Carl
2007-09-21 04:29:43 UTC
Re: King James Study Bible?
Hi all,
I'm a fairly new Christian. I don't yet belong to a denomination, but
visit Baptist, Nazarene, and Assembly of God churches. I would like
to understand the Bible. I love the language of the King James
version, but find it harder to understand. Do you have any
recommendations for a good study Bible? The two I see most often for
King James are Nelson and Zondervan; any pros and cons between those
two?
Thanks so much!
Tom
Hello Tom,Hi all,
I'm a fairly new Christian. I don't yet belong to a denomination, but
visit Baptist, Nazarene, and Assembly of God churches. I would like
to understand the Bible. I love the language of the King James
version, but find it harder to understand. Do you have any
recommendations for a good study Bible? The two I see most often for
King James are Nelson and Zondervan; any pros and cons between those
two?
Thanks so much!
Tom
The King James Bible was translated back in the 17th century. Since
that time, more Bible manuscripts have been discovered, such as the
Dead Sea Scrolls, that allows Bible translators to be more accurate.
Since we are discussing the word of God, accuracy would be paramount,
would it not.
Although most Bibles today get across God's main messages, such as God
sent Jesus as our savior, etc, some Bibles are closer to the original
writings than others. Here is one brief example.
God's name if found in the original OT writings thousands of times.
(nearly 7000) Yet very few Bibles put that name in their translations.
Yet God clearly gave Himself a personal name. So who are they to take
out the personal name that God put in, and replace it with only the
title "Lord" or "God"? The New World Translation Bible restores the
divine name in all of its occurrences. Thus if you want Bible
accuracy, you can find that Bible online by going to the web page
below.
"Jehovah" into the New Testament when NO PLACE IN THE
ORIGINAL-LANGUAGE TEXTS PUTS IT THERE.
committee were knowledgable in any Biblical languages. The following are a
couple of brief articles showing why the New World Translation is a poor
translation rife with error and intentional mistranslation.
May God bless,
Carl
my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
---
THE WORLDS MOST DANGEROUS BOOK!!
Would you place you trust in a surgeon who was about to perform a major
operation on you, if he refused to give you his name or credentials? OR....
Would you place your faith in an attorney, who was defending you against
false accusations of felony charges, if he also refused to give you his name
or credentials?
We can see how important it is that we rely on the names and credentials
of those who serve us in the important aspects of our life. As in the case
of the lawyer, it is essential to know these things, for without knowledge,
we would have no assurance that he would truly and honestly represent you.
It
is therefore of the utmost importance to know the men, the credentials and
the qualifications of those who we entrust our spiritual lives!!
The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has failed the public at this
most
crucial point, as they refuse to give their followers the names and
credentials of the Translation Committee of their Bible, The New World
Translation of the Holy Scriptures (see pg. 258 of Jehovah's Witnesses in
the
Divine Purpose). This is more important than the Watchtower Society will
admit since the New World Translation Committee has deceived many in their
translation of the Bible in the following ways:
1. They have invented non-existent rules of Greek grammar and then
proceeded to follow these rules only when necessary to support their
peculiar
theology.
A clear example of this is John 1:1, where the Translation Committee has
rendered the Greek "and the Word was a god". We cite the appendix of another
Watchtower publication (The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek
Scriptures, page 1158), for their footnote concerning John 1:1: "The reason
for their rendering the Greek word Divine and not God is that it is the
Greek
noun Theos without the definite article..." May we call the Watchtower
Society's attention to verses 6, 12 and 13 (also found in the first chapter
of the Gospel of John). Here the Greek noun Theos appears without the
definite article (as in John 1:1) and yet the Translating Committee has
translated each verse as (Jehovah) God.
Another example of non-existent rules followed only when needed to
support
their theology is found in the forward of the afore mentioned Kingdom
Interlinear Translation (pg. 18). Here we are taught how to restore the
Divine name. We are instructed that we can render the Greek words "Kyrios"
(Lord) and "Theos" (God) into Divine name by determining if the Christian
(Greek) writers have quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). If
so, we can render "Kyrios" (Lord) and "Theos" (God) as Jehovah God. Once
again, the Watchtower "rule" is avoided by the Translation Committee as they
translate Philippians 2:11. The Apostle Paul quotes Isaiah 45:23 as he
states that "every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Jehovah God
(Kyrios) to the glory of God the Father.
