[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Religion See other Religion Articles Title: New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures Recently on Jeopardy, one of the answers was, "It's the most accurate translation of the Holy Scriptures?" No one got the correct question, so Alex Trebek said, "What is the: New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, printed by the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society." ...as per the Source (book): "TRUTH IN TRANSLATION: ACCURACY AND BIAS IN ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT" by author, Jason David BeDuhn. Apparently, BeDuhn is the Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff . He holds a B.A. In Religious Studies from the University of Illinois, Urbana, an M.T.S. in New Testament and Christian Origins from Harvard Divinity School, and a Ph.D. in Comparative Study of Religions from Indiana University, Bloomington. The Nine English Translations compared in BeDuhn's book are: * The King James Version (KJV) * The Amplified Bible (AB) * The Living Bible (LB) * The New American Bible (NAB) * The New American Standard Bible (NASB) * The New International Version (NIV) * The New World Translation (NW) * The (New) Revised Standard Version (NRSV) * Today's English Version (TEV) EXCERPTS FROM HIS BOOK: Chapter Four : Examples of translation of the Greek word "proskuneo", used 58 times in the New Testament. The word is translated various ways as worship, do obeisance, fall down on one's knees, bow before. Scriptures discussed include Matt. 18:26; Rev. 3:9; Mark 15:18,19; Matt 2:1, 2, 8,11; Matt 14:33; Matt 28:9, "... In our exploration of this issue, we can see how theological bias has been the determining context for the choices made by all of the translations except the NAB and NW ... Translators seem to feel the need to add to the New Testament support for the idea that Jesus was recognized to be God." Regarding Matt. 28:16, 17, where all versions except the NW use "worship" where the NW uses "did obeisance": "Here all translations except the NW have recourse to "worship"-a rendering which makes no sense in this context... This contradiction seems to be missed by all the translators except those who prepared the NW ." Chapter Five : A discussion of Philippians 2:5-11: "The NW translators... Have understood "harpagmos" accurately as grasping at something one does not have, that is, a "seizure." The literary context supports the NW translation (and refutes the KJV's "thought it not robbery to be equal)..." Chapter Seven : A discussion on Col. 1: 15-20: "It is a tricky passage where every translation must add words." "The LB translator is guilty of all the doctrinal importation discussed above with reference to the NIV, NRSV, and TEV, and even surpasses them in this respect. So it is the NIV, NRSV, TEV and LB-the four Bibles that make no attempt to mark added words - that actually add the most significant tendentious material. Yet in many public forums on Bible translation, the practice of these four translations is rarely if ever pointed to or criticized, while the NW is attacked for adding the innocuous "other" in a way that clearly indicates its character as an addition of the translators... But the NW is correct. "Other" is implied in "all", and the NW simply makes what is implicit explicit... It is ironic that the translation of Col.1:15-20 that has received the most criticism is the one where the "added words" are fully justified by what is implied in the Greek." Chapter Eight: A discussion on Titus 2:13; 2 Thess. 1:12; 2 Peter 1:1, 2: "... The position of those who insist "God" and "Savior" must refer to the same being... Is decidedly weakened." Chapter Nine : A discussion of Hebrews 8:1: "so we must conclude that the more probable translation is "God is your throne...," the translation found in the NW. .. It seems likely that it is only because most translations were made by people who already believe that Jesus is God that the less probable way of translating this verse has been preferred." Chapter Ten : A discussion on John 8:58: "Both the LB and the NW offer translations that coordinate the two verbs in John 8:58 according to proper English syntax, and that accurately reflect the meaning of the Greek idiom. The other translations fail to do this." "There is absolutely nothing in the original Greek of John 8:58 to suggest that Jesus is quoting the Old Testament here, contrary to what the TEV tries to suggest by putting quotations marks around "I am." "The majority of translations recognize these idiomatic uses of "I am", and properly integrate the words into the context of the passages where they appear. Yet when it comes to 8:58, they suddenly forget how to translate." "All the translations except the LB and NW also ignore the true relation between the verbs of the sentence and produce a sentence that makes no sense in English. These changes in the meaning of the Greek and in the normal procedure for translation point to a bias that has interfered with the work of the translators." "No one listening to Jesus, and no one reading John in his own time would have picked up on a divine self-identification in the mere expression "I am," which, if you think about, is just about