NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES PDF

adminComment(0)

Read and listen to the Bible online, or download free audio recordings and sign- language videos of the Bible. The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. The books of the Bible, listed in order and by chapter, so you find verses quickly. The New World Translation is an accurate, easy-to-read Holy Bible. View or Download copies of the bible known as the New World Translation of the Holy New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures ( Revision). New.


New World Translation Of The Holy Scriptures Pdf

Author:SALLY CATTANO
Language:English, Indonesian, Dutch
Country:Cyprus
Genre:Art
Pages:319
Published (Last):20.05.2016
ISBN:308-1-28820-923-7
ePub File Size:16.80 MB
PDF File Size:13.85 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Sign up for free]
Downloads:48259
Uploaded by: LEZLIE

The Revised New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, published by Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, is now available for downloading. Modern language Bible translation, edition. Available for download at www. fullegodigo.gq under Bible. New World translation of the Holy Scriptures with references, rendered from Topics Bible Borrow this book to access EPUB and PDF files.

Douglas Walsh v. The following is from the trial transcript: - Q : Insofar as translation of the Bible itself is undertaken, are you responsible for that?

A : I have been authorized to examine a translation and determine its accuracy and recommend its acceptance in the form in which it is submitted. Later, Franz was asked about his own involvement in the translating Douglas Walsh v. A : Again I cannot answer that question Here, under oath, Franz refused to confirm or deny he was the translator of the Hebrew text. Why wouldn't he say that he did not translate the Old Testament? The court also wondered "why" and asked ibid Q : Why the secrecy?

A : Because the committee of translation wanted it to remain anonymous and not seek any glory or honour at the making of a translation, and having any names attached thereto. Why is it the writers of the New Testament books identified their authorship by their names, we know they were not seeking honor.

The facts speak for themselves. The real reason would be that the translators could not be checked since they had no qualifications and anyone investigating this could not find anyone to assume responsibility for the translation. A shrewd plan indeed. According to Raymond Franz, only Fred Franz had "sufficient knowledge of the Bible languages to attempt translation of this kind. This book is primarily based on research from the helpful Kingdom Interlinear Translation.

The Tetragrammaton and the Christian Greek Scriptures. This page book is the most comprehensive study of the Tetragrammaton and the Christian Greek Scriptures available today, as it evaluates early Greek manuscripts and related historic documents.

The book includes an exhaustive study of the Jehovah references from the Kingdom Interlinear Translation , a complete explanation of the Jehovah footnote references in the Kingdom Interlinear Translation , a fascinating review of the writings of the patristics church fathers and their awareness of the divine name, and a wealth of appendix information related to the divine name and the Christian Greek Scriptures.

This page book gives a fascinating insight into the divine name as it occurs in the Hebrew Versions J 17 and J These two versions were used as important "J" documents in the translation of the New World Translation Greek Scriptures.

The questions this short book asks are these: Jehovah in the New Testament. Has new evidence finally been found showing the presence of the Tetragrammaton in early Christian Scripture manuscripts? This short book is a response to Matteo Pierro's work.

A Field Service Encounter. Though it was a topic rarely discussed in field service, the first time Mike heard the statement, it sounded unusual. This morning, it struck him with remarkable force. An apartment resident challenged the subject of the Tetragrammaton. This page book tells the story of Mike's dilemma as he searches for an answer. They were identifying God as the Lord they were talking about, and so how does a translator make that clear?

Account Options

We give a list of these in the footnote. We next come to expressions and allusions that Lundquist has missed. In fact, he does not seem to reach beyond the thought of 'quotations' despite quoting from the NWT Reference Edition Appendix 1D on page 40 of his book, [TCGS] which includes the phrase, "quoted verses, passages and expressions from the Hebrew Scriptures.

He then begins his summary of this topic by saying, We have now considered all of Lundquist's references in 4 groups of 35, 17, 6 and Our survey has clearly established that the identity in every case is shown to be Jehovah God the Father, and not the Lord Jesus Christ.

It is therefore quite wrong of Lundquist to say, "The remaining Jehovah instances rely solely on Hebrew translations made after We clearly explained in The Tetragrammaton and the Christian Greek Scriptures why we were conservative in reporting the number of verses quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures which identify Jehovah. However, we could willingly concede that 'Your Word is Truth' is entirely correct regarding the number of verses quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures which identify Jehovah.

