Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 64

Thread: Is the New World Translation Accurate?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    892
    Thanks
    198
    Thanked 151 Times in 118 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BibleStudent View Post
    If the Greek article occurred with both Word and God in John 1:1 the implication would be that they are one and the same person, absolutely identical. But John affirmed that "the Word was with (the) God" (the definite article preceding each noun), and in so writing he indicated his belief that they were distinct and separate personalities. Then John next stated that the Word was God, i.e., of the same family or essence that characterizes the Creator. Or, in other words, that both are of the same nature, and that nature is the highest in existence, namely, divine. (emphasis mine)
    "Distinct and separate personalities" means just that.

    I posted a thread dealing with this where the WT are muddled in its treatment of the Trinity.

    Reasoning from the Scriptures -
    “Trinity Definition” - “According to the Athanasian Creed, there are three divine Persons (the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost), each said to be eternal, each said to be almighty, none greater or less than another, each said to be God, and yet together being but one God..
    Yes, this is the trinitarian definition, not because Athanasius came-up with a creed. He just agreed with it.

    Other statements of the dogma emphasize that these three ‘Persons’ are not separate and distinct individuals but are three modes in which the divine essence exists (emphasis added).”
    And here we have the WT showing they are "spirit-directed" but not by God. This is not what trinitarians believe. This is Modalism. Modalism does not believe in the Trinity.

    Some may see from the WT quote below a misrepresentation of the Trinity.

    IS GOD JESUS OR A TRINITY?

    14 Who is this wonderful God? Some persons say his name is Jesus. Others say he is a Trinity, although the word “trinity” does not appear in the Bible. According to the teaching of the Trinity, there are three persons in one God, that is, there is “one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” Many religious organizations teach this, even though they admit it is “a mystery.” Are such views of God correct?

    15 Well, did Jesus ever say that he was God? No, he never did. Rather, in the Bible he is called “God’s Son.” And he said: “The Father is greater than I am.” (John 10:34-36; 14:28) Also, Jesus explained that there were some things that neither he nor the angels knew but that only God knew. (Mark 13:32) Further, on one occasion Jesus prayed to God, saying: “Let, not my will, but yours take place.” (Luke 22:42) If Jesus were the Almighty God, he would not have prayed to himself, would he? In fact, following Jesus’ death, the Scripture says: “This Jesus God resurrected.” (Acts 2:32) Thus the Almighty God and Jesus are clearly two separate persons. Even after his death and resurrection and ascension to heaven, Jesus was still not equal to his Father.—1 Corinthians 11:3; 15:28. [Emphasis added].

    Notice the highlighted words and how the WT knew what to quote about the Trinity then contradict this a few words later by mingling Trinitarianism and Modalism. This is like saying, 'We know what the Trinity means but will deny it by using non-Trinity belief!'


    I also noted that Mantey is/was a professor at Northern Baptist Theological Seminary. Not exactly an unbiased opinion.
    Are the WT not biased in misrepresenting others' beliefs?

    Look at this example of how the WT use a persons false understanding to their advantage:

    “We believed that after a man dies, he is alive; we believed that Jesus Christ never died; that He could not die; that no Ransom was ever paid or ever will be paid; that Jehovah God and Christ Jesus His Son are one and the same person; that Christ was His own Father; that Jesus was His own Son; that the Holy Spirit is a person; that one plus one, plus one, equal one; that when Jesus hung on the cross and said, ‘My God, My God, why hast Thou Forsaken Me,’ He was merely talking to Himself; . . . that present kingdoms are part of Christ’s Kingdom; that the Devil has been away off somewhere in an unlocated Hell, instead of exercising dominion over the kingdoms of this earth . . . C. J. Woodworth

    Last edited by str8tawk vs heresy; 02-17-2017 at 07:43 AM.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    341
    Thanks
    812
    Thanked 153 Times in 96 Posts

    Default

    Returning to the OP and the issue of restoring God's name to the NT. An article entitled "The Tetragram and the New Testament" by George Howard in Journal of Biblical Literature
    Vol. 96, No. 1 (Mar., 1977), pp. 63-83
    makes for very interesting reading on the subject addressed by the OP.

    In his concluding observations on page 83 he asked fascinating questions:

    "(3) How great was the impact of the removal of the Tetragram from the NT? Were only those passages affected in which God and Christ were confused by the ambiguity of the immediate context; or were other passages, which reflected a low christology even after the change, later altered to reflect a high christology? Did such restructuring of the text give rise to the later christological controversies within the church, and were the NT passages involved in these controversies identical with those which in the NT era apparently created no problems at all?"
    “Can we conceive of a greater incongruity, than for a Christian to go from his closet, where he has been praying for his enemies, and command his troops to plunge the weapons of death with fiend like fury, into the hearts of those very enemies? In the one case, he happily resembles his dying Master; but whom does he resemble in the other? Jesus prayed for his murderers. Christians murder those for whom they pray.” - Henry Grew, 1828

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    892
    Thanks
    198
    Thanked 151 Times in 118 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BibleStudent View Post
    Returning to the OP and the issue of restoring God's name to the NT. An article entitled "The Tetragram and the New Testament" by George Howard in Journal of Biblical Literature
    Vol. 96, No. 1 (Mar., 1977), pp. 63-83
    makes for very interesting reading on the subject addressed by the OP.

