God knows it better than any mortal He fixed his bible here in these last days=The New world translation-- The unbias Greek scholars who knew koine Greek and translated a god at John 1:1--what about them? Like Abner Kneeland who compared Koine Greek to English in his translation-1822 and put a god. So some of these Greek scholars are liars. And bible proof and the teachings of Jesus prove 100% its the ones you listen to.
Who is the creator
- Thread starter Keiw1
- Start date
There has controversy for a very long time. Plus information wasnt so easy to get back then. Catholicism hid much of it in their archives.
In the early 60,s The JW,s were allowed in the archives. They came out with 100% proof the 3 witness bearers are the spirit, water and blood--not the Father, son and holy spirit as Catholicism translated in. They translated in many errors. Then the JW,s were never allowed back in for exposing that Catholicism lie.
TibiasDad
Active Member
By whom were these translations made. My research has found that the Rotherham Bible was an early influence on CT Russell, the founder of what is now the JWs.
What is interesting is the Rotherman Bible has “the Word was God” per the JW website.
Doug
Attachments
Yes error filled translation was used in the earlier years. Finding facts was not so easy back in the early years, it took alot of hard study by many men for years and years. They worshipped Jesus, celebrated holidays--They did however know Jesus enough to know that killing one another by standing on both sides of wars of hatred was not a display of love amongst themselves in front of all creation to witness, And were branded cowards by those in darkness, that is one of the true marks, and went to prison instead of murdering each other in the wars of hatred like ww1. The light grew brighter at the proper time( Matt 24:45)= When God willed a truth known. And another true mark the darkness as well cannot see=1Cor 1:10=Unity of thought( all of Gods 1 truth) - no division=1 single religion has Jesus.
They used the error filled kjv for years as well.
TibiasDad
Active Member
The JWs are endorsing this Bible by posting it on their website! Why would they post it without statements of discrediting its translation of John 1:1?
Doug
TibiasDad
Active Member
But this is why the Watchtower chose to make their own version, because Rotherman and the Authorized Version both translated John 1:1 as “the Word was God”, which is inconvenient for teaching the very opposite meaning.
JW: We believe that Jesus is not God, but is rather “a god” of lesser rank.
Listener: What does your Bible say he is?
JW: Well it says “the Word was God” but that is not a correct translation.
JW to partner JW: We gotta do something about this; it’s getting to be a real problem!
Doug
TibiasDad
Active Member
The Quakers didn’t go either, but they believe Jesus is God as well. (I know, I was one for many years.)
Doug
charismaticlady
Active Member
I also have a copy of the Wycliffe Bible, c 1382
In the beginning was the word, and the word was at God, and God was the word. This was in the beginning at God.
TibiasDad
Active Member
Kneeland didn’t even believe in the God of the Bible. He was a Universalist whose views were so radical that the Universalist kicked him out because he said ‘the Universalist's Christian God was "nothing more than a chimera of their own imagination".’
Doug
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Awe, golly gee.... and I was starting to listen to you.
praise_yeshua
Active Member
If you going to expect people to take you seriously, then you can't say things like this.
These "archives" you're talking about haven't been around for very long. Vatican City was founded in 1929. We have digital copies of the most important collections of early church history and most of the originals are not in "Vatican archives".
Codex Vaticanus isn't really needed at all. Codex Alexandrinus is far more important. You shouldn't be listening to these "elders" that are leading you astray.
Where has your elder told you that you belong? At the end of the line?
praise_yeshua
Active Member
There is so much misinformation about the Wycliffe edition that it really gets me upset. For example
What is the Wycliffe Bible? | GotQuestions.org
What is the Wycliffe Bible? Was the Wycliffe Bible a good and accurate translation of the Bible?
www.gotquestions.org
It really is "crazy" how people will believe just anything they read. There was no Vulgate in 1382. There was a loose framework of variant Latin manuscripts that varied slightly from manuscript to manuscript. Jerome could not finish the so called "Vulgate" because he didn't have the manuscripts to complete the task. That is how rare such manuscripts were that even the "Catholic church" couldn't spend their way to get what they wanted....
So many assumptions with very little real scholarship.
Last edited:
No reputable Koine Greek scholar has agreed with the JW that the NWT is a good translation though
I do not think Dr Wallace,Dr metzger, Burgeon e, Dr Mantey etc were catholic scholars
or Pastor Russell
What gets really interesting is the JW Kingdom interlinear itself stated in the Greek text of John 20:28 that Thomas stated and called jesus the 'God and lord of me"
charismaticlady
Active Member
Nothing to get upset about or try to provoke me. That's a trespass, by the way. I forgive you. You didn't seem to know that the only thing I'm proving is K's mistaken belief that all Bibles before 1879 had "a" god in John 1:1 regarding the Word. They don't. I'm just helping Doug.There is so much misinformation about the Wycliffe edition that it really gets me upset. For example
What is the Wycliffe Bible? | GotQuestions.org
What is the Wycliffe Bible? Was the Wycliffe Bible a good and accurate translation of the Bible?www.gotquestions.org
It really is "crazy" how people will believe just anything they read. There was no Vulgate in 1382. There was a loose framework of variant Latin manuscripts that varied slightly from manuscript to manuscript. Jerome could not finish the so called "Vulgate" because he didn't have the manuscripts to complete the task. That is how rare such manuscripts were that even the "Catholic church" couldn't spend their way to get what they wanted....
So many assumptions with very little real scholarship.
py, I have a lot of old Bibles, but the only modern translation from Westcott and Hort I have is the NASB from before the KNJV came out and I bought in 1985.
If I have a question, I check Young's Literal translation. And if I still have a question, I ask God, and most of the time am given the answer immediately, unless He wants me to keep searching to show myself approved. You know, lexicons etc.
Last edited:
TibiasDad
Active Member
FreeInChrist
Active Member
FreeInChrist
Active Member
Actually I think I could answer that but wont because I dont want to give them any ideas.
Similar threads