2. The Translation Committee has made up a Greek tense that is
non-existent.
We cite the 1950 edition of their "New World Translation of the Christian
Greek Scriptures" rendering of John 8:58 where they have translated "ego
eimi" as "I have been" and state that it is "properly rendered in the
perfect indefinite tense" in the Greek language. There is NO "perfect
indefinite sense" in any language! After the Watchtower Society was informed
of this fact, they made the change to the "perfect tense indicative" but as
the Greek student knows, it is present tense and is correctly translated "I
AM" (see Exodus 3:14).
3. They have added words to Scripture which changes the meaning of the
texts to agree with their theology. Notice the Watchtower's rendering of
Colossians 1:16,17, where the word "other" has been added four times to the
text, completely changing its meaning. When Paul wrote those passages that
the Son created all things, it is obvious that the Son was not himself
created. The Watchtower, however, believes that the Son is also a created
being and has therefore added "other" - not found in the Greek Biblical text
at all - to make it appear that the Son is also a creature. As mentioned
before, the Translation Committee has added the word "a" to John 1:1 to make
the Son a creature rather than God Himself. Take note also of the same
deceitfulness displayed in Philippians 2:9 where the word "other" is again
added, when it is not found or even suggested in the original Greek.
4. The men who comprised the Translation Committee had no adequate
schooling or background to function as critical Bible translators. The
self-appointed "scholars" who made up this Translation Committee were: N.H.
Knorr, F.W. Franz, A.D. Schroeder, G.D. Gangas and M. Henschel. Aside from
the current President Franz, none of the Translation Committee members knew
Biblical Greek or Hebrew and Franz's ability is open to serious question.
This came out in the Scottish Court Sessions in November, 1954 (just four
years after the release of the Watchtower Scriptures). The following
exchange of question and answers between the attorney and Franz is taken
from
the trial transcript:
Q. Have you also made yourself familiar with Hebrew?
A. Yes....
Q. So that you have substantial linguistic apparatus at your
command?
A. Yes, for use in my biblical work.
Q. I think you are able to read and follow the Bible in Hebrew,
Greek, Latin, Spanish, Portuguese, German and French?
A. Yes.....(Pursuer's Proof, pg. 7)
Q. You, yourself, read and speak Hebrew, do you?
A. I do not speak Hebrew.
Q. You do not?
A. No
Q. Can you, yourself, translate that into Hebrew?
A. Which?
Q. That fourth verse of the second chapter of Genesis.
A. You mean here?
Q. Yes.
A. No, I wouldn't attempt to do that. (Pursuer's Proof, pgs.
102,103).
What Franz failed to do was a simple exercise which an average first or
second year Hebrew student in any seminary would have no difficulty (see
further, "We left Jehovah's Witnesses - A non-Prophet Organization" - Edmond
C. Gruss, pg. 59-101). It is also interesting to note that no Greek scholar
with any credentials will endorse the New World Translation. Bill
Centnar,in
1954 (while still a Jehovah's Witness working at Bethel), was assigned to
interview a well known Bible translator, Dr. Edgar J. Goodspeed, asking him
for his evaluation and recommendation of the New World Translation of the
Hebrew Scriptures. Dr. Goodspeed replied: "No, I'm afraid that I could not
do that. The grammar is regrettable...".
We agree with Dr. Goodspeed and go a step further and state that the
theology brought forth in this translation is a fatal distortion of Biblical
truth. We ask you not to put your trust in such a bias translation of Holy
Scripture or in the Society that has deceived many in the writing of it; we
ask that your faith and trust be placed in the Lord Jesus Christ who said
that unless you believe that HE IS the Eternal God (Ego Eimi - "I AM"), you
will die in your sins (John 8:24). It is because of the danger of the
reversion of the New World Translation of Holy Scriptures that this warning
has been written. Our concern is for you to come to know the TRUE LORD Jesus
Christ...
Let us help you discover more...
PERSONAL FREEDOM OUTREACH MIDWEST
P.O. Box 26062
Saint Louis, Missouri 63136
(314) 388-2648 (voice phone)
---
"The New World Translation On Trial"
by Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
*The New World Translation (NWT)[1] is the official translation
of the Bible published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society
and used by all Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs). It has often been
criticized for its biased renderings of crucial texts traditionally
used by Christians to support the deity of Christ. Although study
of such isolated mistranslations in the NWT is valuable, it can
give the mistaken impression that the NWT is an otherwise
acceptable translation with only a handful of verses in dispute.
This is not the case, however.*
As I explained in Part One, the purpose of this four-part
series is to show that the JWs _systematically_ distort the Bible
to make it fit their preconceived beliefs.[2] In the present
article I will argue that the NWT itself reflects this systematic
distortion in a vast number of texts relating to practically
every area of biblical doctrine.
Space does not permit a discussion of who the translators
were, what scholarly training they brought to their work, or what
opinions non-JW scholars have expressed about the NWT. Another
restriction for the sake of space is that the scope of this
article will be confined to the New Testament, or "Christian
Greek Scriptures," as JWs call it.
I should also clarify at the outset what it means to charge a
translation with doctrinal bias. While _all_ translations reflect
their translator's doctrinal convictions to a certain extent,
_some_ translations are extremely biased to the point of severely
distorting the meaning of the Bible. And so, though it is true
that all translations reflect some biases, these are in most
cases inconsequential compared to the bias of the NWT.
In this article there will be no extended discussion of
individual texts. Instead, brief comments will be made concerning
a large number of biblical passages. In most cases the reader can
verify what is said by simply consulting the JWs' own _Kingdom
Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures (KIT)._ The _KIT_
prints the 1984 edition of the NWT New Testament on the right
side of the page. On the left side is the Westcott-Hort Greek
text of 1881 with the Society's own 1969 word-for-word
interlinear translation printed underneath the Greek words.[3]
The editors of the _KIT_ explain the purpose of the volume: "The
word-for-word interlinear translation and the _New World
Translation_ are arranged in parallel on the page, so that
comparisons can be made between the two readings. Thus, the
accuracy of any modern translation can be determined."[4]
There are several types of mistranslations in the NWT. This
article will draw attention only to some of the most common and
unfortunate.
*ADDING WORDS*
In Colossians 1:16-20 the word "other" is added four times in
the NWT to make it appear that Christ is part of creation. Paul
is thus made to say that "all [other] things" were created in and
for Christ, as if Christ were one of the created things. It is,
of course, legitimate for translators to add the word "other"
where this does not change the meaning but simply makes for
smoother English (e.g., Luke 11:41-42; 13:2,4). In Colossians
1:16-20, however, adding "other" substantially changes the
meaning.
What is not so often recognized is that the NWT does this
same thing in several other passages as well (Acts 10:36; Romans
8:32; Phil. 2:9). In Romans 8:32 ("....will he not also with him
[Jesus] kindly give us all other things?"), the word "other" is
not even placed in brackets, contrary to the work's stated
practice.[5] In each case, the intent is apparently to undermine
the implication of the text that Jesus Christ is God.
There are several other texts where the NWT adds words
without brackets which change the texts' meaning. Some of these
have real doctrinal significance. In Romans 8:28 "all things" is
changed to "all his works." This implies that God does not work
"all things" together for good to those who love God, but only
those things which He Himself does, over which He therefore has
control. This allows for their belief that God does _not_ have
control over all things.
In Philippians 1:23-24 (NWT) several words are added without
brackets that, along with some other changes, completely alter
the structure and thereby the meaning of the text. The passage
reads in the NWT (with the added words italicized), "I am under
pressure from _these_ two things; _but what_ I do desire is the
releasing and the being with Christ, for this, _to be sure,_ is
far better." There are other errors as well, but the additions
indicated here clearly change the meaning. JWs translate it this
way in order to avoid the text's implication that at death Paul
would be with Christ. Such an implication would contradict their
belief that death involves the annihilation of the soul.