    In his concluding observations on page 83 he asked fascinating questions:

    "(3) How great was the impact of the removal of the Tetragram from the NT? Were only those passages affected in which God and Christ were confused by the ambiguity of the immediate context; or were other passages, which reflected a low christology even after the change, later altered to reflect a high christology? Did such restructuring of the text give rise to the later christological controversies within the church, and were the NT passages involved in these controversies identical with those which in the NT era apparently created no problems at all?"
    Did you not read the WT admitted no manuscript had "Jehovah" in it?

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to str8tawk vs heresy For This Useful Post:

    JohnB (02-17-2017)

  5. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    341
    Thanks
    812
    Thanked 153 Times in 96 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by str8tawk vs heresy View Post
    Did you not read the WT admitted no manuscript had "Jehovah" in it?
    str8tawk vs heresy,

    Did you get a chance to read the article. Of course I am aware that no extant manuscripts have God's name in them. The question is: Was it there originally?

    Another point to ponder. Is it more fraudulent to restore God's name where it may have appeared in the original writings; or remove God's name some 7,000 times where it definitely appeared in the original writings?
    “Can we conceive of a greater incongruity, than for a Christian to go from his closet, where he has been praying for his enemies, and command his troops to plunge the weapons of death with fiend like fury, into the hearts of those very enemies? In the one case, he happily resembles his dying Master; but whom does he resemble in the other? Jesus prayed for his murderers. Christians murder those for whom they pray.” - Henry Grew, 1828

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to BibleStudent For This Useful Post:

    solver (02-17-2017)

  7. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    892
    Thanks
    198
    Thanked 151 Times in 118 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BibleStudent View Post
    str8tawk vs heresy,

    Did you get a chance to read the article. Of course I am aware that no extant manuscripts have God's name in them. The question is: Was it there originally?

    Another point to ponder. Is it more fraudulent to restore God's name where it may have appeared in the original writings; or remove God's name some 7,000 times where it definitely appeared in the original writings?
    You ask for proof of it being there in the Greek originally. You must provide evidence for that otherwise it's your word against no proof.

    The WT are selective in where they choose to add "Jehovah," why?

  8. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Henrietta NY
    Posts
    1,605
    Thanks
    984
    Thanked 410 Times in 330 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BibleStudent View Post
    Returning to the OP and the issue of restoring God's name to the NT. An article entitled "The Tetragram and the New Testament" by George Howard in Journal of Biblical Literature
    Vol. 96, No. 1 (Mar., 1977), pp. 63-83
    makes for very interesting reading on the subject addressed by the OP.

    In his concluding observations on page 83 he asked fascinating questions:

    "(3) How great was the impact of the removal of the Tetragram from the NT? Were only those passages affected in which God and Christ were confused by the ambiguity of the immediate context; or were other passages, which reflected a low christology even after the change, later altered to reflect a high christology? Did such restructuring of the text give rise to the later christological controversies within the church, and were the NT passages involved in these controversies identical with those which in the NT era apparently created no problems at all?"
    Does the letter "J" even exist in Hebrew?
    How far must someone fall before they hit their head? b

  9. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    341
    Thanks
    812
    Thanked 153 Times in 96 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnB View Post
    Does the letter "J" even exist in Hebrew?
    I think I get your point. There is no “J” in Hebrew therefore, Jehovah can not be a legitimate name in English. Does that mean that the names Jacob, Japheth, Jehoash, Jehoiada, Jehu, Jephthah, Jeremiah, Jericho, Jeroboam, Jerusalem, Joab, Job, Joel, Jonah, Jonathan, Jordan, Joseph, Joshua, Josiah, and Judah have no legitimate place in the English translation of the Hebrew Scriptures?
    “Can we conceive of a greater incongruity, than for a Christian to go from his closet, where he has been praying for his enemies, and command his troops to plunge the weapons of death with fiend like fury, into the hearts of those very enemies? In the one case, he happily resembles his dying Master; but whom does he resemble in the other? Jesus prayed for his murderers. Christians murder those for whom they pray.” - Henry Grew, 1828

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BibleStudent For This Useful Post:

    JohnB (02-19-2017), theQuestion (02-19-2017)

  11. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,345
    Thanks
    342
    Thanked 162 Times in 143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Of COURSE it does, to them.
    They use any pretense imaginable to discredit the REAL God and the REAL Jesus!
    The INSANITY of CHURCHianity! Unequaled in All Religion.

  12. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,345
    Thanks
    342
    Thanked 162 Times in 143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by str8tawk vs heresy View Post
    You ask for proof of it being there in the Greek originally. You must provide evidence for that otherwise it's your word against no proof.

    The WT are selective in where they choose to add "Jehovah," why?
    The Jews, in their own writings, record how they DESTROYED as many copies of the new Christian scriptures that had God's Name in them (probbaly in Hebrew text in the Greek text- as in the Septuagint Jesus read from), and CHURCHianity has, too.

    So adding it BACK when the scriptures are clearly speaking about God Himself (not 'Themselves'), and ESPECIALLY when the 'OT' is quoted is only proper!
    The INSANITY of CHURCHianity! Unequaled in All Religion.

  13. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    892
    Thanks
    198
    Thanked 151 Times in 118 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theQuestion View Post
    The Jews, in their own writings, record how they DESTROYED as many copies of the new Christian scriptures that had God's Name in them (probbaly in Hebrew text in the Greek text- as in the Septuagint Jesus read from), and CHURCHianity has, too.

    So adding it BACK when the scriptures are clearly speaking about God Himself (not 'Themselves'), and ESPECIALLY when the 'OT' is quoted is only proper!
    ​You quoted me then ignored my question. Evidence is all I ask for. The WT admit there's none.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •