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/02/why-are-some-verses-missing-in-new.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Why are some verses missing in the New World Translation Bible?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/02/addressing-claim-that-new-world.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Addressing The Claim That The New World Translation is "Biased"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/05/did-jehovahs-witnesses-really-change.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Did Jehovah's Witnesses Really "Change the Original Meaning of the Bible to Suit their Beliefs" as Opposers Claim?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/05/was-johannes-greber-source-for-new.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Was Johannes Greber a "source" for the New World Translation?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/09/does-name-jehovah-belong-in-new.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Does the Name 'Jehovah' Belong in the New Testament?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2009/11/jehovah-in-new-testament.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">"Jehovah" in The New Testament</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/02/new-world-translation-and-restoration.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">The New World Translation and the Restoration of God's Name 237 Times in the New Testament</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/07/why-does-new-world-translation-use-word.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Why Does the New World Translation Use the Word “Impaled” where Most Bible Translations Say Christ Was “Crucified”?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/06/why-does-new-world-translation-use.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Why Does the New World Translation Use the Expression "magic-practicing priests" in Genesis, Exodus and Daniel? (hhartumim')</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/04/why-does-new-world-translation-bible.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Why Does the New World Translation Bible Say, "God's Active Force" at Genesis 1:2?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/05/translation-and-revision-of-lev-2321.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Translation and revision of Lev 23:21 proves that the NWT Bible translators DID know Hebrew</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/01/new-world-translation-parousia-presence.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">New World Translation - Parousia ("Presence") (Mt. 24:3)</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/05/matt-2546-and-new-world-translation.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Matt. 25:46 and the New World Translation - Does Kolasis Here Mean "Cutting Off" or "Punishment"?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/08/this-means-or-this-is-estin-at-matthew.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">“This Means” or “This Is”? - "Estin" at Matthew 26:26-28, Mark 14:22-24, and Luke 22:19</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/03/luke-2343-punctuation-and-new-world.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke 23:43, Punctuation and the New World Translation - Links to Information</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/08/luke-2343-punctuation-and-new-world.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Luke 23:43 - Punctuation and the New World Translation; "Truly I tell you today,..."</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/06/is-new-world-translation-only-bible-to.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Is the New World Translation the only Bible to phrase John 1:1c as "the Word was *a* God"?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/09/exercise-faith-believe-and-new-world.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">"Exercise Faith" / "Believe" John 3:16 and the New World Translation</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/05/john-1414-and-new-world-translation.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">John 14:14 and the New World Translation</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/08/new-world-translation-and-use-of-other.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">The New World Translation and the use of "Other" at Col. 1:16</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2012/03/why-does-nwt-at-col-29-state-that-in.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Why does the NWT at Col. 2:9 state that in Jesus "all the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily," when other translations say, "dwells the fullness of Deity/Godhead?'"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/05/col-29-and-nwt-divine-quality-deity.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Col. 2:9 and the NWT - "divine quality," "Deity / Godhead"?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/02/rev-510-rule-upon-or-over-earth.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Rev. 5:10 - Rule Upon (or 'over'?) the Earth</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/08/why-does-new-world-translation-add.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Why does the NWT 'add' the words, within square brackets, "the angel of" at Zechariah 3:2?</span></a><br />
<b>------------------------------------------------------------------</b><br />
(To those who are not Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs), please remember that if you are looking for <b>the</b> authoritative information about the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society's (WTBTS) Bible-based beliefs and practices, you should look to our OFFICIAL WEBSITE at <a href="http://www.jw.org/en"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">http://www.jw.org/en</span></a>. Numerous publications as well as the New World Translation Bible (NWT) and the very useful Watchtower Online Library can be found there.)<br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="70" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh9IHurwpSuuqMTbETCxu3Xq4McxJ7mUXnmivUOqkZCnFb4bOCpewPEMoifHO8fjcD2TGGnblsb65uRd5bouP9tq-rUDAxp2dYUZItDLhEmCXqbLkQu9JPS8-FCpB_SO4R3_RCnI-JuwBo/s1600/home+page.jpg" width="70" /></a><a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2009/11/index-sites-and-pages-in-defense-of_2379.html" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="70" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWcaXyK6dqKzhiWirObwfakZIzX7sJ40-uFT7eihFNcHcvZDE751ylwsdiy6fP6hJX6C8uFLd5TdcUnAGA30GrltNav27vhDvi-JN6oLXlqAStOOdSyaj32DlrqbVilHDHYqUM2goef9k/s1600/index5.jpg" width="70" /></a><a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2014/01/scripture-index-for-defend-jehovahs.html" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="70" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKwWIXSQD6lA0MTiikyCOdJ-i2Uy-ypXRKeRpsaJi2nv_UgTOr4g7eaTBRauJFljhfBbvDiHWn_Rm-mniceVwr9vsQ2gnOpGra2lp3dEKn_hPeGZvHv91FF9HdpYNIJao_6cmyAMVyvJ0/s1600/scriptures+index+(1).jpg" width="70" /></a><a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/lv/r1/lp-e/0/4813" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; display: inline !important; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="70" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-9UMrTxLi4OU/Usn8ytlgspI/AAAAAAAAGI4/hVa5brVUQv0/s1600/Watchtower-Online-Library+(1).jpg" width="70" /></a></div>
<form action="http://www.google.com/search" method="get">
<b><span style="color: red;">SEARCH 'DEFEND JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES':</span></b><br />
<table bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><tbody>
<tr><td></td><td><input maxlength="255" name="q" size="31" type="text" value="" />
<input name="btnG" type="submit" value="Search" />
<input name="domains" type="hidden" value="Defend Jehovah's Witnesses" /><br />
<input name="sitesearch" type="radio" value="" /><input checked="" name="sitesearch" type="radio" value="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/" /> Defend Jehovah's Witnesses </td>
<!-- SiteSearch Google --></tr>
</tbody></table>
</form>
<!-- SiteSearch Google -->
<br />
<form action="http://www.google.com/search" method="get">
<input name="ie" type="hidden" value="UTF-8" />
<input name="oe" type="hidden" value="UTF-8" />
<br />
<b><span style="color: red;">SEARCH JW.ORG:</span></b><br />
<table bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><tbody>
<tr><td></td><td><input maxlength="255" name="q" size="31" type="text" value="" />
<input name="btnG" type="submit" value="Search" />
<input name="domains" type="hidden" value="JW.ORG" /><br />
<input name="sitesearch" type="radio" value="" /><input checked="" name="sitesearch" type="radio" value="http://www.jw.org/en/" />JW.ORG</td>
<!-- SiteSearch Google --></tr>
</tbody></table>
</form>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<!-- Blogger automated replacement: "https://images-blogger-opensocial.googleusercontent.com/gadgets/proxy?url=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-oWQCLWWYF4o%2FTkLHG8Qf6KI%2FAAAAAAAAAmw%2FT0zgU6F3DaI%2Fs200%2Ficon_h3.jpg&container=blogger&gadget=a&rewriteMime=image%2F*" with "https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oWQCLWWYF4o/TkLHG8Qf6KI/AAAAAAAAAmw/T0zgU6F3DaI/s200/icon_h3.jpg" -->Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-59383154118200489682013-09-29T12:52:00.001-07:002013-09-29T12:52:59.724-07:00Luke 23:43 - Punctuation and the New World Translation; "Truly I tell you today,..."<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-coXU1nO9D74/TkLH5M8JbGI/AAAAAAAAAm4/ZG_fObwaq-M/s1600/comma.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" naa="true" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-coXU1nO9D74/TkLH5M8JbGI/AAAAAAAAAm4/ZG_fObwaq-M/s200/comma.jpg" width="131" /></a></div>
On occasion, opposers of <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/09/jehovahs-witnesses.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Jehovah's Witnesses</span></a> attempt to attack the scholarship and honesty of the translators of the <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-world-translation-bible.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">New World Translation Bible</span></a>. One passage that is cited by them is <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2011/03/luke-2343-punctuation-and-new-world.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Luke 23:43</span></a> and the issue concerns punctuation. <br />
<br />
Addressing this issue, the late Dr. Julius Mantey, noted NT Greek scholar and strong trinitarian, allegedly wrote a powerful attack against the honesty and <span style="color: black;">accuracy of the NWT</span>. He complained of the NWT's <em><strong>"</strong>attempt to deliberately deceive people by mispunctuation by placing a comma after `today' in Luke 23:43,</em><strong>" </strong><u>when he knows better than anyone that none of the earliest manuscripts (up to the 9th century A.D.) originally had capitalization or punctuation!</u> Later copyists have added punctuation wherever they felt it should be!<br />
<div>
<br />
Just because a modern text writer decides where he wants the punctuation and capital-ization to be in his interpretation of the original text (as Westcott and Hort did for the text that is used by the <i>NWT</i> and<i> Nestle</i> did in the text used by the <i>NASB</i>, etc.) does not mean that is how the original Bible writer intended the meaning - as explained in the <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/kingdom-interlinear-translation-of.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Kingdom Interlinear</span></a> footnote for this verse.</div>
<br />
For example, at <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2010/11/i-am-john-858-ex-314.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">John 8:58</span></a>, most (if not all) text writers have left ego eimi uncapitalized. However, some respected trinitarian Bibles (such as <i>NASB</i>, <i>TEV</i>, and <i>Phillips</i>) have ignored the text writer's preference and used capitalization here in an attempt to make this verb appear to be a Name: "I AM."<br />
<br />
<em>Are these popular trinitarian Bibles also guilty of "deliberately deceiving," then, by miscapitalization?</em><br />
<br />
Clearly, for Dr. Mantey to even hint that punctuation can be precisely determined at Luke 23:43 is totally dishonest. We see <strong><i>The Emphasized Bible</i> by Joseph B. Rotherham <u>also</u> punctuating this Scripture to produce the meaning found in the NWT</strong>:<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
"Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise."<br />
<br />
And the footnote for Luke 23:43 in <i>Lamsa's</i> translation admits:<br />
<br />
"Ancient texts were not punctuated. The comma could come before or after today."<br />
<br />
<div>
<i>The Concordant Literal New Testament</i> renders it: "43 And Jesus said to him, 'Verily, to you am I saying today, with Me shall you be in paradise.'"</div>
<br />
<i>2001 Translation – An American English Bible</i>: 43 And [Jesus] replied, `I tell you this today; you will be with me in Paradise.'<br />
<br />
<i>A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament</i> by E.W. Bullinger, DD., page 811 says:<br />
<br />
<div>
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oWQCLWWYF4o/TkLHG8Qf6KI/AAAAAAAAAmw/T0zgU6F3DaI/s1600/icon_h3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" naa="true" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-oWQCLWWYF4o/TkLHG8Qf6KI/AAAAAAAAAmw/T0zgU6F3DaI/s200/icon_h3.jpg" width="150" /></a></div>
<div>
"'And Jesus said to him, Verily, to thee I say this day, with Me shalt thou be in the Paradise.' The words today being made solemn and emphatic. Thus, instead of a remembrance, when He shall come in...His kingdom, He promises a presence in association (meta, 'with') Himself. And this promise he makes on that very day when he was dying.... Thus we are saved (1) the trouble of explaining why Jesus did not answer the question on its own terms; and (2) the inconvenience of endorsing the punctuation of the [KJV] as inspired; and we also place this passage in harmony with numberless passages in the O.T., such as 'Verily I say unto you this day,' etc.; 'I testify unto you this day.' etc. Deut.vi.6; vii.1; x.13; xi.8;,13,23; xii.13; xix.9; xxvii.4; xxxi.2, etc., where the Septuagint corresponds to Luke xxii.43."</div>
<br />
Yes, there is no reason to deny the rendering of Luke 23:43 as, "I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise."<br />
<br />
<strong>............................................</strong><br />
<br />
A couple examples from the Hebrew Scriptures of the OT in modern Bibles:<br />
<br />
(<i>NKJV</i>) Deuteronomy 30:18 "I announce to you today that you shall surely perish"<br />
<br />
(<i>NASB</i>) Deuteronomy 30:18 I declare to you today that you shall surely perish.<br />
<br />
(<i>RSV</i>) Deuteronomy 30:18 "I declare to you this day, that you shall perish"<br />
<br />
(<i>God's Word</i>) Deuteronomy 30:18 "If you do, I tell you today that you will certainly be destroyed"<br />
<br />
(<i>MKJV (Green))</i> Deuteronomy 30:18 "I declare to you today that you shall surely perish"<br />
<br />
<strong>.........................................</strong><br />
<br />
(<i>NASB</i>) Zechariah 9:12 "Return to the stronghold, O prisoners who have the hope; This very day I am declaring that I will restore double to you."<br />
<br />
(<i>KJV</i>) "even to day do I declare [that] I will render double unto thee;" (<i>TEV</i>) "Now I tell you that I will repay you twice over"<br />
<br />
(<i>RSV</i>) "today I declare that I will restore to you double."<br />
<br />
(<i>JPS</i>) "even to-day do I declare that I will render double unto thee"<br />
<br />
(<i>BBE</i>) "today I say to you that I will give you back twice as much"<br />
<br />
(<i>God'sWord</i>) "Today I tell you that I will return to you double blessings."<br />
<br />
(<i>CEV</i>) "because today I will reward you with twice what you had."<br />
<br />
(<i>NJB</i>) "This very day, I vow, I shall make it up to you twice over."<br />
<br />
(<i>NAB</i>) "This very day, I will return you double for your exile."<br />
<br />
[Also compare Deut. 5:1 and 6:6]<br />
<br />
<strong>For much more, see:</strong><br />
<div>
</div>
<div>
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200003377#s=4:0-8:733"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">What is the Paradise that Jesus promised to the evildoer who died alongside him?</span></a> (Insight-2 pp. 574-577; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br /></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<span class="hl"><a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989252#s=5:0-20:331"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">How can we be sure what Jesus meant by Paradise in his statement to the evildoer, at</span></a></span><a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989252#s=5:0-20:331"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;"> Luke 23:43?</span></a> (rs p. 284-p. 288; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br /></div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<span class="hl"><a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200003709#s=28:0-29:687"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Earthly Resurrection</span></a> (Insight-2 pp. 783-793; Watchtower Online Library)</span><br />
<span class="hl"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/luke23.43.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">LUKE 23:43-"Truly I tell you today,You will be with me in Paradise"(NWT)- Where should the comma be placed?</span></a> (IN Defense of the NWT)</div>