From our point of view, it would cause no difficulty if it could be shown that The Tetragrammaton and the Christian Greek Scriptures was entirely too conservative in the number it listed. If every reference to these Jehovah passages in the Christian Greek Scriptures could be clearly identified as a references to Jehovah in the Hebrew Scriptures, then the argument for the so called "deity of Jesus" would be that much stronger.

First Peter has long been a contested verse. At the very least, almost all concede that the verse is an allusion to Isaiah However, 1 Peter is listed as an uncontested quotation from Isaiah which suggests that Peter would be making reference to Isaiah in the following verse.

Nonetheless, the translator of the J17 Hebrew version considers it to be a quotation as evidenced by his use of the Tetragrammaton. Finally, J20 also recognizes it as a quotation from Isaiah Thus, by their own criteria, this verse which is clearly understood by a Hebrew Scripture reader to be referring to Jehovah, would be saying "But sanctify the Christ as Jehovah in YOUR hearts.

Essentially the same argument could also be made for 1 Peter which says, ".

See the information on our Contributions page for confirmation of the Tetragrammaton in Hebrew versions for both 1 Peter and 1 Peter For other interesting uses of the Tetragrammaton in Hebrew versions, see the additional examples on this same Contributions page. Now the real issue comes into focus.

Conclusion on the New World Transation

To greatly simplify this debate, we can say that there are two opposite points of view. The one point of view says that Jesus was created by the Father and does not share his nature.

The other says that Jesus is eternal and thus has the same nature as the Father. Without taking a position as to which point of view may be correct, we realize that these two points of view must handle Hebrew Scripture references containing the Tetragrammaton quite differently when they are cited in the Christian Scriptures.

For one to whom Jesus is a created being, when a verse from the Hebrew Scriptures identifies a unique attribute of Jehovah, it must be applied to none other than the Father when it is cited in the Christian Scriptures.

On the other hand, to one who believes that the Father and Jesus are both eternal, an attribute which exclusively describes Jehovah in the Hebrew Scriptures may be applied to Jesus in the Christian Scriptures. From the perspective of this second point of view, merely stating that a verse was a reference to Jehovah in the Hebrew Scriptures does not say that under inspiration, the Christian Scriptures cannot use it in reference to Jesus as Lord.

There is a corollary to the statement in the paragraph above. From the point of view that Jesus was created by the Father, there must be a strong separation between the word kurios in the Christian Scriptures when it is applied to Jehovah of the Hebrew Scriptures and Jesus as Lord in the Christian Scriptures.

1984 New World Translation-PDF

This is not the case from the point of view that the Father and Jesus share equal attributes. Certainly, there are times when one or the other is being identified [TCGS]. Yet, from the second point of view, because there is no inequity between the two sharing the same title "Kurios" in the Christian Scriptures, it is the context within the Christian Scripture alone which determines as much as possible to whom the Christian Scripture writer intended to apply it.

I need to restate what I just said. At present I am not saying that one or the other of these points of view is correct. I am merely reporting the way in which each point of view must handle a reference to the divine name as kurios in the Christian Scriptures.

For one point of view, the use of kurios with the meaning of Jehovah from the Septuagint must be restricted to the Father alone. For the other point of view, it may apply to either the Father or Jesus and needs only the precision given to it by the Christian Scripture writer.

That precision may be added by having Jesus use kurios in reference to the Father, in which case we understand that he is addressing Jehovah.

In contrast, the precision may come from combining Jesus' name with kurios and we understand it to be a title of the "Lord Jesus. There is, however, a mistake translators from both sides of this debate often make. Each frequently resorts to their own theology to resolve the conflict.

May I suggest that theology is not the way in which this conflict should be resolved? Rather, both points of view must allow the Christian Scripture writers to say exactly that which they intended to say. Where they were precise in their use of kurios, the translator must convey that precision so the English reader can see the meaning intended by the original writer.

However, when the original writer did not add precision to the word kurios, then the translator is in error to alter the translation to explain which "Lord" his theology says is being described.

So too, the New Testament translator who wants to assure his readers that Jesus is more than what the word kurios tells them in a specific passage is equally in error when he adds qualities to the "Lord" Jesus which are not expressed by the original writer.

When precision is rightfully included in the translation, it must be added in the same way as it was originally described by the Christian Scripture author.