the most common pronoun-verb combination in any language." "The NW. ..understands the relation between the two verbs correctly... The average Bible reader might never guess that there was something wrong with the other translations, and might even assume that the error was to be found in the... NW." Chapter Eleven : A discussion of John 1:1: "Surprisingly, only one, the NW , adheres to the literal meaning of the Greek, and translates "a god." "Translators of the KJV, NRSV, NIV, NAB, NASB , AB , TEV and LB all approached the text at John 1:1 already believing certain things about the Word... and made sure that the translations came out in accordance with their beliefs. ... Ironically, some of these same scholars are quick to charge the NW translation with "doctrinal bias" for translating the verse literally, free of KJV influence, following the sense of the Greek. It may very well be that the NW translators came to the task of translating John 1:1 with as much bias as the other translators did. It just so happens that their bias corresponds in this case to a more accurate translation of the Greek." "Some early Christians maintained their monotheism by believing that the one God simply took on a human form and came to earth-in effect, God the Father was born and crucified as Jesus. They are entitled to their belief, but it cannot be derived legitimately from the Gospel according to John." "John himself has not formulated a Trinity concept in his Gospel." "All that we can ask is that a translation be an accurate starting point for exposition and interpretation. Only the NW achieves that, as provocative as it sounds to the modern reader. The other translations cut off the exploration of the verse's meaning before it has even begun." Chapter Twelve : A discussion of holy spirit: "In Chapter Twelve, no translation emerged with a perfectly consistent and accurate handling of the many uses and nuances of "spirit" and "holy spirit." The NW scored highest in using correct impersonal forms of the relative and demonstrative pronouns consistently with the neuter noun "holy spirit," and in adhering to the indefinite expression "holy spirit" in those few instances when it was used by the Biblical authors." Summary : "... it can be said that the NW emerges as the most accurate of the translations compared...the translators managed to produce works relatively more accurate and less biased than the translations produced by multi-denominational teams, as well as those produced by single individuals." "Jehovah's Witnesses... really sought to reinvent Christianity from scratch... building their system of belief and practice from the raw material of the Bible without predetermining what was to be found there. Some critics, of course, would say that the results of this practice can be naive. But for Bible translation, at least, it has meant a fresh approach to the text, with far less presumption than that found in may of the Protestant translations." "...Most of the differences are due to the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal, conservative translation of the original expressions of the New Testament." Commenting on bias in translation : " To me, it expresses a lack of courage, a fear that the Bible does not back up their "truth" enough. To let the Bible have its say, regardless of how well or poorly that say conforms to expectations or accepted forms of modern Christianity is an exercise in courage or, to use another word for it, faith." For those that want to add this book to their library, it's available on Amazon.com : www.amazon.com/Truth-Translation-Accuracy-Translation Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: richard9151 (#0)
Well, Jeopardy is the final authority.
Any Bible that properly translates hades, gehenna, sheol, aion, aionios, krima, etc. is better than the KJV anyday. If the KJV would only correct those, that would make it the best IMO, because otherwise it really is good. I dont know anything about the NWT and it's accuracy. It's the doctrines apart from any scripture that make me question JW, same as any other sect or denomination. .
It's a forum post, not a doctoral thesis. Click for Privacy and Preparedness files
I must have overcome my alzheimers ... I had forgotten that you existed ... I'm praying for relapse!
Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces. De La Boétie
If only there was such a thing as a single accurate translation from a single authoritative document. "I'll take 'Biblical Statistics for $500, Alex." "What is the number of manuscripts that are identical to each other used to compile a translation of the Bible?" That's correct!
That link is dead and so is your bullshit religion.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field- keywords=TRUTH+IN+TRANSLATION% 3A+ACCURACY+AND+BIAS+IN+ENGLISH+TRANSLATIONS+OF+THE+NEW+TESTAMENT&x=10&y=16 Ah. Gee. Do you have trouble figuring out how to use Amazon? No problem; any time I can help.
Daniel 2:44 “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;.
I know how to use it just fine but I'm not going to bother to look for bullshit, especially if you are too incompetent to post a link. Posting valid links is quite easy for most of us.
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||