Some of the additions in brackets with the NWT so clearly
change the meaning that it is a wonder that more JWs do not
question them. In 1 Corinthians 14:12-16 the expression "gift of
the" is added in brackets five times, changing "spirit" to "[gift
of the] spirit." The result is that Paul's contrast between his
own personal "spirit" and his "mind" is removed, which again
serves the JW doctrine that the spirit is not a distinct entity
which survives death. To assure that this contrast is missed, the
word "my" is also added in brackets before "mind" twice in verse
15. Thus the simple contrast between "the spirit" and "the mind"
is changed to "the [gift of the] spirit" and "[my] mind."
*OMITTING WORDS*
The NWT also omits key words on occasion, when retaining them
in the text would seem to contradict JW doctrine. The most
glaring example is Romans 8:1, "Therefore those in union with
Christ Jesus have no condemnation," which omits the word "now."
This omission is evidently motivated by the fact that JWs do not
believe anyone can claim to be free of condemnation _now._
Also notable is the NWT rendering of Colossians 1:19,
"because [God] saw good for all fullness to dwell in him." Here
the little word "the" is omitted before "fullness." This is
significant, because in the NWT rendering "all fullness" is
ambiguous, whereas "all _the_ fullness" clearly refers to the
"fullness" of God's own being (cf. Col. 2:9).
John 14:14 should also be mentioned. In the NWT this reads,
"If YOU ask anything in my name, I will do it." The Greek text in
the _KIT_, however, has "me" after "ask." It therefore should be
translated, "If you ask _me_ anything in my name, I will do it."
It is true that some later Greek manuscripts omitted this word,
but most of the earlier ones included it, and most modern
editions of the Greek New Testament (including those used by the
JWs in producing the NWT) include it. At the very least, the NWT
ought to have mentioned this reading in a note.
*CHANGING WORDS*
The NWT is further guilty of mistranslating or paraphrasing
words in a way which not only does a disservice to the text but
betrays its prevailing doctrinal bias as well. It does this with
words as small as prepositions.
Of course, it is possible to make too much of prepositions.
Words like "in," "of," "into," and "with" really do not in and of
themselves have doctrinal significance. Only as these words are
attached to other words do they take on significance. It is also
important to recognize that a preposition can have different
meanings in different contexts. Yet -- though this is true --
prepositions do have recognizable functions and meanings and
cannot be translated in whatever manner one chooses.
In violation of this, the NWT translates the simple
preposition "in" (Greek, _en_) with unnecessary variations which
often obscure or alter the meaning of the passage. This is
illustrated in 1 John 5:20 where the NWT reads in part, "And we
are in union with the true one, by means of his Son Jesus
Christ." Reading this translation, one would never suspect that
_in union with_ and _by means of_ translate the same simple Greek
preposition. There is no sound reason for this variation. "And we
are _in union with_ the true one, _in union with_ his Son Jesus
Christ," would have brought out John's point that union with
Christ _is_ union with God.
Again, in Colossians 2:6-12 the preposition "in" is
translated by the NWT using unnecessary variations. The Greek
phrase _en auto_ ("in him") is translated "in union with him" (v.
6b), "in him" (vv. 7a,9), and "by means of him" (v. 10). _En ho_
("in whom") is translated "by relationship with him" (vv.
11a,12a). These variations of "in" serve no useful purpose,
undermine the unity of the passage, and obscure the point of the
author which is that the Christian life consists of a
supernatural relationship with Christ through faith.
There are many other passages where "in" is paraphrased in
the NWT to avoid the otherwise clear meaning of the text. For
example, in Matthew 5:19 "in" is translated "in relation to."
This is done to avoid the passage's teaching that some who
disobey the Law's commandments and teach others to do so will
nevertheless be accepted "in the kingdom of heaven." (JWs believe
the Kingdom will be restricted to 144,000 specially chosen and
sanctified believers).