<br />
<a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/01/luke-2343-and-new-world-translation.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Luke 23:43 and the New World Translation</span></a> (Search For Bible Truths)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://myaiua.blogspot.com/2009/04/what-aboutluke-2343_29.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">What About...Luke 23:43?</span></a> (From God's Word)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JWquestions-and_answers/message/773"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Luke 23:43</span></a> (Jehovah's Witnesses Questions and Answers)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://jehovah.to/exe/translation/lewis.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Luke 23:43</span></a> (Jehovah's Witnesses United; Scroll Down to Second Letter) <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.scripturaltruths.com/articles/general/lu23_43/lu23_43.pdf"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Luke 23:43 - <span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRomanPSMT; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: small;">The Greek adverb which is rendered in English “today”</span> </span></span>in relation to its verb in Biblical Greek when found in Direct Discourse</span></a> (Scriptural Truths)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AkBB8nJpXbQCSpq0PusEVH7ty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20110305054524AAUB1jg"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Jehovah's Witnesses: Is It True That You Place Punctuation In Your NWT To Support Your Own Teachings?</span></a> (Y/A)</div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-58613171980898317872013-09-16T16:55:00.001-07:002013-09-16T16:55:26.208-07:00Why Does the New World Translation Use the Word “Impaled” where Most Bible Translations Say Christ Was “Crucified”?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-04VPmSUvfCg/UMtMz6W4RrI/AAAAAAAABSE/GMlthwJNHdE/s1600/icon_h3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-04VPmSUvfCg/UMtMz6W4RrI/AAAAAAAABSE/GMlthwJNHdE/s200/icon_h3.jpg" width="150" /></a></div>
Most Bible translations say Christ was “crucified” rather than “impaled.” This is because of the common belief that the torture instrument upon which he was hung was a “cross” made of two pieces of wood instead of a single pale, or stake. Tradition, not the Scriptures, also says that the condemned man carried only the crossbeam of the cross, called the patibulum, or antenna, instead of both parts. In this way some try to avoid the predicament of having too much weight for one man to drag or carry to Golgotha.<br />
<br />
Yet, what did the Bible writers themselves say about these matters? They used the Greek noun stau·ros′ 27 times and the verbs stau·ro′o 46 times, syn·stau·ro′o (the prefix syn, meaning “with”) 5 times, and a·na·stau·ro′o (a·na′, meaning “again”) once. They also used the Greek word xy′lon, meaning “wood,” 5 times to refer to the torture instrument upon which Jesus was nailed.<br />
<br />
Stau·ros′ in both the classical Greek and Koine carries no thought of a “cross” made of two timbers. It means only an upright stake, pale, pile, or pole, as might be used for a fence, stockade, or palisade. Says Douglas’ New Bible Dictionary of 1985 under “Cross,” page 253: “The Gk. word for ‘cross’ (stauros; verb stauroo . . . ) means primarily an upright stake or beam, and secondarily a stake used as an instrument for punishment and execution.”<br />
<br />
The fact that Luke, Peter, and Paul also used xy′lon as a synonym for stau·ros′ gives added evidence that Jesus was impaled on an upright stake without a crossbeam, for that is what xy′lon in this special sense means. (Ac 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Ga 3:13; 1Pe 2:24) Xy′lon also occurs in the Greek Septuagint at Ezra 6:11, where it speaks of a single beam or timber on which a lawbreaker was to be impaled.<br />
The New World Translation, therefore, faithfully conveys to the reader this basic idea of the Greek text by rendering stau·ros′ as “torture stake,” and the verb stau·ro′o as “impale,” that is, to fasten on a stake, or pole. In this way there is no confusion of stau·ros′ with the traditional ecclesiastical crosses. (See TORTURE STAKE.) The matter of one man like Simon of Cyrene bearing a torture stake, as the Scriptures say, is perfectly reasonable, for if it was 15 cm (6 in.) in diameter and 3.5 m (11 ft) long, it probably weighed little more than 45 kg (100 lb).—Mr 15:21.<br />
<br />
Note what W. E. Vine says on this subject: “STAUROS (σταυρός) denotes, primarily, an upright pale or stake. On such malefactors were nailed for execution. Both the noun and the verb stauroo, to fasten to a stake or pale, are originally to be distinguished from the ecclesiastical form of a two beamed cross.” Greek scholar Vine then mentions the Chaldean origin of the two-piece cross and how it was adopted from the pagans by Christendom in the third century C.E. as a symbol of Christ’s impalement.—Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, 1981, Vol. 1, p. 256. - <a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002159?q=Christ+crucified+impaled&p=par" target="_blank"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">IMPALEMENT; What does the original Greek reveal as to the shape of the instrument on which Jesus was put to death?</span></a>; <b>Insight-1 pp. 1190-1192</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>For more, see:</b>
<br />
<b><br /></b>
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200271473"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">CROSS - Links to Information </span></a>(INDEX; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/s/r1/lp-e?q=Cross&p=par"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Cross</span></a> (Search Results From the Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002159?q=Cross&p=par"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">What does the original Greek reveal as to the shape of the instrument on which Jesus was put to death? </span></a>(Insight-1 pp. 1190-1192; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200004456"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">TORTURE STAKE</span></a> (Insight-2 pp. 1116-1117; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/01/jehovahs-witnesses-and-cross.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Why Don't Jehovah's Witnesses Believe that Jesus Died Upon A Cross?</span></a> (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/06/stauros-cross-or-torture-stake.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">STAUROS - "Cross" or "Torture Stake"?</span></a> (Search For Bible Truths)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/stauros-torture-stake-response-to.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Stauros / Torture Stake (Response to accusations made by Robert H. Countess)</span></a> (Defending the New World Translation)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/cross_hd.ward.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Extracts from HISTORY OF THE CROSS: THE PAGAN ORIGIN AND IDOLATROUS ADOPTION AND WORSHIP, OF THE IMAGE. BY HENRY DANA WARD, M.A., U.S.A. 1871</span></a> (In Defense of the New World Translation)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/stauros.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">The STAUROS of the New Testament: Cross or Stake?</span></a> (In Defense of the New World Translation)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://pastorrussell.blogspot.com/2008/09/cross-or-stake-stauros.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Cross or Stake (Stauros)</span></a> (Pastor Russel)<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #6fa8dc;"><a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JWquestions-and_answers/message/1523"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">What does the original Greek reveal as to the shape of the instrument on which Jesus was put to death?</span></a> </span>(Jehovah's Witnesses Question and Answers)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://jehovah.to/exe/translation/cross.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Advantages of the New World Translation: Did Jesus Die on a Cross?</span></a> (Jehovah's Witnesses United)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AnGYFe1.7pZOmCJMcagcr87ty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20100901140352AA7dRuF&show=7#profile-info-iVTtYhX7aa"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">If Jesus was nailed to a tree with his hands above his head then why does John 20:25 say nailS?</span></a> (Y/A; Esp. Bar Anerges' response);<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/7849852/Jesus-did-not-die-on-cross-says-scholar.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">"Jesus did not die on cross, says scholar"</span></a> (News article from Telegraph.co.uk) <br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_7843.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">NWT - Criticism by Zondervan's So Many Versions? - "Torture Stake" vs. "Cross"</span></a> (Defending the NWT)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/03/quotes-concerning-pagan-history-of.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Quotes concerning the pagan history of the Cross</span></a> (Search For Bible Truths)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JWquestions-and_answers/message/1517"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Should the Cross be venerated?</span></a> (Jehovah's Witnesses Question and Answers)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2009/12/does-it-matter-if-jesus-died-on-cross.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Does it matter if Jesus died on a cross?</span></a> (Search For Bible Truths)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://pastorrussell.blogspot.com/2009/04/sign-of-cross.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">The Sign of the Cross</span></a> (Pastor Russel)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">BACK TO HOME PAGE</span></a> <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2009/11/index-sites-and-pages-in-defense-of_2379.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">INDEX</span></a> </span>
</div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-61201515294737751542013-09-12T00:57:00.000-07:002013-09-12T00:57:05.102-07:00Why Does the New World Translation Bible Say, "God's Active Force" at Genesis 1:2?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiswR7c2PWwOKTwDRIfH0ezOWURwSTKQjxV7ce16PIGsPZM_ARYbtSZyZ2twpmEWt-kL3LNxOMFtWG4-fuKlA9fJMvUf_eB5m4VM4_Oaptv_pE01poKmggGJ7sa0iSjq7HFXYqP39_Ri2A/s1600/DSC_5123.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="133" qda="true" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiswR7c2PWwOKTwDRIfH0ezOWURwSTKQjxV7ce16PIGsPZM_ARYbtSZyZ2twpmEWt-kL3LNxOMFtWG4-fuKlA9fJMvUf_eB5m4VM4_Oaptv_pE01poKmggGJ7sa0iSjq7HFXYqP39_Ri2A/s200/DSC_5123.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
In the <em>New World Translation</em> (NWT) Bible, it says at Genesis 1:2, <br />
<br />
"Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of [the] watery deep; and God’s active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters." <br />
<br />
Yet many translations do not say "God's active force" at Genesis 1:2.<br />
<a href="http://www.biblestudytools.com/genesis/1-2-compare.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">http://www.biblestudytools.com/genesis/1-2-compare.html</span></a><br />
<br />
However, the <em>New World Translation</em>'s "active force" for the Hebrew RUACH is both accurate and appropriate for Genesis 1:2 because the way that the Bible uses the term "holy spirit" indicates that it is God's active force that He uses to accomplish a variety of His purposes.<br />
<br />
Even many trinitarian scholars will admit this:<br />
<br />
"In the New Testament there is no direct suggestion of the Trinity. The Spirit is conceived as an <strong>impersonal power</strong> by which God effects his will through Christ." - <em>An Encyclopedia of Religion</em>, p. 344, Virgilius Ferm, 1945 ed.<br />
<br />
Using Genesis 1:2; Job 33:4 and Psalm 33:6 as its basis, Swete writes about the "Spirit" in the Old Testament: <br />
<br />
"The Spirit of God is the <strong>vital power</strong> which belongs to the Divine Being, and is seen to be operative in the world and in men. It is the <strong>Divine Energy</strong> which is the origin of all created life, especially of human existence and the faculties of human nature." Swete, <em>The Holy Spirit in the New Testament</em> (1909), page 2. <br />
<br />
The commentator clearly sees the Spirit as a force, not a person in this verse. <br />
<br />
About the translation of Genesis 1:2: <br />
<br />
"There is little to commend "a mighty wind" (NEB, Speiser, von Rad); in the relatively few passages where "God" is used as a superlative, the context usually makes it clear. The sense is excellently given by "<strong>the power of God</strong>" (GNB)." <em>A Bible Commentary for Today</em>, General Editor G. C. D. Howley (1973), page 135. <br />
<br />
Note that this Commentary states, "The sense is excellently given by "the power of God" (GNB)." <br />
<br />
"There is apparent a development in the direction of hypostatization of the Spirit, not in the sense that it is conceived as a person <strong>but as a substantial source of force and activity</strong>. It is the creative force of Yahweh (Gn. 1:2; Jb 33:5)" <em>Dictionary of the Bible</em>, McKenzie (1965), page 841. <br />
<br />
This Bible Dictionary agrees with the NWT that in Genesis 1:2, the Spirit is the "creative force of Yahweh." <br />
<br />
"The Spirit brooding over the primeval waters (Gn. 1:2) and creating man (Gn. 2:7), the Spirit who garnishes the heavens (Jb 26:13), sustains animal life and renews the face of the earth (Ps. 54:30), is the ruah ('breath,' 'wind') of God, <strong>the outgoing divine energy and power</strong>." <em>The New Bible Dictionary</em>, J. D. Douglas (1962), page 531. <br />
<br />
The ruach is not a person, the basic meaning in Genesis 1:2 (and the other scriptures quoted) is shown to be "the outgoing divine energy and power." <br />
<br />
<strong>Additional Reading:</strong><br />
<strong><br /></strong>
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/genesis1.2.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Genesis 1:2 New World Translation - "..and God's active force was moving to and fro..."</span></a> (In Defense of the New World Translation)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/12/holy-spirit-links-to-information.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Holy Spirit - Links to Information</span></a> (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.watchtower.org/e/ti/article_07.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">The Holy Spirit—God's Active Force</span></a> (Insight-2 pp. 1017-1027; Watchtower Online Library)
</div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-10275236068761793932013-08-08T12:34:00.000-07:002013-08-08T12:34:33.646-07:00Is the New World Translation the only Bible to phrase John 1:1c as "the Word was A God"?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<object height="200" style="clear: right; float: right;" width="200"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/IdMV3PIEUco&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param>
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param>
<param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param>
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IdMV3PIEUco&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="200" height="200"></embed></object><strong style="color: blue;"><span style="color: black;">"Is the New World Translation the only Bible to phrase John 1:1c as "the Word was *a* God"?"</span></strong></div>
</div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br />
Consider the following:<br />
<br />
1808: “and the word was a god.” - The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text.<br />
<br />
1864: “and a god was the word.” - <em>The Emphatic Diaglott</em>, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson.<br />
<br />
1928: “and the Word was a divine being.” - La Bible du Centenaire, L’Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.<br />
<br />
1935: “and the Word was divine.” - <em>The Bible—An American Translation</em>, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.<br />
<br />
1946: “and of a divine kind was the Word.” - <em>Das Neue Testament</em>, by Ludwig Thimme.<br />
<br />
1958: “and the Word was a God.” - <em>The New Testament</em>, by James L. Tomanek.<br />
<br />
1975: “and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word.” - <em>Das Evangelium nach Johannes</em>, by Siegfried Schulz.<br />
<br />
1978: “and godlike kind was the Logos.” - <em>Das Evangelium nach Johannes</em>, by Johannes Schneider.<br />
<br />
<strong>Even Origen, the most knowledgeable of the early Christian Greek-speaking scholars, tells us that John 1:1c actually means "the Word [logos] was <span style="color: red;">a</span> god". -</strong> "<em>Origen's Commentary on John,"</em> Book I, ch. 42 - Bk II, ch.3.<br />
<br />
Jehovah's Witnesses have been criticized for allowing the indefinite article (a) at John 1:1c. However, the true fault lies with their critics. It is the other way around...the absence of the indefinite article at John 1:1c has been purposely mistranslated in most Trinitarian-produced Bibles to fit their doctrine that Jesus is God. <br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: large;">For much more concerning John 1:1, see:</span></strong><br />
<strong><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></strong>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;"><a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/04/john-11.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">John 1:1 (Links to Information)</span></a> </span>(Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)</span><br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
</div>
</div>
</div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-88357929663387351172013-04-18T10:52:00.000-07:002013-04-18T10:52:42.221-07:00Addressing The Claim That The New World Translation is "Biased"<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtkXLk4Zl9Sy8EUNODJs2PUq2P-WwWUUgGF-jj_vU9VI-R2ijwKNQJtIajkVbZavXbHtuiTbxgJq4HY3RE3V9-4XRNlmihFIbJKZHrsHh9yVQ7p1-63pBzREHdztGcMKD9je7JZ5ABUAc/s1600/100_0484_edited.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" gda="true" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtkXLk4Zl9Sy8EUNODJs2PUq2P-WwWUUgGF-jj_vU9VI-R2ijwKNQJtIajkVbZavXbHtuiTbxgJq4HY3RE3V9-4XRNlmihFIbJKZHrsHh9yVQ7p1-63pBzREHdztGcMKD9je7JZ5ABUAc/s200/100_0484_edited.jpg" width="190" /></a></div>
Some have made claims similar to the quote found in p. 65, <em>Understanding Jehovah's Witnesses</em>, Baker Book House, 1991, that, "the<em> NWT</em> is filled with faulty translations designed to make the Bible fit Jehovah's Witness doctrine. It is therefore legitimate to say ... that the <em>NWT</em> is doctrinally biased." <br />
<br />
Ususally what many of these opposers apparently mean by "doctrinally biased" is that the <em>NWT</em> translates passages that may have more than one possible interpretation in a way that does not support the trinity doctrine (or certain other "orthodox" doctrines of modern Christendom). Just because <em><u>they</u></em> support some of these doctrines (particularly the trinity doctrine) does not make them true. Jehovah's Witnesses have determined through proper, honest scholarship that a number of these teachings are actually unscriptural additions by scholars and philosophers made hundreds of years after the deaths of Christ and his Apostles. - See the <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/history-of-christian-trinity-hist-part.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">HIST</span></a>; <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/creeds.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">CREEDS</span></a>; <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/israel.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">ISRAEL</span></a>; <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/image.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">IMAGE</span></a>; etc. study papers.<br />
<br />
For Jehovah's Witnesses to choose honest alternate translations and interpretations which refute these unscriptural doctrinal additions or questionable translations may make them biased, in a sense, but it certainly does not make them dishonest or guilty of "faulty translations"!<br />
<br />
Being "biased" does not necessarily make a person dishonest or unscholarly. Being biased against illegal drug usage and drug pushers does not make you a villain. Being biased against abortion or biased against having children out of wedlock or adultery, etc., does not automatically make you wrong, dishonest, unscholarly, or evil! We are all biased in <em>many</em> ways and often in good, proper ways.<br />
<br />
All Bibles are doctrinally biased in their translations. For example, it is doubtful that you will easily find one for sale today which is not strongly biased toward a trinity doctrine. That is, when more than one honest rendering exists for a particular verse, these Bibles will purposely choose the one which best presents evidence for a trinity. This is solely because of the tradition of a three-persons-in-one-God trinity doctrine which was officially begun by the Roman Catholic Church in the 4th century A. D. (hundreds of years after the deaths of Christ, his Apostles, and the inspired Bible writers) and continues down to today in 99% of the churches of Christendom.<br />
<br />
This trinitarian doctrinal bias is not based on proper Scriptural evidence (see the <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/image.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">IMAGE</span></a>; <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/john-11c-primer_21.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">PRIMER</span></a>; <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/i-am-part-1.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">I-AM</span></a>; etc. study papers). It is not based on proper historical evidence (see <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/israel.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">ISRAEL</span></a>; <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/history-of-christian-trinity-hist-part.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">HIST</span></a>; and <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/creeds.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">CREEDS</span></a> study papers). It is not just "doctrinal bias," it is <em><strong>unsupported</strong></em> doctrinal bias.<br />
<br />
So for the <em>NWT</em> to be virtually the only Bible to be consistently translated with its properly-supported bias for a single-person God is certainly not dishonest or false!<br />
<br />
<strong>Additional Reading:</strong><br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/nwtbiased.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Is The New World Translation Biased and Unscholarly?</span></a> (In Defense of the NWT)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://jehovah.to/xlation/ho.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Robert Hommel's Comments on the New World Translation</span></a> (Bible Translation and Study)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/index-of-links-and-pages.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Index of Links and Pages that Defend the New World Translation</span> </a>(Defending the NWT)</div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-71171324947337769572013-04-14T17:58:00.000-07:002013-04-14T17:58:28.819-07:00Why was the New World Translation Bible Printed, and How Accurate is it?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-s-6zLtP31Fw/Tk8euz1fXQI/AAAAAAAAAnY/TaJfIzJcKS8/s1600/nwt.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" qaa="true" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-s-6zLtP31Fw/Tk8euz1fXQI/AAAAAAAAAnY/TaJfIzJcKS8/s200/nwt.jpg" width="142" /></a><strong>Why was the New World Translation Bible Printed?</strong></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
There were several reasons why the NWT was printed: </div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
1) Most of the other translations used were made by those who were influenced by the pagan philosophies and unscriptural traditions that their religious systems had passed down from long ago as well as other influences, </div>
<br />
2) Older and more reliable Bible manuscripts were becoming available, <br />
<br />
3) As a result of archaeological discoveries, the Greek language of the first century was becoming more clearly understood, and <br />
<br />
4) The languages into which translations are made undergo changes over the years. (For instance, who today really talks like this?: "And he commanded the foremost, saying, When Esau my brother meeteth thee, and asketh thee, saying, Whose art thou? and whither goest thou? and whose are these before thee?" - Gen. 32:17; KJV) <br />
<br />
Jehovah's Witnesses wanted a translation that was of the latest scholarship, one that was without spot by creeds or traditions, a literal translation that faithfully presented what is in the original writings and a translation that would be clear and understandable to modern-day readers. (Read the New World Translation Bible <a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/binav/r1/lp-e"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">online</span></a>.)<br />
<br />
<strong>How Accurate is The New World Translation?</strong><br />
<br />
Concerning it's accuracy, the New World Translation has been found to be "<em>one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available</em>" and is "<em>the most accurate of the [8 major] translations compared</em>." -Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament by Jason BeDuhn, associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff, Arizona<br />
<br />
The comments made by Professor Benjamin Kedar of Israel can be found by clicking on the link below: <br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_7717.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_7717.html</span></a><br />
<br />
<em>Recommended Links to Information and Quotes Praising and Supporting the New World Translation:</em> <a href="http://myaiua.blogspot.com/2009/01/scholarly-quotes-on-new-world.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Scholarly Quotes on the New World Translation</span></a> (From God's Word)<br />
<a href="http://jehovah.to/exe/translation/advantages.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Advantages of the New World Translation</span></a> (Jehovah's Witnesses United)<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/advantages.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Advantages of the NWT</span></a> (In Defense of the NWT)<br />
<a href="http://pastorrussell.blogspot.com/2008/08/new-world-translation.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">The New World Translation</span></a> (Pastor Russell)<br />
<div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<br />
<strong>Accusations Against The New World Translation Hypocritical </strong><br />
<br />
Some have hypocritically accused the <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-world-translation-bible.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">New World Translation Bible</span></a> of inaccuracies, bias, and <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2011/07/translation-and-revision-of-lev-2321.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">written by those with poor credentials</span></a>. When, in reality, what kind of credentials do the writers of most every other modern Bible have? And yet these copyists allowed the insertion the title "LORD" instead of the divine name in most of the nearly SEVEN THOUSAND instances in their 'translation' of the Hebrew Scriptures. Not only is this inaccurate, but it is a purposeful, blatant misuse of God's Name! (Ex. 20:7) The NWT is accurate in that it uses God's Name in all instances found in Scripture. (Also see <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/11/jehovah-in-new-testament.html" style="color: #6fa8dc;">"Jehovah" in The New Testament</a>; Search For Bible Truths)<br />
<br />
Also, (unlike the NWT) most of these other translations used were made by those who were influenced by the pagan philosophies and unscriptural traditions that their religious systems had passed down from long ago as well as other influences. <em>For just <strong>one </strong>instance</em>, the majority of Bible scholars (including Trinitarian ones) freely admit that 1 John 5:7 in the King James Version is spurious. But Trinitarian scholars and copyists felt compelled to ADD it to the Holy Scriptures because of their trinitarian biases.<br />
(Also see: <a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2008327"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">How Can You Choose a Good Bible Translation?</span></a>; w08 5/1 pp. 18-22; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br />
<strong>For more, see:</strong><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/index-of-links-and-pages.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Index of Links and Pages that Defend the New World Translation</span></a> (Defending The New World Translation)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/index-of-links-and-pages.html#uds-search-results"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">NWT FAQs</span></a> (Defending The New World Translation)<strong> </strong></div>
</div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-20437855041409299922013-04-09T08:00:00.000-07:002013-04-09T08:00:09.954-07:00Why does the NWT at Col. 2:9 state that in Jesus "all the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily," when other translations say, "dwells the fullness of Deity/Godhead?'"<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
The following is an excerpt from the <span style="color: blue;"><em>Watchtower</em>, August 1st, 1962, pages 479, 480 </span>(WTB&TS): <br />
<br />
"At Colossians 2:9 the word in the Greek that the New World Translation renders "divine quality" is theótes, and this is the only use of the word in the Christian Greek Scriptures. The same is true of a similar Greek word, theiótes, which appears only at Romans 1:20, and which the New World Translation there renders "Godship," as follows: "For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world's creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable."The way these two words have been rendered in the New World Translation has given rise to the charge that the New World Bible Translation Committee let their religious beliefs influence them. That charge is true, but they did not do so wrongly, or unduly. The meaning that is to be given to these two Greek words depends upon what the entire Bible has to say about Jehovah God and Jesus Christ.<br />
<br />
"How so? In that there is basis for translating these words either as "Deity," "Divinity" or "Godhead" and so attributing personality to them, or as "Divine Nature," "divine quality," "Godship," and having them merely denote qualities. Thus those who believe in the trinity will attach personality to these words, whereas those who do not will render them as qualities in view of the way God and Christ are described in the Scriptures and so as to harmonize the words with the rest of God's Word. This emphasizes the fact that one simply cannot properly and accurately translate the Bible unless one clearly understands its teachings.<br />
<br />
"That the New World Bible Translation Committee were perfectly right in rendering these words the way they did is apparent from what Greek authorities have to say about them. Thus Parkhurst's A Greek and English Lexicon (1845) defines theiótes as "Godhead" (page 261) and theótes as "Deity, godhead, divine nature" (page 264). Note the definition "divine nature" as well as "Godhead."<br />
<br />
"Liddell and Scott's A Greek-English Lexicon, in its new ninth edition, completed in 1940 and reprinted in 1948, Volume I, defines the two terms in the light of ancient usages apart from the Scriptures. Theiótes it defines as "divine nature, divinity" (page 788). Theótes it defines in exactly the same way, as "divinity, divine nature," and then cites as an example Colossians 2:9. In this connection it shows that the similar Greek expression, dia theóteta, means "for religious reasons" (page 792).<br />
<br />
"Thus the New World Translation is fully justified in rendering Colossians 2:9 to show that Christ has in him all the fullness, not of God himself, the Deity, the Godhead, but of the divine quality dwelling bodily, and this in behalf of the spiritual body of Christ, so that this body of Christ's followers is possessed of a fullness by means of him: "It is in [Christ] that all the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily. And so you [Christians] are possessed of a fullness by means of him, who is the head of all government and authority." - Col. 2:9, 10.<br />
<br />
"It is also of interest to note that both Weymouth and An American Translation render the passage, "the fullness of God's nature."<br />
<br />
"To get an objective view of the matter, in exploring questions such as these it is best to use the nonsectarian and nonreligious Hebrew-English and Greek-English dictionaries, instead of those that have been produced by some religious denomination."<span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<span style="color: black;">-------------------------------------------------------------------</span><br />
<br />
The following is an excerpt from the two volume encyclopedia <em><span style="color: blue;">Insight on the Scriptures</span></em> (WTB&TS):<br />
<br />
"Then, at Colossians 2:9 the apostle Paul says that in Christ "all the fullness of the divine quality [form of the·o´tes] dwells bodily." Here, again, some translations read "Godhead" or "deity," which Trinitarians interpret to mean that God personally dwells in Christ. (KJ, NE, RS, NAB) However, Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon defines the·o´tes in basically the same way it does thei·o´tes, as meaning "divinity, divine nature." (P. 792) The Syriac Peshitta and the Latin Vulgate render this word as "divinity." Thus, here too, there is a solid basis for rendering thei·o´tes as referring to quality, not personality.<br />
<br />
A consideration of the context of Colossians 2:9 clearly shows that having "divinity," or "divine nature," does not make Christ the same as God the Almighty. In the preceding chapter, Paul says: "God saw good for all fullness to dwell in him." (Col 1:19) Thus, all fullness dwells in Christ because it "pleased the Father" (KJ, Dy), because it was "by God's own choice." (NE) So the fullness of "divinity" that dwells in Christ is his as a result of a decision made by the Father. Further showing that having such "fullness" does not make Christ the same person as Almighty God is the fact that Paul later speaks of Christ as being "seated at the right hand of God."-Col 3:1.<br />
<br />
Considering the immediate context of Colossians 2:9, it is noted that in verse 8, Christians are warned against being misled by those who advocate philosophy and human tradition. They are also told that "carefully concealed in [Christ] are all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge," and they are urged to "go on walking in union with him, rooted and being built up in him and being stabilized in the faith." (Col 2:3, 6, 7) In addition, verses 13 to 15 explain that they are made alive through faith, being released from the Law covenant. Paul's argument, therefore, is that Christians do not need the Law (which was removed by means of Christ) or human philosophy and tradition. They have all they need, a precious "fullness," in Christ. -Col 2:10-12." (Vol. 1, page 629)<br />
<br />
<strong>For MUCH more, see:</strong><br />
<a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/01/does-col-29-prove-that-jesus-is-god.html"><span style="color: blue;">Does Col. 2:9 prove that Jesus is God?</span></a> (SFBT)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/10/col-29-fulness-of-deity.html"><span style="color: blue;">Col. 2:9 - "Fulness of Deity"</span></a> (Examining the Trinity)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JWquestions-and_answers/message/2651"><span style="color: blue;">"Theotes simply does not literally mean "godhead," and the use of "godhead" by the KJV translators was not intended as some would understand it today..."</span></a> (JWQ&A)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://jehovah.to/xlation/theotes.html"><span style="color: blue;">"The Fullness of the Divine Quality" in Colossians 2:9</span></a> (Bible Translation and Study)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/index-of-links-and-pages.html"><span style="color: blue;">Defending the New World Translation Index</span></a> <span style="color: black;">(Defending the New World Translation)</span></div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-58130583729255016882013-04-08T18:42:00.000-07:002013-04-08T18:42:00.979-07:00How Accurate is The New World Translation?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-s-6zLtP31Fw/Tk8euz1fXQI/AAAAAAAAAnY/TaJfIzJcKS8/s1600/nwt.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" qaa="true" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-s-6zLtP31Fw/Tk8euz1fXQI/AAAAAAAAAnY/TaJfIzJcKS8/s200/nwt.jpg" width="142" /></a>Concerning it's accuracy, the New World Translation has been found to be "<em>one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available</em>" and is "<em>the most accurate of the [8 major] translations compared</em>." -Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament by Jason BeDuhn, associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff, Arizona<br />
<br />
The comments made by Professor Benjamin Kedar of Israel can be found by clicking on the link below: <br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_7717.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_7717.html</span></a><br />
<br />
<em>Recommended Links to Information and Quotes Praising and Supporting the New World Translation:</em> <a href="http://myaiua.blogspot.com/2009/01/scholarly-quotes-on-new-world.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Scholarly Quotes on the New World Translation</span></a> (From God's Word); <a href="http://jehovah.to/exe/translation/advantages.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Advantages of the New World Translation</span></a> (Jehovah's Witnesses United); <a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/advantages.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Advantages of the NWT</span></a> (In Defense of the NWT); <a href="http://pastorrussell.blogspot.com/2008/08/new-world-translation.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">The New World Translation</span></a> (Pastor Russell)<br />
<div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<br />
<strong>Accusations Against The New World Translation Hypocritical </strong><br />
<br />
Some have hypocritically accused the <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-world-translation-bible.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">New World Translation Bible</span></a> of inaccuracies, bias, and <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2011/07/translation-and-revision-of-lev-2321.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">written by those with poor credentials</span></a>. When, in reality, what kind of credentials do the writers of most every other modern Bible have? And yet these copyists allowed the insertion the title "LORD" instead of the divine name in most of the nearly SEVEN THOUSAND instances in their 'translation' of the Hebrew Scriptures. Not only is this inaccurate, but it is a purposeful, blatant misuse of God's Name! (Ex. 20:7) The NWT is accurate in that it uses God's Name in all instances found in Scripture. (For the subject of God's Name in the N.T., see the <span style="color: #6fa8dc;"><a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/11/jehovah-in-new-testament.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">"Jehovah" in The New Testament</span></a> </span><span style="color: black;">Category.</span>)<br />
<br />
Also, (unlike the NWT) most of these other translations used were made by those who were influenced by the pagan philosophies and unscriptural traditions that their religious systems had passed down from long ago as well as other influences. <em>For just <strong>one </strong>instance</em>, the majority of Bible scholars (including Trinitarian ones) freely admit that 1 John 5:7 in the King James Version is spurious. But Trinitarian scholars and copyists felt compelled to ADD it to the Holy Scriptures because of their trinitarian biases.<br />
(Also see: <a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2008327"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">How Can You Choose a Good Bible Translation?</span></a>; w08 5/1 pp. 18-22; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<div>
<br />
<strong>For more, see:</strong><br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/index-of-links-and-pages.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Index of Links and Pages that Defend the New World Translation</span></a> (Defending The New World Translation)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/index-of-links-and-pages.html#uds-search-results"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">NWT FAQs</span></a> (Defending The New World Translation)<strong> </strong></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-13953890624001957122013-04-08T09:36:00.000-07:002013-04-08T09:36:14.772-07:00"Jehovah" 50 or 237 places in the New Testament? (Examining Countess' list)<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WCyDt3Z6-U4/UWLxH1H3HEI/AAAAAAAAB7c/lCOBUjYPPEw/s1600/New-World-Translation.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="150" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-WCyDt3Z6-U4/UWLxH1H3HEI/AAAAAAAAB7c/lCOBUjYPPEw/s200/New-World-Translation.jpg" width="200" /></a>As a part of his attack upon the <em>NWT's</em> `dishonest' use of "Jehovah" in the NT, Mr. Countess uses a list<em>NWT</em> translators, editors, and publishers are hypocritically dishonest! He claims that there are only 50 places in the NT where the inspired writer has quoted OT scriptures which actually use "Jehovah." Therefore, he tells us there should be a maximum of 50 places where the <em>NWT</em> has `honestly' changed "Lord" or "God" in the NT to "Jehovah" (to match the original OT quote)! And yet the <em>NWT</em> has used "Jehovah" in 237 places in the NT! Even worse, only <strong>39</strong> of them (out of a possible <strong>50</strong>) are places where the NT actually quotes <strong><span style="color: red;">*</span></strong> an OT scripture using "Jehovah" (according to Mr. Countess)! Therefore, according to this trinitarian "scholar" and Presbyterian minister, the <em>NWT</em> has dishonestly and hypocritically used "Jehovah" in 198 out of the 237 instances (about 85% of the time)! {Please see my <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_425.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">JHVHNT</span></a> study} Below is the first part of Table IV (p. 104) which Mr. Countess uses in support of his extremely serious charges:<br />
(Table IV, p. 104) to "prove" that the <br />
<br />
<br />
<strong>TABLE IV </strong><br />
<br />
"Jehovah's" in the Main Text of <em>NWT</em><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Book.....<u>YHWH in OT text</u>...<u>NWT based on YHWH</u>..<u>not based on YHWH</u> <br />
<br />
Matthew..........8.....................7 ............................. 11 <br />
<br />
Mark.............. 2 ................... 2.................................7 <br />
<br />
Luke............... 2................... 2............................... 34 <br />
<br />
John............... 2................... 1................................. 4 <br />
<br />
Etc. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
[In other words, Countess is claiming that there are only <strong>8</strong> places in Matthew which quote or refer to an OT use of YHWH ('Jehovah'). Then he claims that the <em>NWT</em> uses 18 "Jehovahs" in the Book of Matthew. Of those 18, he claims that only <strong>7</strong> of them are actually based on a passage in the OT which uses YHWH. Then he claims that the <strong>11</strong> other "Jehovahs" in the Book of Matthew in the <em>NWT</em> are <strong>NOT</strong> based on a use of YHWH in the OT!!]<br />
<br />
Why don't we actually examine the accuracy of this table by Mr. Countess? That is the only way that one can truly determine who is being dishonest! <br />
<br />
For example, notice that in his table he claims that John only quoted twice from the OT where it originally used "Jehovah," whereas the <em>NWT</em> has used "Jehovah" 5 times in the Gospel of John. Furthermore, of those 5 times, he claims, only one is actually based on an OT use of "Jehovah"! In other words, the <em>NWT</em> is dishonest in 4 of its 5 uses of "Jehovah" in the Gospel of John because they are not based on an OT use of "Jehovah"!<br />
<br />
We have seen that even respected trinitarian scholars disagree as to whether certain NT scriptures are quotes (or clear, direct references) to OT scriptures or not. Sometimes the evidence is simply not strong enough to make it certain. However, for a Bible to disagree with all other Bibles and scholars in <strong>80% (4 out of 5)</strong> of such cases might justify an accusation of dishonesty.<br />
<br />
The <strong>five</strong> uses of "Jehovah" in John by the <em>NWT</em> are Jn 1:23; 6:45; 12:13; and 12:38 (twice). Is it <strong><em>really</em></strong> true, as Countess claims, that only <strong>one</strong> of these uses a quote from the OT where "Jehovah" was originally used?<br />
<br />
<strong>(1)</strong> <strong>ALL</strong> of the trinitarian Bible translations I used above to determine what was a quote from the OT and what was not <em>(NKJV; RSV; NRSV; NASB; NIV; REB; NAB</em> (1970);<em> NAB</em> (1991); <em>JB; NJB; MLB;</em> Moffatt; and Beck) show Jn 1:23 to be a quote from the OT: Is. 40:3 (which does use "Jehovah" in the original OT manuscripts). And <em>NKJV</em> actually uses its keyword (`LORD') here which indicates "Jehovah" was in the original!<br />
<br />
<strong>(2)</strong> <strong>ALL</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles show Jn 6:45 to be a quote from the OT: Is. 54:13 (which does use "Jehovah" in the original OT manuscripts).<br />
<br />
<strong>(3)</strong> <strong>Six</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles <em>(NKJV; NASB; JB; NJB;</em> Moffatt; and Beck) show Jn 12:13 to be a quote from the OT: Ps. 118:26 (which does use "Jehovah" in the original OT manuscripts). And <em>NKJV</em> again uses its keyword (`LORD') here which indicates "Jehovah" was in the original!<br />
<br />
<strong>(4)</strong> & <strong>(5)</strong> <strong>ALL</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles show Jn 12:38 to be a quote from the OT: Is. 53:1 (which does use "Jehovah" once in the original OT manuscripts). And <em>NKJV</em> again uses its keyword `LORD' here (once only, however) which indicates "Jehovah" was in the original! The only possible accusation of "dishonesty" here could be the fact that the <em>NWT</em> has rendered both `Lord's in Jn 12:38 as "Jehovah" whereas the original being quoted uses only one "Jehovah." However, the context certainly suggests that the first "Lord" is directed to Jehovah also. And a number of Hebrew New Testament translations have rendered both `Lord's at Jn 12:38 as "Jehovah." This includes the two I have in my possession which are translated by respected trinitarians: (1) by the United Bible Societies, 1983 printing; and (2) Delitzsch's <em>Hebrew New Testament</em>, The Trinitarian Bible Society, 1981 printing.<br />
<br />
So just how is the <em>NWT</em> being "dishonest" by using "Jehovah" 5 times in these 4 verses in the Gospel of John where John is quoting from the OT? And how honest is Mr. Countess when he tells us that <strong>only <u>one</u></strong> use of "Jehovah" in the Gospel of John in the <em>NWT</em> is supported by a quote from the OT? Exactly who is being dishonest?<br />
<br />
Another good example from Mr. Countess' table is that of Mark.<br />
<br />
In Mark, he claims, there are only <strong>two</strong> times that Mark quoted from the OT where "Jehovah" was used in the original OT manuscripts. But there are 9 times in Mark that the <em>NWT</em> has used "Jehovah." Therefore, according to Countess, the <em>NWT</em> has used the Divine Name in Mark "dishonestly" <strong>7</strong> times!<br />
All of the 9 uses of "Jehovah" in Mark by the <em>NWT</em> are: Mark 1:3; 5:19; 11:9; 12:11; 12:29 (twice); 12:30; 12:36; and 13:20. Is it really true that only <strong>two</strong> of these use a quote from the OT where "Jehovah" was originally used?<br />
<br />
<strong>(1) ALL</strong> of the 13 trinitarian Bible translations I used above to determine what is considered a quote from the OT and what is not show Mk 1:3 to be a quote from Isaiah 40:3 (which does use "Jehovah" in the original OT manuscripts).<br />
<br />
<strong>(2)</strong> <strong>NONE</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles indicates Mk 5:19 to be a quote from the OT. However, the context makes the connection to Jehovah probable. In addition, 7 Hebrew New Testament translations do use "Jehovah" at Mk 5:19. This includes the two respected trinitarian Hebrew New Testaments I have: Delitzsch's and the UBS'. It certainly does not seem dishonest for "Jehovah" to be used here, but it apparently is not a quote from the OT.<br />
<br />
<strong>(3) SIX</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles <em>(NKJV; NASB; JB; NJB;</em> Moffatt; and Beck) show Mk 11:9 to be a quote from Ps. 118:26 (which does use "Jehovah" in the original OT manuscripts). And <em>NKJV</em> again uses its keyword (`LORD') here which indicates "Jehovah" was in the original! The <em>NIVSB</em> also tells us in a footnote for Mk 11:9, "A <strong>quotation of Ps. 118:26</strong>." Also 14 Hebrew New Testaments use "Jehovah" at Mk 11:9. This includes the two modern, respected trinitarian Hebrew New Testaments I have in my possession.<br />
<br />
<strong>(4) ALL</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles show Mk 12:11 to be a quote from Ps. 118:23 (which does use "Jehovah" in the original OT manuscripts). And <em>NKJV</em> again uses its keyword (`LORD') here which indicates "Jehovah" was in the original! <br />
<br />
<strong>(5) ALL</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles show Mk 12:29 ("Hear, O Israel, the Lord God....") to be a quote from the OT: Deut. 6:4 (which does use "Jehovah" in the original OT manuscripts). And <em>NKJV</em> again uses its keyword (`LORD') here which indicates "Jehovah" was in the original!<br />
<br />
<strong>(6) ALL</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles show Mk 12:29 (last part of verse: "...the Lord is one.") to be a quote from the OT: Deut. 6:4 (which does use "Jehovah" in the original OT manuscripts). And <em>NKJV</em> again uses its keyword (`LORD') here which indicates "Jehovah" was in the original!<br />
<br />
<strong>(7) ALL</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles show Mk 12:30 to be a quote from Deut. 6:5 (which does use "Jehovah" in the original OT manuscripts). And <em>NKJV</em> again uses its keyword (`LORD') here which indicates "Jehovah" was in the original!<br />
<br />
<strong>(8) ALL</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles show Mk 12:36 to be a quote from Ps. 110:1 (which does use "Jehovah" in the original OT manuscripts). And <em>NKJV</em> again uses its keyword (`LORD') here which indicates "Jehovah" was in the original!<br />
<br />
<strong>(9) NONE</strong> of those same trinitarian Bibles shows Mk 13:20 to be a quote from the OT. However, as in Mk 5:19 above, the context makes the connection probable. In addition there are 10 Hebrew New Testament translations which use "Jehovah" here in Mk 13:20. This includes the 2 respected trinitarian translations I have in my possession. It certainly does not seem dishonest for "Jehovah" to be used here, although it does not appear to be a quote from the OT.<br />
<br />
It is very obvious that at least <strong>7</strong> of the 9 uses of "Jehovah" in Mark by the <em>NWT</em> are from quotes by Mark of the OT which also used "Jehovah"!<br />
<br />
So exactly who is being dishonest? Are there really only <strong><u>2</u></strong> places in Mark where an OT passage using "Jehovah" is being quoted or referred to by Mark? Mr. Countess insists there are!<br />
<br />
Everyone else says there are at least <strong><u>7</u></strong>! And some other respected trinitarian sources agree that "Jehovah" is also an appropriate rendering in the two other places the <em>NWT</em> uses "Jehovah" in the Gospel of Mark! <br />
<br />
<strong>So, honestly, exactly who is being dishonest?</strong><br />
<br />
<strong>-----------------------------------------------</strong><br />
<strong>Note</strong><br />
<br />
<strong><span style="color: red;">*</span></strong> Although it was the most certain determinant, the <em>NWT</em> translators did not restrict themselves entirely to exact quotes of specific OT verses when they restored the Divine Name to the NT. They admitted that they took into consideration the <strong>context</strong> of the NT itself (especially if it included a common description or popular phrase frequently found also in the OT which normally included God's personal name) whether or not to restore the name `Jehovah.' But it was extremely rare that there weren't Hebrew translations of the NT (usually by <strong>trinitarian</strong> translators) which had used "Jehovah" at that same place and, therefore, reinforced their decision. These Hebrew translations are listed in the 1951 ed. of the <em>NWT</em> on pp. 30-33 and 1984 <em>NWT Reference Bible</em> on pp. 9-10.<br />
<br />
<strong>For more, see:</strong><br />
<strong><br /></strong>
<a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2011/07/jehovah-in-new-testament.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">"Jehovah" in The New Testament - Links to Information</span></a> (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2008567"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Should the Name Jehovah Appear in the New Testament?</span></a> (w08 8/1 pp. 18-23; Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/s/r1/lp-e?q=God%27s+Name+and+the+New+Testament&p=par"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">God's Name and the New Testament</span></a> (Search Results From the Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1001060073"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">The Divine Name in the Hebrew Scriptures Heb., יהוה (YHWH)</span></a> (Watchtower Online Library)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2009/11/jehovah-in-new-testament.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">"Jehovah" in The New Testament</span></a> (Search For Bible Truths)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_425.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">NWT - Criticism by Zondervan's So Many Versions? - "Jehovah" in the New Testament</span></a> (Defending the NWT)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/jehovah.htm"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">On the Form of the Divine Name "Jehovah"</span></a> (IN Defense of the NWT)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/01/should-gods-name-jehovah-appear-in-new.html"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">Should God's name “Jehovah" appear in the New Testament? </span></a>(Search For Bible Truths)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://jehovah.to/exe/greek/yhwh.htm"><span style="color: #3d85c6;">YHWH in the New Testament</span></a> (Jehovah's Witnesses United)</div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-68053189029175779412013-04-06T18:01:00.000-07:002013-04-08T18:20:19.493-07:00Other Sites and Pages That Defend The New World Translation<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Click on the following links to access other sites and pages that defend the New World Translation:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.jehovah.to/xlation/index.html"><span style="color: #0000bf; font-family: georgia;">Bible Translation and Study</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20040517235626/http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/"><span style="color: #0000bf; font-family: georgia;">How Theology and Bias affects Bible Translation</span></a></div>
<br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20071218010255/mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/newworldtranslation/home.htm"><span style="color: #0000bf; font-family: georgia;">In Defense of the New World Translation</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.jehovah.to/exe/"><span style="color: #0000bf; font-family: georgia;">Jehovah's Witnesses United - Biblical Exegesis Section</span></a> <a href="http://onlytruegod.org/jwstrs/quelle.htm"></a></div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-77949501327400127922013-01-26T07:24:00.000-08:002013-01-26T07:43:20.694-08:00The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bEQzmxHwZVo/UQP1ABGmZnI/AAAAAAAABtU/-g10uSPEmzY/s1600/the-kingdom-interlinear-translation-of-the-greek.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bEQzmxHwZVo/UQP1ABGmZnI/AAAAAAAABtU/-g10uSPEmzY/s320/the-kingdom-interlinear-translation-of-the-greek.jpg" width="201" /></a></div>
<strong>Click on any of the following links to view:</strong><br />
<br />
<a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101990134#s=28:0-28:426"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">DESCRIPTION</span></a> (si pp. 320-327) <a href="http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200004778?q=The+Kingdom+Interlinear+of+the+Greek+Scriptures&p=par"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Additional Details</span></a> (Insight-2 pp. 1277-1278)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/kitbest.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">"It Is The Best Interlinear New Testament Available"</span></a> (IN Defense of the New World Translation)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20101207171910/http://onlytruegod.org/defense/kit69.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Why the Kingdom Interlinear of the Greek Scriptures was published and the benefits to students</span></a> (IN Defense of the New World Translation<span style="font-size: medium;">)</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://jehovah.to/xlation/int.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">The Kingdom Interlinear Translation and the Deception of "MacGregor Ministries"</span></a> (Bible Translation and Study)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://pastorrussell.blogspot.com/2010/05/kingdom-interlinear-translation.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">The Kingdom Interlinear Translation</span></a> (Pastor Russell)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://jehovah.to/exe/translation/interlinear.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Advantages of the New World Translation: "Between-the-Lines" Translations of the Bible</span></a> (Jehovah's Witnesses United)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://archive.org/details/KingdomInterlinearGreekScriptures"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Kingdom Interlinear Greek Scriptures (VIEW THE BOOK)</span></a> (Community Books - Internet Archive)Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-13627898304073056572012-06-15T19:58:00.000-07:002012-06-15T19:58:00.609-07:00<span lang="EN"><span style="font-size: x-small;">
</span></span><b><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></b><br />
<b><span style="font-size: medium;">Acts 5:29 - “obey” (<i>Peith<u>archein</u></i><u></u>)<br />
</span></b><span style="font-size: medium;"></span><br />
Here is how <i>peitharchein </i>is translated at Acts 5:29 in most Bibles:<br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://niv.scripturetext.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">New International Version</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"> </span><a href="http://biblica.com/"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">(©1984)</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
Peter and the other apostles replied: "We must obey God rather than men! </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://nlt.scripturetext.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">New Living Translation</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"> </span><a href="http://www.newlivingtranslation.com/"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">(©2007)</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
But Peter and the apostles replied, "We must obey God rather than any human authority. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://esv.scripturetext.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">English Standard Version</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"> </span><a href="http://www.crossway.org/"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">(©2001)</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://nasb.scripturetext.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">New American Standard Bible</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"> </span><a href="http://www.lockman.org/"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">(©1995)</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
But Peter and the apostles answered, "We must obey God rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://kingjbible.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
Then Peter and the <i>other</i> apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://isv.scripturetext.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">International Standard Version</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"> </span><a href="http://isv.org/"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">(©2008)</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
But Peter and the apostles answered, "We must obey God rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://aramaic-plain-english.scripturetext.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010)</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
Shimeon answered with the Apostles and said to them, “God ought to be obeyed more than men.” </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://gwt.scripturetext.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">GOD'S WORD® Translation</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"> </span><a href="http://www.godsword.org/"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">(©1995)</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
Peter and the other apostles answered, "We must obey God rather than people. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://kj2000.scripturetext.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">King James 2000 Bible (©2003)</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://kjv.us/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">American King James Version</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://asvbible.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">American Standard Version</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
But Peter and the apostles answered and said, We must obey God rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://basicenglishbible.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">Bible in Basic English</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
But Peter and the Apostles, answering, said, We have to do the orders of God, not of man. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://drb.scripturetext.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">Douay-Rheims Bible</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://darbybible.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">Darby Bible Translation</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
But Peter answering, and the apostles, said, God must be obeyed rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://erv.scripturetext.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">English Revised Version</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
But Peter and the apostles answered and said, We must obey God rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://websterbible.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">Webster's Bible Translation</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://weymouthbible.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">Weymouth New Testament</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
Peter and the other Apostles replied, "We must obey God rather than man. </span><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><br />
<u><span style="color: blue;"></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span><a href="http://worldebible.com/acts/5.htm"><u><span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN">World English Bible</span></span></u><span style="color: blue;"></span></a><span lang="EN"><br />
But Peter and the apostles answered, "We must obey God rather than men. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"></span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"> <br />
</span><br />
(Compare Titus 3:1)<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">
</span><br />
So, some anti-NWT critics claim that the <i>NWT</i> has falsely added “as ruler” to this scripture. But let’s examine what other authorities have to say about the word in question <i>(peitharchein).</i><br />
<i>
</i><span style="font-size: x-small;">
</span><b></b><br />
<b>“<i>We must</i></b><i> </i>(<b><i>dei</i></b><i></i>). Moral necessity left them no choice. They stood precisely where Peter and John were when before the Sanhedrin before (Acts 4:20). <b><i>Obey</i></b><i></i> <i>(<b>peitharchein</b>)</i>. Old verb from <i>peithomai</i> and <i>arche</i>, to <b>obey <u>a ruler</u></b><u></u>. Only by Luke and Paul in the N.T.” - Robertson’s <i>Word Pictures in the New Testament, </i>p. 65, vol. 3.<br />
<b><i></i></b><br />
<b><i>Peitharchein: </i></b><i></i>“to obey (a <b>ruler</b> or a superior)” p. 497, <i>Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament</i>, Thayer, Baker Book House, 1977.<br />
<br />
“The term ‘obey’ (<i>peithomai</i>) is used twice in [Acts 5] verses 36 and 37; it picks up the related verb ‘obey a <b><u>leader</u></b><u></u>’ (<i>peith<b>archein</b>) </i>in verses 29 and 32.” - Note for Acts 5:37 in <i>Sacra Pagina</i>, <i>The Acts of the Apostles</i>, p. 100, the Liturgical Press, 1992.<br />
<br />
(All emphasis above was added.)<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">
</span><span style="color: blue;"></span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><span lang="EN"><em>New World Translation:</em><br />
<em>
</em></span><span style="color: blue;"></span><br />
<span style="color: black;">“In answer Peter and the [other] apostles said: ‘We must obey God <b><u>as ruler</u></b><u></u> rather than men.’" [emphasis added]</span><br />
</span>Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-65842867980566688132012-04-17T08:15:00.002-07:002012-04-17T08:15:32.514-07:00Why Does the New World Translation Bible Use the Words, "Time Indefinite" Where Other Bibles Read, "Forever"?<strong>Why Does the New World Translation Bible Use the Words, "Time Indefinite" Where Other Bibles Read, "Forever"?</strong><br />
<br />
Other Bible translations are inaccurate when they translate the Hebrew word 'Oh lam (or "Owlam"; "Olam") as "forever."<br />
<br />
Many lexicons and dictionaries will show that the explicit meaning of 'Oh lam is of an unknown length of time and <strong>not</strong> forever. It <em>can </em>be used of something that is to last forever<em> but in itself</em> the word can only <em>imply</em> eternity.<br />
<br />
Jehovah's Witnesses accept the meaning of the word as given in standard Hebrew Lexicons. Here is what their reference work "<em>Insight on the Scriptures</em>" states:<br />
<br />
"The Hebrew word 'oh lam carries the thought of indefinite or uncertain time. Lexicographer Gesenius defines it as meaning "hidden time, i.e. obscure and long, of which the beginning or end is uncertain or indefinite." (<em>A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the OT</em>, translated by E. Robinson, 1836, p. 746) Accordingly, expressions such as "time indefinite" (Ps. 25:6), "indefinitely lasting" (Hab. 3:6), "of old" (Gen. 6:4), "a long time ago," "of long ago" (Jos. 24:2; Pr. 22:28; 23:10), and "long-lasting" (Ec. 12:5) appropriately convey the thought of the original-language term. The word 'oh lam is at times associated with that which is everlasting...However, the Hebrew expression 'oh lam does not in itself mean "forever." It often refers to things that have an end, but the period of such things' existence can be said to be ‘to time indefinite' because the time of their end is not then specified." - it-2 pp. 1102-1103<br />
<br />
The context and other parallel texts must be referred to in order to determine whether the sense of 'Oh lam is to be understood as eternity or just an indefinitely long period of time in any specific occurrence.Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-65955776994725772522012-02-14T08:00:00.000-08:002012-02-14T08:00:03.611-08:00What Does the Hebrew Word 'Qanah' Mean at Prov. 8:22?"Jehovah himself produced (qanah) me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago." (Prov. 8:22) NWT<br />
<br />
The Hebrew word 'qanah', can mean either to "produce, aquire, create" or "possess". <strong>Context is key</strong> in finding out which one it means.<br />
<br />
Many Bible commentators agree that the Son is referred to as wisdom personified here. (See: <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/02/does-wisdom-at-prov-822-30-refer-to.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Does "Wisdom" at Prov. 8:22-30 refer to the Messiah, and does it say that he was created?</span></a>; SFBT) Bibles which are biased toward the Trinity do not want to render it as "Produce" or something similar because that would mean that Jesus has a beginning, and that would contradict the Trinity doctrine. <br />
<br />
Yet because the context of Prov. 8:22-31 so overwhelmingly supports the translation of the word 'qanah' as "create" (See: <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/10/prov-822-30.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Prov. 8:22-30 "Wisdom" and Christ</span></a>; Examining the Trinity), even scores of <strong>trinitarian</strong> bibles have decided to render it as such. Notice how these <span style="color: red;">trinitarian</span> Bibles reluctantly render qanah at Prov. 8:22): <br />
<br />
(1) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me at the beginning of his work" - RSV; <br />
<br />
(2) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me" - NRSV; <br />
<br />
(3) "[Jehovah] <strong>made</strong> me" - MLB; <br />
<br />
(4) "Yahweh <strong>created</strong> me" - JB; "Yahweh <strong>created</strong> me" - NJB; <br />
<br />
(5) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me" - NEB; <br />
<br />
(6) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me" - REB; <br />
<br />
(7) "I was the <strong>first thing made</strong>" - ETRV; <br />
<br />
(8) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me as the first of his creations" - Lamsa; <br />
<br />
(9) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me first of all" - GNB; <br />
<br />
(10) "[Jehovah] <strong>formed</strong> me as the first of his works" - AT; <br />
<br />
(11) "[Jehovah] <strong>formed</strong> me first of his creation" - Mo; <br />
<br />
(12) "Jehovah <strong>framed</strong> me first" - Byington; <br />
<br />
(13) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me" - The Reader's Digest Bible; <br />
<br />
(14) "[Jehovah] <strong>brought me forth</strong> as the first of his works" - The NIV Study Bible. It also explains in a footnote for Prov. 8:22: "brought...forth. The Hebrew for this verb is also used in Ge 4:1; 14:19, 22 (`creator')." - Zondervan, 1985;<br />
<br />
(15) "[Jehovah] <strong>made</strong> me the beginning of his ways for his works" - The Apostles Bible;<br />
<br />
(16) "[Jehovah] <strong>made</strong> me as the start of his way, the first of his works in the past. - BBE;<br />
<br />
(17) "Yahweh <strong>created</strong> me first, at the beginning of his works" - Christian Community Bible;<br />
<br />
(18) "[Jehovah] <strong>made</strong> me as the beginning of his way, the first of his ancient works" - The Complete Jewish Bible;<br />
<br />
(19) "[Jehovah] <strong>made</strong> me at the beginning of His creation, before His works of long ago" - The Holman Christian Standard Bible;<br />
<br />
(20) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me as the first of his creations, before all of his works. - Peshitta - Lamsa Translation;<br />
<br />
(21) "[Jehovah] sovereignly <strong>made</strong> me—the first, the basic— before he did anything else." - The Message;<br />
<br />
(22) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me as the beginning of his works, before his deeds of long ago." - NET;<br />
<br />
(23) "I, wisdom, was with [Jehovah] when he began his work, long before he made anything else. 23 I was <strong>created</strong> in the very beginning, even before the world began." - New Century Version;<br />
<br />
(24) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me as the first of his works, before his acts of long ago." - New International Reader's Version;<br />
<br />
(25) "[Jehovah] <strong>made</strong> me at the beginning of His work, before His first works long ago." - New Life Bible;<br />
<br />
(26) "[Jehovah] <strong>formed</strong> me from the beginning, before he created anything else. - New Living Translation;<br />
<br />
(27) "Jehovah <strong>created </strong>me in the beginning of his way, before his works of antiquity." - New Simplified Bible;<br />
<br />
(28) "[Jehovah] <strong>created</strong> me as the head of His ways, to perform all of His works" - 2001 Translation.<br />
<br />
<strong>For more, see:</strong><br />
<a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2011/04/wisdom-prov-822-31.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Wisdom (Prov. 8:22-31) Links to Information</span></a>Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-55348020470771468402012-02-07T13:45:00.001-08:002012-02-07T13:45:58.576-08:00Rev. 3:14 - Does 'Arkhe' Mean "Beginning" or Does it Mean "Origin" or "Source"?<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
</div>
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">As the following will show, the Watchtower Society is correct when it says that when Jesus called himself "the <b><u>beginning</u></b> [Greek – <i>arkhe/arche, </i></span><i><span style="font-family: Symbol;">arch</span></i><i><span style="font-family: Rockwell;">]</span></i><span style="font-family: Rockwell;"> of the creation of God" - Rev. 3:14, <i>KJV</i>, <i>ASV</i>, <i>RSV, NASB</i>, <i>NKJV, MLB, Douay, Byington, Rotherham, Lattimore, Lamsa, Phillips, Darby, Webster,</i> etc. - he meant "the <b>first</b> thing created by God."</span><span style="font-family: Rockwell;"> </span><br />
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">Some trinitarians, however, insist that the word <i>arkhe</i> (sometimes written in English as <i>arche</i>) here does not mean "beginning" but should be rendered "<b>source</b>" or "origin." (For an examination of the mistranslation for this word as "Ruler" here, see the <a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/08/beginning-wisdom-and-firstborn-bwf.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Beginning, Wisdom, Firstborn</span></a> study, starting with par. #4.)</span></div>
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">So the real question is: Do the writers of the New Testament ever use <i>arkhe</i> to mean "source" or "origin"? And, more importantly, since John wrote Rev. 3:14, does <b>John</b> ever use <i>arkhe</i> to mean "source," "origin," or "ruler"? </span></div>
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;"></span><br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">The <b><u>only</u></b> NT word John has used when he intended the meaning of "beginning" is <i>arkhe</i>. (The only apparent exception to this is <i>archomai</i> <i>(arkhomai)</i> found at John 8:9 - see p. 139 in the <i>New</i> <i>American</i> <i>Standard</i> <i>Exhaustive</i> <i>Concordance</i> <i>of</i> <i>the</i> <i>Bible. </i>However, even trinitarian scholars admit that this verse is spurious, not written by John but added by a later copyist! - [Jn 9:32 should be more literally translated "from of old".]) <o></o></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">To say that John meant "origin"</span><span style="color: red; font-family: "Rockwell Extra Bold";"> </span><span style="font-family: Rockwell;">or "source" when he used <i>arkhe</i> at Rev. 3:14 ignores two important facts: </span></div>
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: "Rockwell Extra Bold";">(1)</span><span style="font-family: Rockwell;"> Nowhere else does John use <i>arkhe</i> as "source," "origin," or "beginn<b><u>er</u></b>."<b><span style="color: red;">[<a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/10/bwf-endnotes_20.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">See footnote #4</span></a>]</span></b> </span><b><sup><span style="color: red; font-family: "Rockwell Extra Bold";"></span></sup></b><span style="font-family: Rockwell;">In the 23 times it is found in the writings of John (in the text used by the King James translators), it is <b>always</b> understood in the sense of "beginning" and is <b>always</b> so translated in the <i>KJV</i>. (And every time <i>arkhe</i> is found in the writings of John - 21 times in the text used by the <i>NASB - </i>it is also <b>always</b> translated "beginning" in that most-respected trinitarian Bible.) Here are all the uses of <i>arkhe</i> by John according to <i>Young's</i> <i>Analytical</i> <i>Concordance</i>: John 1:1; 1:2; 2:11; 6:64; 8:25; 8:44; 15:27; 16:4; 1 John 1:1; 2:7 (twice in <i>KJV</i>); 2:13; 2:14; 2:24 (twice); 3:8; 3:11; 2 John 5, 6; Rev.1:8 (<i>KJV</i>); 3:14; 21:6; and 22:13. Notice that the <i>ASV</i>, <i>RSV</i>, etc. also translate these as "beginning" or "first" (in time). </span></div>
</div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">John consistently used <i>arkhe</i> to mean <b>only</b> "beginning." Since it is John's writing we are concerned with at Rev. 3:14, this is of utmost importance.<b><span style="color: red;">[<a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/10/bwf-endnotes_20.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">See footnote #5</span></a>]</span></b> </span><br />
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: "Rockwell Extra Bold";">(2)</span><span style="font-family: Rockwell;"> If John had really intended to use a word for "origin," "source," or "beginn<b><u>er</u></b>," he could have easily done so. As we will see later, there would have been no reason to use a word that he consistently and frequently used to mean <b>only</b> "beginning."</span></div>
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<i><span style="font-family: Rockwell;">The</span></i><span style="font-family: Rockwell;"> <i>Expositor's</i> <i>Greek</i> <i>Testament</i> (trinitarian, of course) tells us that to understand Rev. 3:14 as meaning that Jesus is "the active source" of creation, instead of the first created person, one must <b><u>interpret</u></b> <i>arkhe</i> "as in Greek philosophy and Jewish wisdom-literature, = <b><i>aitia</i></b> or origin." </span></div>
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">Isn't it odd that the Greek word actually used for this philosophical concept is <i>aitia</i> which can honestly mean "cause" or "source"? If the word actually used is <b><i>aitia</i></b>, why must one <b><u>interpret</u></b> <i>arkhe</i> with a similar meaning? Why wouldn't John have simply used the word <b><i>aitia </i></b>if that's what he intended? </span></div>
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">The trinitarian theologian Albert Barnes says concerning the NT Greek word <i>arkhe</i>:</span></div>
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman";">"The word properly refers to the <b>commencement</b> of a thing, not its authorship, and denotes properly primacy in <b>time</b>, and primacy in rank, but not primacy in the sense of causing anything to exist.... <u>the word is <b>not</b>, therefore, found in the sense of <b>authorship</b></u>, as denoting that one is the beginning of anything in the sense that he caused it to have an existence." - <i>Barnes'</i> <i>Notes</i> <i>on</i> <i>the</i> <i>New</i> <i>Testament</i>, p. 1569. <b><span style="color: red;">[<a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/10/bwf-endnotes_20.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">See footnote #6</span></a>]</span></b></span></div>
<strong><span style="color: red;"><span style="color: black;"></span></span></strong><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman";"><strong><span style="color: red;"></span></strong><o></o></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">We also see the highly respected BDAG admits the same for the use of <i>arkhe</i> (or <i>arche)</i> in Rev. 3:14.<b><span style="color: red;">[<a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/10/bwf-endnotes_20.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">See footnote #7</span></a>]</span></b></span></div>
<strong><span style="font-family: Rockwell;"><br /></span></strong></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;"><strong><span style="color: red;"></span></strong><o></o></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">Although there are other words which (more appropriately than <i>arkhe</i>) may be <b>properly</b> translated "source," "cause," "origin," etc., there is one word which is most frequently so used throughout the Bible in the Hebrew and Greek scriptures. This word emphasizes the strong Biblical comparison between "creation" and "procreation." (E.g., "brought forth" at Ps. 90:2 is "<b>begotten</b>" in the original Hebrew and is paralleled here with "gave <b>birth</b> to the earth" - <i>NASB</i>.)</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;"></span><br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell; font-size: large;"><strong>Only the <u>Father</u> is the <u>Source</u> of Creation</strong></span></div>
<br />
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">It is because of this common Bible metaphor that "father" was considered as synonymous (whether as "creator" or "procreator") with "<b><u>source</u></b>"! - See p. 190, <i>Thayer's</i> <i>Greek</i>-<i>English</i> <i>Lexicon</i> <i>of</i> <i>the</i> <i>New</i> <i>Testament</i>, Baker Book House, 1984. </span></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">The famous Biblical Hebrew authority, Gesenius, tells us that "Father" means: </span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;"><o></o></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman";">"Of the <b>author</b>, or <b>maker</b>, of anything, <u>specially of the <b>creator</b></u>.... And in this sense God is said to be `the father of men,' Is. 63:16; 64:8; [etc.]. All these ... come from the notion of <b><u>origin</u></b>." - p. 2, Gesenius' <i>Lexicon</i>. </span><br />
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">Trinitarian Robert Young in his <i>Young's</i> <i>Analytical</i> <i>Concordance</i>, p. 331, also shows this meaning for the Hebrew word <i>ab, </i></span><span style="font-family: WtlHebrew;">"</span><span style="font-family: Rockwell;"> </span><span style="font-family: WtlHebrew;">!</span><span style="font-family: Rockwell;"> : "<i>Father, ancestor, <b><u>source</u></b>, <b><u>inventor</u></b></i>."<b><span style="color: red;">[<a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/10/bwf-endnotes_20.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">See footnote #8</span></a>]</span></b></span></div>
</div>
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">God's people have used "Father" synonymously with "source" or "origin" for thousands of years. When they wanted to use a word that denotes absolute "source" they most often used "<b>Father</b>."<b><span style="color: red;">[<a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/10/bwf-endnotes_20.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">See footnote #9</span></a>]</span></b></span><span style="font-family: "Rockwell Extra Bold";"> </span><span style="font-family: Rockwell;">Obviously the Son is not the "<b>source</b> of creation" - his <b><u>Father</u></b> is! (And what could be more appropriate than the Father's very <b>first</b> creation being called his "Firstborn Son"?)</span></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">So John's (and Jesus' and all Bible writers') repeated use of the term "Father" for God stresses over and over that Jesus' Father (and our Father) is the ultimate <b><u>source</u></b> who, because of his will (Rev. 4:11) and his spoken command (Ps. 33:6, 8, 9; Ps. 148:5) caused (originated) all things to be made <b>through</b> the obedient efforts of his Firstborn <b>Son</b>, Jesus. </span></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">So we can see that the Father <u>alone</u> is the <b><u>source</u></b> and his first creation (the only direct creation by Him), His only-begotten son, is the channel <b>through</b> whom he caused all the rest of creation to be. "His son, whom he <u>appointed</u> heir of all things, <b>through</b> <i>[dia]</i> whom he made the world." - Heb. 1:2. "All things came into being <b>through</b> <i>[dia]</i> him.... The world was made <b>through</b> <i>[dia]</i> him" - John 1:3,10. </span></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">Notice how the strongly trinitarian NT Greek experts, Dana and Mantey, explain this scripture: </span><br />
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman";">"`All things were made through him.' Jn 1:3. Here God the Father is thought of as the <b><u>original</u></b><u> <b>cause</b></u> of creation, and the logos [Jesus] as the intermediate agent." - p. 162, <i>A </i><i>Manual</i> <i>Grammar</i> <i>of</i> <i>the</i> <i>Greek</i> <i>New</i> <i>Testament</i>. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">"For us there is but <b><u>one</u> God</b>, the Father [compare John 17:1, 3], <b>from</b> <i>[ex</i> or <i>ek</i>, literally: `out of'] whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, <b>through</b> <i>[dia]</i> whom are all things, and we exist through <i>[dia]</i> him." - 1 Cor. 8:6. Concerning this very scripture even the highly trinitarian <i>The</i> <i>New</i> <i>International</i> <i>Dictionary</i> <i>of</i> <i>New</i> <i>Testament</i> <i>Theology</i> has to admit: </span></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman";">"in 1 Cor. 8:6 the function of God the Father as the <b><u>SOURCE</u></b><u> <b>of</b> <b>creation</b></u> is distinguished from Christ's role as <b>mediator</b> of creation." - p. 1182, Vol. 3. </span><br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">Also see <i>The</i> <i>NIV</i> <i>Study</i> <i>Bible</i> footnote for 1 Cor. 8:6: </span><br />
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman";">"See Heb 2:10. <b>God</b> <b>the</b> <b>Father</b> is the <u>ultimate</u> <b><u>Source</u></b> of all creation (Ac 4:24)." </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i><span style="font-family: Rockwell;">The</span></i><span style="font-family: Rockwell;"> <i>Encyclopedia</i> <i>of</i> <i>Religion</i> states: </span></div>
<br />
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman";">"God the Father is <b><u>source</u></b> of all that is <i>(pantokrator)</i> and also the father of Jesus Christ" - 1987, Vol. 15, p. 54. </span></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<span style="font-family: Rockwell;">It should be obvious to all that, if the <b>Father</b> is the <b><u>source</u></b> of creation and Jesus is the <b>intermediate agent</b>, then Rev. 3:14 cannot be calling Jesus the "source" or "origin" of creation! </span></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none;">
<strong><span style="color: red;"><span style="font-family: Rockwell;">For more, see:</span></span></strong></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_1692.html"><span style="color: blue;">NWT - Rev. 3:14</span></a> (Defending the NWT)</div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/08/beginning-wisdom-and-firstborn-bwf.html"><span style="color: blue;">BWF - 'Beginning,' 'Wisdom,' and 'Firstborn'</span></a> (Examining the Trinity)</div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: left;">
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/revelation3.14.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Revelation 3:14 "...the beginning of the creation by God."</span></a> (INDNWT)</div>
<div style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: center;">
<object height="425" width="325"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eInMOAB2nJc&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0">
</param>
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true">
</param>
<param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always">
</param>
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/eInMOAB2nJc&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="325"></embed></object></div>Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-22321413695746106992011-08-20T08:00:00.000-07:002013-04-08T15:07:20.519-07:00"What Have Jehovah's Witnesses Witnessed?" - Where Does the Name "Jehovah's Witnesses" Come From?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<div class="separator" style="border-bottom: medium none; border-left: medium none; border-right: medium none; border-top: medium none; clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GhpsrIwU4ug/TkLquhJk3rI/AAAAAAAAAm8/pkNyJm_L2co/s1600/jehovah_witness.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; cssfloat: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="138" naa="true" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GhpsrIwU4ug/TkLquhJk3rI/AAAAAAAAAm8/pkNyJm_L2co/s200/jehovah_witness.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
Many people who wish to ridicule Jehovah's Witnesses often resort to asking the same old, childish question: "What Have Jehovah's Witnesses Witnessed?" <br />
<br />
However, this question may prompt some to consider a legitimate and somewhat related question, "Where Does the Name "Jehovah's Witnesses" Come From?"<br />
<br />
The key here is to understand exactly what "witness" means in this context.<br />
<br />
According to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, "the concept of witness [is used] both in the sense of witness to ascertainable facts and also in that of witness to truths, i.e., the making known and confessing of convictions." So a witness relates facts from direct personal knowledge, or he proclaims views or truths of which he is convinced.<br />
<br />
So a "Witness" is someone that speaks publically about what he knows to be true. Of course no human has ever literally seen God (John 1:18), but Jehovah's Witnesses realize that God has asked his faithful servants to be His Witnesses and to tell others about Him:<br />
<br />
"Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah, and my servant whom I have chosen;" (Isa. 43:10) - ASV<br />
<br />
Isa. 43:10 also corresponds with Acts 15:14 where it says that God will turn "his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name." (NWT) <br />
<br />
According to the Bible, the line of Witnesses of Jehovah reaches back to faithful Abel. Hebrews 11:4-12:1 mentions this line as a "great a cloud of WITNESSES surrounding us."<br />
<br />
The Bible says that Jesus Christ was the foremost witness of Jehovah: "These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God." (Rev. 3:14) Considering the definition of "witness" mentioned above, Jesus said that it was his Father's name that he made manifest. (John 17:6)<br />
<br />
<strong>For more, see:</strong><br />
<a href="http://pastorrussell.blogspot.com/2009/07/xx.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">How We Came to Be Known as Jehovah’s Witnesses</span></a> (Pastor Russell)</div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-16043208931334225422011-08-10T12:19:00.000-07:002013-04-08T15:07:38.980-07:00Why does the New World Translation 'add' the words, within square brackets, "the angel of" at Zechariah 3:2?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<strong>All</strong> Bible translations add words to make the intended meaning of the original language clear to the readers of another language. Some Bibles indicate the added words in footnotes. Some, like the King James Version, frequently signifies these additions by italicizing such added words. The <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/index-of-links-and-pages.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">New World Translation</span></a> usually indicates added words with brackets [ ].<br />
<br />
In the case of Zechariah 3:2, <strong>the New World Translation is not the only Bible to add "the angel of" or its equivalent here.</strong><br />
<br />
A New Commentary on Holy Scripture explains their reason why: <br />
<br />
"[v]2. the Lord. Read the angel of the Lord, <em><u>as the speech that follows seems to require</u></em>."- SPCK, London, reprint 1946 (1st pub.1928).<br />
<br />
Another footnote, this one belonging to The Revised English Bible (1989) reveals why it reads at Zechariah 3:2 "The angel said to Satan." The footnote states: "3:2 angel: prob[able] r[ea]d[in]g, so Syriac; Heb[rew] LORD." (Additions in square brackets aim to aid in better understanding.) <br />
<br />
This is similiar to what we can read in the footnote to this verse in the Reference Edition of the New World Translation (1984): "2* "The angel (messenger) of Jehovah," Sy[riac]; MLXXVg, "Jehovah."<br />
-----------------------------------------<br />
<br />
<strong>Other translations that render this passage the same way as the New World Translation:</strong><br />
<br />
"The angel of the Lord <a href="http://www.blogger.com/" name="a"></a><sup class="footnote" jquery1313001965642="10" style="display: none;"><a href="http://www.biblestudytools.com/gnt/zechariah/3-2.html#fn-descriptionAnchor-a" id="a" jquery1313001965642="25" title="[One ancient translation] The angel of the Lord; [Hebrew] The Lord."></a></sup>said to Satan," (<a href="http://www.biblestudytools.com/gnt/zechariah/3-2.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">Good News Translation</span></a>) <br />
<br />
"The angel of Yahweh said to Satan," (<a href="http://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=45"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">The Jerusalem Bible</span></a>; Scroll down)<br />
"And the angel of the L<small><span style="font-size: small;">ORD..." (</span></small><a href="http://new.usccb.org/bible/scripture.cfm?bk=Zechariah&ch=3"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">New American Bible</span></a>) <br />
<br />
"The LORD rebuke you," the Angel of the LORD said..." (The Holy Bible, An American Translation; W.F. Beck)<br />
"The messenger of Yahweh..." (vs.1) (<a href="http://lookhigher.net/englishbibles/theemphasisedbible/zechariah/3.html"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">The Emphasised Bible</span></a>; J. B. Rotherham)<br />
"Then [the messenger] of Jehovah..." (<a href="http://www.2001translation.com/zechariah.htm"><span style="color: #6fa8dc;">2001 Translation – An American English Bible</span></a>)<br />
<br />
"So the angel of the LORD said...." (The Bible, An American Translation; Powis-Smith and Goodspeed)<br />
<br />
<br /></div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-59256642386014546692011-05-31T11:18:00.001-07:002013-04-08T15:07:57.426-07:00Translation and revision of Lev 23:21 proves that the NWT translators DID know Hebrew<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
Some JW critics claim that the NWT wasn't translated from the Hebrew and Greek, but was just a revision of other English Bibles such as the KJV, ASV, and Rotherham.<br />
<br />
However, a mistranslation that occurred in the first volume of the 1953 New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures helps to demonstrate that the translators <em><strong>did indeed</strong> know Hebrew</em>.<br />
<br />
The NWT is the only Bible translation to have "Jehovah" in Lev 23:21.<br />
<br />
In 1953, The first volume of the NWT of the Hebrew Scriptures was published, which had Leviticus 23:21 read:<br />
<br />
"And you must proclaim on this very day <strong>Jehovah's</strong> holy convention for yourselves."<br />
<br />
This stood for 26 years, when it was changed to:<br />
<br />
"And you must make a proclamation on this very day; there will be a holy convention for yourselves."<br />
<br />
Lev. 23:21 has יהיה ("there will be") which is remarkably similar to יהוה ("Jehovah"). The translators misread יהיה as יהוה and later corrected this as noted in the 8/15/79 Watchtower's notice to it's readers on page 31:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">"A Correction</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br />
</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;">In making the New World Translation of Leviticus 23:21, the Hebrew יהיה (“it will be”) was misread as יהוה (“Jehovah”). Hence, the first sentence of this verse should read: “And you must make a proclamation on this very day; there will be a holy convention for yourselves.”'</span><br />
<br />
<strong>The original mistake definitely shows that the translators were either working from or comparing a Hebrew text and not simply “revising” English bibles, and the revision shows that the later revisers were also checking the Hebrew.</strong></div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-18029959488528863052010-12-07T17:47:00.000-08:002013-09-16T10:43:43.267-07:00Index of Links and Pages that Defend the New World Translation<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>Subjects</strong> </span> </span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;">(Scoll down for Scripture List; <span style="color: red;">For the Index to ALL topics, click <a href="http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2009/11/index-sites-and-pages-in-defense-of_2379.html"><span style="color: blue;"><strong>here</strong></span></a></span><span style="color: black;">.)</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>A</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_2569.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Analuo/Releasing</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> <a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/fraziers.incompetence4.APOLLUMI.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Apollumi - "destroy" / "annihilate"</span></a> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/asiarches-acts-1931.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Asiarches</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>B</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_2466.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Baptism for Dead</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_7717.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Ben Kedar</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/claim-that-nwt-is-doctrinally-biased.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Biased? (NWT)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>C</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/choosing-modern-translation.html"><span style="color: blue;">Choosing a Modern Translation</span></a> <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2010/09/coptic.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Coptic</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/i-understand-that-group-of-bible.html"><span style="color: blue;">Colwell's study of various translations</span></a></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>D</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/despotes.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Despotes / "Sovereign Lord"</span></a> <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/diakonos-minister.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Diakonos/Minister</span></a> <span style="color: blue;"><u><a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/dungy.idols.htm"><span style="color: blue;">"Dungy idols" / "gullilum"</span></a></u> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: black; font-size: x-large;"><strong>E</strong></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/fraziers.incompetence.bagd.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Epiphaneia / Jesus' future return</span></a> <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_3365.html"><span style="color: blue;">Estin / "is" or "means"?</span></a> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/exercise-faith-believe.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Exercise Faith/Believe</span></a><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>F<span style="color: blue;"> </span></strong></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/some-new-world-translation-features.html"><span style="color: blue;">Features (of the NWT)</span></a> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: black; font-size: x-large;"><strong>G</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/god-god-countess.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"God" or "a god"? (Cnts)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_9558.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"God" or "a god"? (Zndvn)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: x-large;">H</span></strong><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_4974.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Holy Ones</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>I</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_16.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">I AM</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/translating-in.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"In" (translating)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/inspired-expression-1-john-41-6.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Inspired Expression</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_3365.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"Is" or "Means"?</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>J</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_425.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"Jehovah" in the NT (Zndvn)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/jehovah-50-or-237-places-in-new.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"Jehovah" in the NT (Cnts' List)</span></a> <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/jesus-as-theos-in-new-testament.html"><span style="color: blue;">Jesus as "Theos" in the New Testament</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: x-large;">K</span></strong><br />
<br />
<u><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/greek-word-kharis-undeserved-kindness.html"><span style="color: blue;">Kharis: "Undeserved Kindness"</span></a></u> <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/kingdom-interlinear-translation-of.html"><span style="color: blue;">Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures</span></a> <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/keras-soterias.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Keras Soterias</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt-kolasis-cutting-off.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Kolasis-Cutting Off</span></a><br />
<br />
<br />
<strong><span style="font-size: x-large;">L</span></strong><br />
<br />
