So far we’ve established:
- Jehovah’s Witnesses are not Christians, as two of the cardinal doctrines of Christianity include the Godhood of Jesus Christ and the Trinity.
- The translators of the New World Translation were not “experienced, anointed Christians” as the Watchtower Society claims – but rather untrained, inexperienced Jehovah’s Witnesses.
- It would take doctorate degrees in Greek and Hebrew to be qualified to translate the Bible
- We are unable to verify the claims of the Watchtower society on the abilities of their translators as they withhold the list of the translating committee.
- There is no good reason to withhold this list, and suggest the Watchtower Society has something to hide by concealing the names of the translators.
- Fred Franz, who served on the translating committee of the NWT, was incapable of recognizing a single Hebrew word in court, or even a single Hebrew letter – after claiming under oath he knew both Koine Greek and Hebrew.
At this point, I’ve seriously called into question the NWT. I will continue to focus on this issue today and tomorrow.
If the NWT was “translated” by men who did not know Greek and Hebrew, this means the work was probably a paraphrase, with some work done with an interlinear and a Strong’s concordance. This is not a translation, and to pass off a paraphrase as a translation is to lie – which of course is perfectly acceptable to the Watchtower Society to lie to “pagans” – despite Biblical prohibitions against lying.
Next we must look at the Greek texts of the translation. What text was it? Obviously, it was UBS, or Nestle-Aland, some drtivative of Wescott-Hort. Again, this is a major issue. However, a quick check of Acts 8:37 reveals it is assuredly a Wescott-Hort Alexandrian text.
35 Philip began to speak, and starting with this scripture, he declared to him the good news about Jesus. 36 Now as they were going along the road, they came to a body of water, and the eunuch said: “Look! Here is water; what prevents me from getting baptized?” 37 ?— — 38 With that he commanded the chariot to halt, and both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him. (NWT)
As Marc Monte describes Acts 8:37, it is the “litmus test” to reveal which manuscript family this came from – Antioch or Alexandria? Notice verse 37 is missing, which means it is from the Alexandrian family of manuscripts.
That’s a major concern. The Wescott-Hort text was created from a synthesis between Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. Where the two differed (as they do in many thousands of places), Wescott and Hort chose Vaticanus. Why? They felt immediately upon seeing it that it was the most authentic manuscript.
In other words, merely an emotional reaction determined what they felt was the most authentic manuscript. And that raises a lot of questions, as we are not allowed access to Vaticanus, but only copies. Any actual attempts to study the real Vaticanus will cause the Jesuit holding it to cover it and pull it away. So we have no idea if the Vaticanus we are allowed to examine is genuine or not.
There’s even more questions about Sinaiticus. Tischendorf was asked how he determined which text was “Authentic” and his response was truly a masterpiece of scholarly detective work. “You intuitivvely know it” is what his answer boiled down to. So, in other words, Tischendorf simply relied on a gut hunch to decide if the manuscripts he looked at were authentic or not! And so, he relied merely upon a manuscript that the monks who held it were about to burn it as it was worthless. The manuscript itself looks in amazingly good condition for a supposed 1600 year old manuscript.
To make matters worse, a suspected manuscript forger even came forward and admitted that Sinaiticus was actually his own work! Suspicion was now gone whether Constantinus Simonides was a forger or not – he had admitted it, and claimed Sinaiticus was one of his early pieces, and “Clumsy”.
So, the authenticity of the supposed “oldest and best manuscripts” is greatly called into question! And these were the two that Wescott and Hort attempted to reconcile, finding it an almost impossible task, as words, phrases, even entire verses were missing – and not always in both manuscripts. One manuscript would have part of the verse, another would have a different part – and the parts both have did not agree in wording or spelling. Sinaiticus was missing entire chapters of the Bible, and even several books! And yet Tischendorf immediately triumphed he had found the “oldest and most authentic” manuscript – miraculously, just a few days before his grant money ran out!
I call the Watchtower Society at this time to enroll a dozen men in a university to study Koine Greek and Hebrew, and obtain doctorates in these languages – and then use the Greek Manuscripts that Christians have used from the earliest church until 1881 (when Wescott and Hort did their nefarious work), and use the Textus Receptus to translate their New World Translation from. This they will not do, as the Textus Receptus clearly affirms the godhood of the Lord Jesus Christ, and more so the Trinity.
Checking my copy of the NWT, I can say that the NWT was translated using updates Kittel’s BHS instead of the Masoretic Ben Chayyim texts. Good choice, going to the work of a Nazi instead of the texts that the Jews have used for thousands of years.
In the late 19th century, scholars B. F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort compared existing Bible manuscripts and fragments as they prepared the Greek master text that they felt most closely reflected the original writings. In the mid-20th century, the New World BibleTranslation Committee used that master text as the basis for its translation. Other early papyri, thought to date back to the second and third centuries C.E., were also used. Since then, more papyri havebecome available.In addition,master texts such as those by Nestle and Aland and by the United Bible Societies reflect recent scholarly studies. Some ofthe findings of this research were incorporated into this present revision. (page 1729, NWT)
How these manuscripts are used is used is beyond me, as only one member of the translating committee had studied any Greek, and in insufficient time to be prepared for such a work.
Again, the Watchtower Society relies on the word of heretics and upon the assumption that the Textus Receptus is not the word of God, despite the textual evidence to the contrary. Over 5200 manuscripts are from the Antioch family, and only fifty are from Alexandrian. Of the lectionaries, 100% are Antiochan. Of the Manuscripts, it becomes immediately obvious that the Antioch family is the word of God, as it usually hovers around the 98% mark of them being Antioch. Quotes from the earliest Church fathers, those who lived during the times of the Apostles up until 130 AD all use the Antioch manuscripts to quote from. The testimony of the Watchtower Society is in direct opposition of the overwhelming evidence.
- Correct Doctrine 3 (matthew714ministries.wordpress.com)
- Correct Doctrine 12 (matthew714ministries.wordpress.com)
- Questions that Jehovah’s Witnesses do not like to be asked. (christianspooksite.wordpress.com)
- Why You Can’t Dismiss The KJV Lineage Of Bibles – A Case For The Majority (sdgapologeticsmin.wordpress.com)
- Why I use the King James Bible (anothersoldiercalledpreacher.wordpress.com)
- Correct Doctrine 11 (matthew714ministries.wordpress.com)
- Is Your Bible Version The Only One That Has God’s Word In It? (christiansareus.com)