Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | is jesus god? | John 1:1 | kalos | 56479 | ||
New World Mis-Translation (Jehovah's Witnesses) 'The following quotes are taken from language scholars who study the Greek language of the New Testament and are offering their opinions as to the validity of John 1:1. '"...the Word was a god." John 1:1 (New World Translation) 'Dr. Paul L. Kaufman of Portland, Oregon: "The Jehovah's Witnesses people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of Greek grammar in their mistranslation of John 1:1." 'Dr. Charles L. Feinberg of La Mirada, California: "I can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1:1 is not held by any reputable Greek scholar." 'Dr. James L. Boyer of Winona Lake, Indiana: "I have never heard of, or read of any Greek Scholar who would have agreed to the interpretation of this verse insisted upon by the Jehovah's Witnesses...I have never encountered one of them who had any knowledge of the Greek language." 'Dr. Walter R. Martin (who does not teach Greek but has studied the language): "The translation...'a god' instead of 'God' is erroneous and unsupported by any good Greek scholarship, ancient or contemporary and is a translation rejected by all recognized scholars of the Greek language may of whom are not even Christians, and cannot fairly be said to be biased in favor of the orthodox contention." 'Dr. J. R. Mantey (who is quoted on pages 1158-1159 of the Witnesses own Kingdom interlinear Translation): "A shocking mistranslation." "Obsolete and incorrect." "It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 'The Word was a god.'" 'Dr. Bruce M. Metzger of Princeton (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature): "A frightful mistranslation." "Erroneous" and "pernicious" "reprehensible" "If the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists." 'Dr. Samuel J. Mikolaski of Zurich, Switzerland: "This anarthrous (used without the article) construction does not mean what the indefinite article 'a' means in English. It is monstrous to translate the phrase 'the Word was a god.'" 'Dr. William Barclay of the University of Glasgow, Scotland: "The deliberate distortion of truth by this sect is seen in their New testament translations. John 1:1 is translated: '...the Word was a god, ' a translation which is grammatically impossible...It is abundantly clear that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually dishonest." 'Dr. F. F. Bruce of the University of Manchester, England: "Much is made by Arian amateur grammarians of the omission of the definite article with 'God' in the phrase 'And the Word was God.' Such an omission is common with nouns in a predicative construction...'a god' would be totally indefensible." [Barclay and Bruce are generally regarded as Great Britain's leading Greek scholars. Both have New Testament translations in print!] 'Dr. Ernest C. Colwell of the University of Chicago: "A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb...this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas. 'My Lord and my God.' - John 20:28" 'Dr. Phillip B. Harner of Heidelberg College: "The verb preceding an anarthrous predicate, would probably mean that the LOGOS was 'a god' or a divine being of some kind, belonging to the general category of THEOS but as a distinct being from HO THEOS. In the form that John actually uses, the word "THEOS" is places at the beginning for emphasis." 'Dr. J. Johnson of California State University, Long Beach: "No justification whatsoever for translating THEOS EN HO LOGOS as 'the Word was a god.' There is no syntactical parallel to Acts 28:6 where there is a statement in indirect discourse; John 1:1 is direct....I am neither a Christian nor a Trinitarian." _____________ (...) 'Just a side note, I found this quote in the Watchtower's official website, www.watchtower.org in the "How can you find out what God Requires" section, paragraph #3, -- "God made sure that the Bible was accurately copied and preserved." 'Then why was the New World Translation Bible needed?' (www.soulright.com/nwt.html |
||||||
2 | is jesus god? | John 1:1 | Hank | 56485 | ||
You know, kalos, while I recognize your question as rhetorical, to wit: "Then why was the New World Translation Bible needed?", I at the same time feel that Dr. William Barclay's quotation, which you cite in your post, is classic and to the point in his use of the words "the deliberate distortion of truth by this sect." That's the thing that makes this so-called translation so horrible, so despicable, so blasphemous. It is one thing to make an honest error of translation, but it is quite another to mis-translate the sacred text in such an obviously deliberate and profound way in order to make it comply with the false doctrines of a cult. I can think of nothing more dishonest and deceptive than this. --Hank | ||||||
3 | is jesus god? | John 1:1 | kalos | 56488 | ||
Hank: I agree. And what compounds the offensiveness of this abomination (the NWT) is the fact that none of the so-called translators know or have studied Greek. Then the Watchtower Society tries to cover this up by refusing to release the names of the translators, under the guise of humility. "Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive." kalos |
||||||