Another kind of mistranslation involves the word "believe." One
of the most offensive teachings of evangelical Christianity to the
JWs (and to many others as well) is that God reckons the sinner
righteous on the basis of simple faith, or believing, in Christ. Of
course, where "faith" or "belief" is reduced to mental assent to a
doctrine, this is rightly rejected. But biblical justification is
based on faith in _Christ,_ not faith in a doctrine. Nonetheless,
even when this teaching is properly defined it is offensive to the
JWs, as is evidenced by their attempt to obscure this truth in the
NWT.
Most notable in this regard is the NWT rendering of the Greek
word for "believe" (_pisteuo_) as "exercise faith" instead of
"believe." As others have noted, to "exercise faith" implies more
than to believe; it implies doing works on the basis of one's
belief. The NWT almost always renders _pisteuo_ as "exercise faith"
when it concerns God's free pardon and justification of those who
believe in Christ (e.g., John 1:12; 3:16-18 [but note v. 15]; Rom.
4:3; Gal. 3:22).
It was noted earlier that in 1 Corinthians 14:12-16 the phrase
"gift of the" is added in brackets five times, changing "spirit" to
"[gift of the] spirit." The NWT elsewhere frequently paraphrases
the simple word "spirit" -- especially when referring to the
immaterial aspect of human nature -- in order to avoid the
implication that such a spirit has a reality distinct from the
body. For instance, in Hebrews 12:9 "the Father of spirits" becomes
"the Father of our spiritual life." In Galatians 6:18 "your spirit"
is paraphrased "the spirit YOU show."
Similar rewordings are introduced in passages where the simple
translation "spirit" or "Spirit" might imply that God's Spirit is
a person, contrary to their doctrine that "holy spirit" is God's
"active force." So, Jude's description of certain men as "not
having the Spirit" is rendered "not having spirituality" (Jude 19).
Even clearer is 1 John 4:1-6. John has just stated that we
know our union with God is secure "owing to the _spirit_ which he
gave us" (3:24). The next sentence (4:1) in the NWT reads, "Beloved
ones, believe not every _inspired expression,_ but test the
_inspired expressions_ to see whether they originate with God..."
(4:1a; emphases added). One would never suspect from this rendering
that "inspired expression" translates the same Greek word
(_pneuma_) as was translated "spirit" in 3:24 (see also 4:2,3,6).
John's whole point is that although the Spirit's presence in us
gives us assurance of God's love, we are not to believe every
"spirit" that claims to be from God, but test them by the teachings
which their prophets espouse, "because many false prophets have
gone out into the world" (4:1b). The NWT obscures this point of
God's Word in order to avoid its implication that His "Spirit" is
a person rather than a force (just as the demonic "spirits" are
personal entities and not impersonal forces, as JWs recognize).
The same doctrinal bias is seen in 1 Timothy 4:1 where the NWT
reads, "However, the _inspired utterance_ says...." A
straightforward "the spirit says" would too obviously imply the
personality of the "spirit."
Finally, the way in which the NWT most systematically distorts
the teaching of Scripture is in its handling of the names and
titles used for God. Two points must be made here.
First and most obvious is the appearance of "Jehovah" over 200
times in the NWT New Testament where the Greek text has _kurios_
("Lord"). Other writers have exposed the scholarly errors
involved;[6] I will not repeat their work here. Instead I wish to
point out two ways in which this distorts the teaching of the New
Testament.
The New Testament follows the practice of the Septuagint (the
Greek translation of the Old Testament used by most Greek-speaking
Jews in the first century) in substituting the word "Lord" (and
occasionally "God") for the divine name "Yahweh" (or "Jehovah"). By
so doing, the New Testament makes it clear that the use of
"Jehovah" is _not_ necessary for Christians, contrary to the JWs'
claim.
Moreover, the substitution of "Jehovah" for "Lord" often
obscures the meaning of passages relating to Jesus Christ. A good
example is Romans 10:9-13, where Christ is called "Lord" (_kurios_)
three times, concluding with verse 13, a quote from the Septuagint
where the "Lord" is Jehovah. The NWT, by rendering _kurios_ in
verse 13 as "Jehovah" but as "Lord" in verses 9 and 12, has
obscured the fact that in this passage Jesus is being identified as
Jehovah by the use of the title "Lord."
