AboutBrenda Martin Expertise I have been one of Jehovah`s Witneses now for over 30 years, in those years I have brought up 4 children, teaching each of them the bible.Being one of Jehovah`s Witnesses has helped me cope with my Epilepsy and bring up a daughter with learning difficulties.I have conducted bible studies with people from nearly every denomination i.e. Muslim. Having used the bible all these years to answer peoples questions, I feel I am qualified to give any answer regarding Jehovah`s Witnesses and the bible.
Experience My experience has been one of attending bible lectures 5 times a week,taking part in these lectures in front of an audience and being with thousands of J.W. at conventions where I have seen the bible at work in peoples lives.It is truly a miracle when you see thousands of people meeting together and not one policeman needed, and not even a piece of litter in sight.It is like another world.
Question Are you willing to say the NWT is an erroneous mistranslation? And can you give the names of the 'scholars' that were on the NWT translation committee?
Also, are you aware of Johanes Greber whom the WT quoted favorably from for YEARS because his translation lines up with theirs, and his was given to him by "spirits" and he was a psycic medium?
What 'mistakes' are you refering to in the KJV?
-------------------------
Followup To
Question -
I'm a firm believer that the KJV is the preserved words of God. There is MANY reasons why I believe this, but still even for Acts 20:28, you will be hard pressed to find other versions [other than a couple] that do not say that it was GOD'S OWN BLOOD that purchesed the church.
There are other reasons I hold to the King James, and I can help but notice the great strengthening of doctrines in the KJV, based on the RECEIVED text. In the past little while we have had an influx of "newer" and supposedly "better" Bible versions, yet concider these deletions in the modern versions, and ESPECIALLY the NWT.
The Doctrine of Repentance...
Why in the modern versions has the Doctrine of Biblical repentance been altered?
Notice Matthew 9:13, Mark 2:17, and Luke 5:32 all have removed two very important words at the end of the verses..."to repentance."
"Christ came not to call the righteous, but sinners [to repentance]."
Those of us who believe that repentance is essential for salvation should be troubled by this.
In a day when many seem to believe that people can walk in open, unrepentant sin and rebellion against God and still be saved, this is of utmost importance.
Paul preached "repentance toward God, and faith toward the Lord Jesus"
[Acts 20:21]
Revelation 22:15 says who will not be in the Holy City. We need to be lovers of truth, and lovers of God's Holy Words of life in this dark age.
The denial of future judgement in modern versions:
Mark 6:11 in the modern translations, have removed the latter half of the verse, "Verily I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for sodom and gommorah, in the day of judgement than for that city."
ALL OF THIS IS GONE IN THE MODERN VERSIONS
THIS IS NO SMALL MATTER!
Jesus said that EVERY WORD that procedes from God's mouth is our bread of life.[Matthew 4:4]
The Denial in modern versions of the eternality of hell:
2 Peter 2:17 has removed 1 important word off the end of the verse in modern translations [FOREVER].
The Denial of literal fire in hell:
Mark 9:44 & 9:46 have been eliminated in the modern versions.
The Denial of a literal heaven:
Why has Luke 11:2 removed the precious words of Jesus quote "Thy will be done as in heaven, so in Earth".
THE COMPLETE ELIMINATION OF MARK 16:9-20
[note; some modern translation have removed this alltogether, and others have cast doubt on it's validity in footnotes]
In many modern versions they actually end the book of Mark with the apostles and Peter actually being afraid.
It is obvious, even to the most unlearned eye in Biblical translation, that this is an unfinished passage of scripture.
The doctrines that are effected by leaving out this important passage of Scripture are:
1]Jesus appearing to Mary Magnaline first, who had been delivered of seven demons[Mark 16:9]
2]Jesus appearing to people after the resurrection, and eating with them[Mark 16:12-14]
3]The Great Commission[Mark 16:15]
4]Believers baptism [Mark 16:16]
5]The fate of unbelievers[Mark 16:16]
6]The sign gifts following the Lord's disciples[Mark 16:17-18]
7]The assention of the Lord to the Father's right hand[Mark 16:19]
8]The ascention of the Lord to the Father's right hand[Mark 16:19]
9]The going forth with the great commission, with signs following.
So it is not ONLY the doctrine of the Deity of Christ that has been effected. There are many more I can show you if you are interested.
What I believe is that many of the modern Bible versions have taken away from precious Biblical doctrines. The NWT is amongsdt the Most guilty in this, attacking EVERY Scripture concerning the Deity of Christ, and also altering other vital Christian doctrines like repentance as well.
You quote from the RSV, but I don't concider that Bible to be a reliable translation at all.
The RSV even removes the fact that Salvation is only in Christ in John 6:47.
The KJV says in John 6:47, Jesus words "he that BELIEVETH ON ME hath everlasting life.
The RSV says "He who believes has eternal life"
Believes in whom?
Most Christians are agreed though in one thing, that the NWT is NOT a reliable translation. Although the Deity of Christ is still found in Isaiah 9:6, He is the MIGHTY GOD, the everlasting [or eternal] Father. Eternal or everlasting meaning without beginning or end. He is the Alpha and Omega of Revelation.