<u><a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/response.lundquist.byatt.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Lynn Lundquist's Criticisms (Response to)</span></a></u><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>M</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/magi.htm"><span style="color: blue;">MAGI - "Wise men" or "Astrologers"?</span></a> <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/what-is-authority-for-use-of-expression.html"><span style="color: blue;">"Magic-practicing priests"</span></a> <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/how-nwt-consistently-distinguishes.html"><span style="color: blue;">"Man"</span></a> <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/monogenes-only-begotten.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Monogenes (only begotten)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>O</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/adding-other-col-116-20-acts-1036-rom.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"Other" (Adding)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>P</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_7395.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Parousia-Presence</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_4669.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"Peculiar Translations"</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_17.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Pneuma/Spirit </span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/psyche-soul-response-to-accusations.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Psyche/soul</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><span style="color: black; font-size: x-large;"><strong>R</strong></span> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_4974.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Rock-mass</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>S</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2009/12/index.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">SFBT Index</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_2284.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Sharp's Rule (Zndvn)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/sharps-rule-response-to-major.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Sharp's Rule (Cntss)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_7206.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">SMV Conclusion</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>T</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/tasso-rightly-disposed-acts-1348.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Tasso</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_5644.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"Too Literal" (Zndvn)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/nwt-totally-literal-translation-with.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Too Literal (Cnts)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_7843.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Torture Stake vs Cross</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/stauros-torture-stake-response-to.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"Torture Stake" Stauros</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/10/index_15.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Trinity Index</span></a><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>U</strong></span><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_5479.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Unnamed Translators</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: black; font-size: x-large;"><strong>V</strong></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_2466.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">"Virginity"</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><span style="color: black; font-size: x-large;"><strong>W </strong></span> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_5380.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Weights & Measures</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/words-omitted-romans-81-colossians-119.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Words Omitted</span></a> <a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/worship-proskyneo.html"><span style="color: blue;">Worship / Proskyneo</span></a><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-large;"><strong>Scriptures </strong></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;">(<span style="color: red;">For the Scripture Index to ALL topics, click</span> <a href="http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.com/2009/12/scriptures-index.html"><span style="color: blue;"><strong>here</strong></span></a>.)</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/genesis1.2.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Gen. 1:2 (Ruach)</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/gen-715-force-of-life-was-active.html"><span style="color: blue;">Gen 7:15</span></a> <br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/gen-821-jehovah-began-to-smell-restful.html"><span style="color: blue;">Gen 8:21</span></a> <br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/gen-1612-he-will-become-zebra-of-man.html"><span style="color: blue;">Gen 16:12</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/gen-174-you-will-certainly-become.html"><span style="color: blue;">Gen 17:4</span></a> <br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/gen-219-sarah-kept-noticing-son-of.html"><span style="color: blue;">Gen 21:9</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_2741.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Judges 14:3</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/job6_6.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Job 6:6: "marshmallow"</span></a> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/ps-12-but-his-delight-is-in-law-of.html"><span style="color: blue;">Ps 1:2</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/psalm902.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Ps. 90:2</span></a> (Yalad)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-does-rendering-of-proverbs-1116-in.html"><span style="color: blue;">Prov. 11:16</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/isa-96.html"><span style="color: blue;">Isa. 9:6</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/is-581-call-out-full-throated-do-not.html"><span style="color: blue;">Isa 58:1</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/jeremiah10.10.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Jeremiah 10:10 ".. is in truth God"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/joel-226-32.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Joel 2:32</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/habakkuk-112.html"><span style="color: blue;">Hab. 1:12</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2011/08/why-does-new-world-translation-add.html"><span style="color: blue;">Zech. 3:2 NWT 'add' the words "the angel of"?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/zech1210.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Zech 12:10</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/zech-1210-john-1937.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Zech 12:10/Jn 19:37</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/malachi-38-will-earthling-man-adam-rob.html"><span style="color: blue;">Mal 3:8</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/matthew5.18.nwt.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Mt. 5:18 "hews" / "sooner would"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/matthew5.44.nwt.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Mt. 5:44 "agapate" / "continue to love"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/matt-617-grease-aleipho-your-head.html"><span style="color: blue;">Mt 6:17</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/is-not-use-of-term-cubit-at-matthew-627.html"><span style="color: blue;">Mt. 6:27 (Cubit / Lifespan)</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/matthew-2752-53-was-there-resurrection.html"><span style="color: blue;">Matthew 27:52, 53 - resurrection?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/make-disciples-of-people-of-all-nations.html"><span style="color: blue;">Mt. 28:19</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/mark1.4.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Mark 1:4 "baptism [in symbol] of repentance"?</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JWquestions-and_answers/message/1254"><span style="color: blue;">Luke 12:42 "discreet" in the NWT is 'phronimos'</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/despotes.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Luke 20:29 "Sovereign Lord"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt-luke-2343-punctuation.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Luke 23:43</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/john-11.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Jn 1:1</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: black;">(</span>A Number of Trinitaran Translations and Scholars Admit "a god")<br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Jn 1:1 NWT</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/charge-that-nwt-translators-made-up.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Jn 1:1 NWT Make Up Rule?</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_3341.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Jn 1:1 Mrtn</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/john-118-only-begotten-god-son.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Jn 1:18 "only-begotten god/son"</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2010/11/john-1414-from-rdb-files.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Jn 14:14</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_659.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Jn 17:3 "Taking in Knowledge"</span></a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/para-john-175.html"><span style="color: blue;">John 17:5 (para)</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/john17_en.htm"><span style="color: blue;">John 17:21 "are in union with me."</span></a> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/john-2028-my-lord-and-my-god.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">John 20:28 "My God"</span></a></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/acts-217-pour-out-my-spirit-or-pour-out.html"><span style="color: blue;">Acts 2:17 "some of" (apo)</span></a>; <a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/acts2_17_sort.htm"><span style="color: blue;">"Every sort" (pas)</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/acts2.42.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Acts 2:42 "..to taking of meals.."</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/despotes.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Acts 4:24 "Sovereign Lord"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/acts5.3.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Acts 5:3 "play false"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/acts5.42.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Acts 5:42 "from house to house"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/acts10.36.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Acts 10:36 'others'</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/acts-2028-godwith-his-own-blood.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Acts 20:28</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/phronema.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Rom. 8:27 (phronema)</span></a> (INDNWT); <a href="http://jehovah.to/exe/translation/greek.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Rom. 8:27 - Why is the Greek word translated differently in the NWT?</span></a> (Jehovah's Witnesses United)<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/rom-95-christ-came-who-is-over-all-god.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Rom 9:5</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/romans10.9.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Romans 10:9,10: "homologeo"</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JWquestions-and_answers/message/3296" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Rom 10:13</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/romans13.1.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Rom. 13:1</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/1-cor-27-nwts-sacred-secret.html"><span style="color: blue;">1 Cor 2:7</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/1corinthians10.4.htm"><span style="color: blue;">1 Cor. 10:4 - "that rock-mass meant the Christ"</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/1-cor-1412-16-gifts-of-spirit.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">1 Cor 14:12-16</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/1corinthians15.2.htm"><span style="color: blue;">1 Cor. 15:2 "being saved"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/1cor.5.1._to.have.htm"><span style="color: blue;">2 Cor. 5:1 (exomen)</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><span style="color: black;"><a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/2corinthians13.14.htm"><span style="color: blue;">2 Cor.13:14 "the sharing in"</span></a></span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/ephesians2.8.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Ephesians 2:8, 9</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/ephesians4.12.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Eph. 4:12 (katartismos)</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_2362.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Phil 2:6 "Other"</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt-martin.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Col 1:16 "Other"</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-does-new-world-translation-at.html"><span style="color: blue;">Col. 2:9 "fullness of the divine quality"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-does-nwt-give-preference-to-word.html"><span style="color: blue;">2 Thess. 2:15 "Tradition"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/why-does-nwt-give-preference-to-word.html"><span style="color: blue;">2 Thess. 3:6 "Tradition"</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/2-peter-11-and-titus-213-sharps-rule.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Tit 2:13</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/worship-proskyneo.html"><span style="color: blue;">Heb. 1:6</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/hebrews-18-thy-throne-o-god.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Heb 1:8</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/heb.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Heb 9:27</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/1peter1.11.htm"><span style="color: blue;">1 Peter 1:11 "spirit of Christ."</span></a><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/1-peter-23-refuting-countess.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">1 Pet 2:3</span></a> <span style="color: black;">(DNWT</span>)<span style="color: blue;"> <u><a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/1peter2.3.htm"><span style="color: blue;">1 Peter 2:3 ("Lord")</span></a></u> </span></span><span style="color: black;">(INDNWT)</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/1-peter-315-refuting-countess.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">1 Pet 3:15</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/2-peter-11-and-titus-213-sharps-rule.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">2 Pet 1:1</span></a></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/johannine-comma-1-john-57.html"><span style="color: blue;">1 John 5:7</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/11/1-john-520-true-god.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">1 Jn 5:20 "True God"</span></a><span style="color: blue;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/rev1.1.signs.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Rev. 1:1 (eshmanen)</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/revelation1.9.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Revelation 1:9 "bearing witness to Jesus."</span></a> (INDNWT)<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2009/09/nwt_1692.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank"><span style="color: blue;">Rev. 3:14</span></a></span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/revelation5.10.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Revelation 5:10 and "EPI": "On" or "Over"?</span></a>; <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/JWquestions-and_answers/message/3243"><span style="color: blue;">What does 'epi' mean?</span></a> (JWQ&A); <br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/despotes.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Rev. 6:10 "Sovereign Lord"</span></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://defendingthenwt.blogspot.com/2010/12/rev-131-wild-beast-therion.html"><span style="color: blue;">Rev 13:1</span></a></div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-70330137376941822952010-12-07T17:01:00.000-08:002013-04-08T15:09:47.567-07:00Revelation 1:9 "bearing witness to Jesus." New World Translation<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">
<strong>Click on the following link to view:</strong><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/revelation1.9.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Revelation 1:9 "bearing witness to Jesus." New World Translation</span></a> (INDNWT)</div>
Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-61507364917493689412010-12-07T17:00:00.000-08:002010-12-07T17:00:21.346-08:00Psalm 34:8 and 1 Peter 2:3 ("Lord") New World Translation<strong>Click on the following link to view</strong>:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/1peter2.3.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Psalm 34:8 and 1 Peter 2:3 ("Lord") New World Translation</span></a> (INDNWT)Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-77917290052841584232010-12-07T16:57:00.001-08:002010-12-07T16:57:41.478-08:001 Peter 1:11 "spirit of Christ." New World Translation<strong>Click on the following link to view:</strong><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/1peter1.11.htm"><span style="color: blue;">1 Peter 1:11 "spirit of Christ." New World Translation</span></a> (INDNWT)Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-70509214499166290892010-12-07T16:57:00.000-08:002010-12-07T16:57:08.674-08:00Ephesians 2:8, 9 New World Translation<strong>Click on the following link to view:</strong><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/ephesians2.8.htm"><span style="color: blue;">Ephesians 2:8, 9 New World Translation</span></a> (INDNWT)Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1263993786465663072.post-36449001973370487662010-12-07T16:56:00.000-08:002010-12-07T16:56:37.350-08:001 Cor. 15:2 "being saved" New World Translation<strong>Click on the following link to view:</strong><br />
<br />
<a href="http://onlytruegod.org/defense/1corinthians15.2.htm"><span style="color: blue;">1 Cor. 15:2 "being saved" New World Translation</span></a> (INDNWT)Elijah Danielshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13053062645377291813noreply@blogger.com0