If the Scripture writer qualified kurios with a second word such as "Father" or "Jesus," then that word must be used. If the original writer qualified it with a term such as "God," the translation must be exact without substituting the divine name.

If the original writer qualified it only with context, or stated it as being a quotation from the Hebrew Scriptures, then the English translator must restate kurios with its English equivalent and let the translation of the context alone guide the reader.

If the original author did not qualify a statement, the translator is not at liberty to insert his own qualification such as "[other]" in order to correct the Scripture author. Jason BeDuhn has much to say on the subject of bias in his book Truth in Translation. It is well worth reading. There is a high risk encountered in bringing personal or sectarian theology to Bible translation. This is not legitimate Bible translation. It becomes misleading Bible interpretation in the guise of translation.

It is not improper to interpret Scripture. Every group is free to do that. However, it is improper to produce a Bible translation which appears to make the original author agree with the theology of the group publishing that Bible version. A written document is not smooth when every "she," "it," "they," "here," "that," and similar words particularly adjectives must be qualified in order to remove uncertainty.

In order to produce a written document which is easy to read, most writers allow some ambiguity and trust the reader to understand the sense based on context and logic. If, for example, a "he" is doing obedience to a "him" in a Gospel account, we understand that the "he" must be someone in the context of the account, and allow logic to identify the "him" as Jesus since we would not expect Jesus to be doing homage to another man. The inordinate demand on precision is what often makes technical writing cumbersome to read.

Read a U. Patent to understand why percent precision is not the writing style of the Christian Scriptures!

Historical Watchtower Publications

In concluding this section, there is something the reader should consider. How much complexity does it require to support one or the other of the two points of view described above? In the one case, it requires the existence of original Greek manuscripts which have never been discovered, it must be supported by historical evidence which is beyond verification, it requires a specialized explanation of Christians altering the original text in the second and third centuries C.

It is exactly this kind of complexity which has produced the book we are reviewing. Look at the chapter contents of 'Your Word is Truth'.

The chapter titles identify some of the complexities which must be defended in order for the point of view presented in the New World Translation to have credence. Of course, some translations have more bias than others. And finally, each translation acceptable to one or the other group may have more—or less—bias in a particular area.

Certainly, there are inherent complexities in every theology.

This is true of a theology which understands that God became a man, just as there are inherent complexities in a theology which explains biblical redemption apart from divine sacrifice.

My statement is limited to complexities in the use of the text in which one point of view requires numerous qualifications added to the text, whereas the other point of view is satisfied by reading the text as written by the original author.

Let's return to our evaluation of 'Your Word is Truth'. But the situation is made much worse by a further serious flaw in Lundquist's argument, which causes him to take up a large amount of space quite unnecessarily.

There are indeed many "telltale traces" of this, which Lundquist denies, some of which can be picked up from clues still remaining in those Hebrew translations. The only evidence which exists from over 5, Greek manuscripts shows no indication of any kind that the Tetragrammaton was ever used in the Christian Scriptures. The Watchtower Society is forthright in telling you that there is no manuscript evidence. For reference, see Aid to Bible Understanding, pages The only "evidence" is conjecture.Though there is more under this sub-heading on which I could comment, I will close with Anthony Byatt's statement regarding the translation principles of the New World Translation.

I began to appreciate more than ever before how vitally important context was in discerning the meaning of any part of Scripture, and that realization seemed to be true of others of the group who were working regularly on the Aid project. What are Hebrew Versions?

This page book is the most comprehensive study of the Tetragrammaton and the Christian Greek Scriptures available today, as it evaluates early Greek manuscripts and related historic documents. Please remember, however, that material quoted in our books belongs to the original author or publisher and is protected by their copyrights. He is merely describing the process as he envisions it.

Philippians , by David Jakubovic Please also note that even though our books do not argue a theological position regarding the deity of Jesus, the statement "only of God" is most certainly supportive of that position when kurios and pantokrator are used together. In future days I was to remind him of these statements on more than one occasion during Governing Body sessions. The more I looked up information in these commentaries, however, the more deeply impressed I was by the firm belief in the divine inspiration of the Scriptures the vast majority expressed.

CHRISSY from Waterbury
See my other articles. I have always been a very creative person and find it relaxing to indulge in toe wrestling. I relish reading comics well .
>