Followup To
Question -
Brenda, you said,
[quote]I used to think that about JW's and the NWT, you see I was a Protestant and attended church for 19 years using the KJV, so when the Witnesses called at my home, I had no intention of using, what I saw as; “their” bible, during my study with them I used my KJV and they used the NWT, I became a Witness studying the KJV, not the NWT. Which proves ALL bibles carry the same message.[/quote]
See what the KJV says as far as 1 Timothy 3:16, 1 John 3:16, and Acts 20:28...
How can you say all bibles carry the same message?
Notice Acts 20:28 says (Son) in brackets too.
Love in Christ, Laurie
Answer -
"KJV--1 TIMOTHY 3:16, 1 JOHN 3:16, AND ACTS 20:28."
As I've said before, they all carry the same message, but that does not mean mistakes haven't crept in, that's why its good to have more than one translation of the bible so we can compare them.
1.---1TIMOTHY 3;16--. The King James Version reads: “God was manifest in the flesh,” in referring to Christ Jesus.
However today, MOST translations (not just the NWT) omit any reference to “God” in this text. So why have do these other translations omit the word God, well a little bit of digging revels why--
In the Alexandrine codex (the first of the ancient Bible manuscripts made accessible to scholars) the contraction for “God,” formed by two Greek letters “ÈC,” appears originally to have read “ÏC,” the word for “who.” Obviously, this meant that Christ Jesus was not “God.”
It took more than 200 years and the discovery of other older manuscripts to confirm the rendering “who” or “which” as being correct.
When the Codex Sinaiticus ( oldest known complete copy of the Christian Greek Scriptures) was discovered it helped scholars to uncover errors that had crept into later manuscripts. For example, the reference to Jesus at 1 Timothy 3:16 The Sinaiticus reads: “He was made manifest in the flesh.”
Sinaiticus was made many years before any Greek manuscript reading “God.” So these scholars revealed that there had been a later corruption of the text, evidently introduced to support the Trinity doctrine.
So it is not something invented by JW's, Scholars etc. compared the Alexandrine codex with the oldest manuscript; Codex Sinaiticus, and they found the later one to be wrong and consequently the KJV incorrect in its rendering.
But even with that mistake in it I found out the truth about Jesus, because I didn't just look at this verse and say “oh well Jesus must be God” I looked at many other scriptures in the KJV and they said the opposite, I believed the bible has to be in harmony all the way through, so I dug further. This information is what I found.
2.---The oldest manuscripts render (1 John 3:) for “we have come to know love, because that one [Jesus Christ] surrendered his soul [or, “life”]
3.---Acts 20;28 KJV reads—“to feed the Church of God which he bought with his own blood.”
Again lets compare what other translations say—
The 1971 edition of the Revised Standard reads- “with the blood of his own Son.”
So which is correct, well it has to be the one that agrees with the rest of scripture does it not? So what do other scriptures say—
1 John 1:7,says: “The blood of Jesus his [God's] Son cleanses us from all sin”(See also Revelation 1:4-6.)
As stated in John 3:16, did God send his only-begotten Son, or did he himself come as a man, so that we might have life? It was the blood, not of God, but of his Son that was poured out, we have to conclude.
ALL BIBLES CARRY THE SAME MESSAGE?
Yes ,despite these mistakes a person can still come to an accurate knowledge of truth, for instance ,all bibles tell us; what God's purpose is for the earth and mankind—
“Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.”—Matthew 5:5, King James Version.
The meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.”—Psalm 37:11, KJ.
The King James version of the Bible has been printed on the Watchtower Society's own presses for use by Jehovah's Witnesses in their door to door work.
All the best
Brenda
Answer -
Are you willing to say that mistakes have crept in the KJV? if not, I really dont see what else I can say.
No point in me looking at all these texts if you are unwilling to see that the KJV has errors, would you agee?
Brenda
Answer Laurie you asked--"WHAT 'MISTAKES' ARE YOU REFERING TO IN THE KJV?"
The more striking differences consist of things appearing in the older versions that are not found in the later ones or that are shown only in footnotes. Why is that? Because most copyists' errors are additions to the text rather than omissions.
1. Bible scholars today agree that the last twelve verses of the Gospel of Mark (16:9-20) and
2. The first eleven verses of the eighth chapter of the Gospel of John were not part of the original writings.
3. Neither were the words “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth,” which are found at 1 John 5:7, 8 in the King James Version.
The Greek text from which the King James Version of 1611 was translated, is a text now rejected by true scholars because of the many mistakes, additions and omissions which mark it, so that the King James Version has been convicted of containing over 20,000 errors.
Even within the KJV's themselves there are errors—“The Committee on Versions (1851-56) of the American Bible Society found 24,000 variations in six different editions of the King James Version!”
The translations of the Bible of which the King James Version was a revision were based upon a small number of Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. Many thousands of manuscripts have been found since then, some being as much as a thousand years older than those. The fact that these manuscript copies are older means they are closer in time to the original writings and are, therefore, more accurate, having fewer copyist errors.