The second way the NWT has systematically abused the divine
names or titles is in its handling of texts in which Jesus is
called God. There are nine texts where Jesus is definitely called
God (Isa. 9:6; John 1:1,18; 20:28; Rom. 9:5; Tit. 2:13; Heb. 1:8;
2 Pet. 1:1; 1 John 5:20; possibly also Acts 20:28).[7] Of these,
four are translated so that Jesus is not called God at all (Rom.
9:5; Tit. 2:13; Heb. 1:8; 2 Pet. 1:1). Two are rendered so that he
is "a god" or "god" (John 1:1,18). The remaining three texts (Isa.
9:6; John 20:28; 1 John 5:20) are interpreted so that either Jesus
is not called God at all or he is called God only in some lesser
sense. In short, wherever possible, the NWT has translated texts
which in their natural reading plainly call Jesus God in such a way
that they no longer make that identification.
Only a small sampling of doctrinally-motivated mistranslations
in the NWT have been documented here. We have seen words added,
words omitted, and words and phrases paraphrased improperly with a
view toward transmuting the Bible into JW doctrine. We have seen
that these mistranslations conveniently support the distinctive JW
understanding of the name "Jehovah" and their denials of Christ's
deity, the personhood of the Holy Spirit, the separableness of the
human spirit from the body, spiritual life after the death of the
body for Christians, God's absolute sovereign control over the
world, the unity of God's people, and justification by faith. Were
we to extend the study, we would see that every distinctive of the
JWs has strategically been insinuated into the text of the NWT in
a way that to the non-JW clearly shows doctrinal bias.
One possible criticism of this survey would be that it does not
consider the arguments JWs would advance in defense of their
controversial renderings in the NWT. In reply I must point out that
to address such arguments would necessarily mean limiting the
examples of mistranslation to just a few. But, it is my experience
and doubtless that of many others that no JW will admit that there
might be so much as _one_ doctrinally-slanted verse in the NWT. To
defend such a position, however, they must now satisfactorily
explain _all_ of the examples given here. In any case, the more
in-depth treatment a specific text is given (including evaluation
of arguments in its favor), the more evidence piles up that the JW
renderings are wrong and biased.
In Part Three of this series, a specific passage of the Bible
_will_ be examined in-depth as a case in point. I shall argue that
the methods and presuppositions of biblical interpretation used by
the JWs are seriously flawed and lead them into error.
*NOTES*
1 The New World Translation of the "Christian Greek Scriptures"
was first published in 1950, with the complete Bible appearing
in 1961. All citations from the NWT are from the _New World
Translation of the Holy Scriptures: With References_ (Brooklyn:
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1984), hereafter cited as
_NWT_ (1984).
2 "Watchtower Authority and the Bible," CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL
11 (Fall 1988):19-21.
3 "By Way of Explanation," in _The Kingdom Interlinear Translation
of the Greek Scriptures,_ rev. ed. (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible
and Tract Society, 1985), 5.
4 _Ibid._
5 _NWT_ (1984), 7.
6 _See_ Robert H. Countess, _The Jehovah's Witnesses' New
Testament: A Critical Analysis of the New World Translation of
the Christian Greek Scriptures_ (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian
& Reformed Publishing Co., 1982), 19-40, and especially Doug
Mason, _JEHOVAH in the Jehovah's Witnesses' New World
Translation_ (n.p.: Doug Mason, 1987; available from Bethel
Ministries, CP-258, Manhattan Beach, CA 92667).
7 On John 1:1 and 20:28, see my _Jehovah's Witnesses, Jesus
Christ, and the Gospel of John_ (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1989). On Romans 9:5, see Bruce M. Metzger, "The Punctuation of
Rom. 9:5," in _Christ and Spirit in the New Testament: In Honour
of Charles Francis Digby Moule,_ ed. Barnabas Lindars and Stephen
S. Smalley (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press,
1973), 95-112.