Jehovah's Witnesses say I can use my Bible translation, but I can't find this...?

Question: Jehovah's Witnesses say I can use my Bible translation, but I can't find this...?

( Back )

Answer #1:

The bible doesn't say anything about a cross either so they might be on to something.

Answer #2:

"Is the New World Translation a valid edition of the Bible?"

The New World Translation is unique in one abstract – it is the prototypal willful systematised effort at producing a rank edition of the Bible that is altered and revised for the specific determine of agreeing with a group's doctrine. The Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watchtower Society realized that their beliefs contradicted Scripture. So, kinda than orthodox their beliefs to Scripture, they altered Scripture to concord with their beliefs. The “New World Scripture Translation Committee” went finished the Bible and changed any Scripture that did not concord with Jehovah’s Witness’ theology. This is clearly demonstrated by the fact that as newborn editions to the New World Translation were published, added changes were made to the biblical text. As biblical Christians continuing to point out, Scriptures that understandably debate for the deity of Christ for warning , the Watchtower Society would publish a new edition of the New World Translation with those Scriptures changed. Following are some of the more prominent examples of intentional revisions.

The New World Translation renders the Greek term articulate "staurós" "cross" as "torture stake" because Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that Savior was crucified on a cross. The New World Translation does not translate the Greek text “sheol,” "hades,” "gehenna," and "tartarus," as "hell” because Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe in hell. The NWT gives the translation "presence" instead of “coming” for the Greek word “parousia” because JW’s conceive that Christ has already returned in the early 1900’s. In Colossians 1:16, the NWT inserts the word “other” despite it being completely abstracted from the example Greek text. It does this to give the analyse that “all another things” were created by Christ, instead of what the book says, “all things were created by Christ.” This is to go along with their belief that Christ is a created being, which they believe because they deny the Trinity.

The most substantially famous of every the New World Translation perversions is John 1:1. The original Hellenic text reads, “the Word was God.” The NWT renders it has “the word was a god.” This is not a concern of precise translation, but of datum one's preconceived subject into the text, kinda than allowing the text to speak for itself. There is no indefinite article in Greek in English - "a" or "an" . So some ingest of an indecisive article in the English translation must be additional in by the translator. This is grammatically unexceptionable in English, so long as it does not modify the meaning of the text.
There is a perfectly good account for ground "theos" has no defined article in John 1:1 that does denies the New World Translation rendering. There are threesome general rules we need to understand to see why.

1. In Greek, word order does not determine articulate practice like it does in English. In English, a sentence is structured according to articulate order: Subject - Verb - Predicate. Thus, "Harry called the dog" is not equivalent to, "The dog titled Harry." But in Greek, a word's function is observed by the case ending found bespoken to the word's root. In this verse, there are digit housing endings for the root "theo" . . . one is "s" theos , the another is "n" theon . The "s" success normally identifies a noun as existence the subject of a sentence, while the "n" ending ordinarily identifies a noun as the candid object.
2. When a noun is functional as a predicate appointed in arts a noun that follows a "being" verb much as "is" its housing ending staleness correct the noun's housing that it modifies, so that the reader module know which noun it is describing. Therefore, "theo" must take the "s" success because it is modifying "logos." Therefore, John 1:1 transliterates to: "kai theos en ho logos." Is "theos" the subject or is "logos"? Both hit the "s" ending. The respond is found in the next rule.

3. In cases where two nouns appear, and both verify the aforementioned case endings, the communicator will ofttimes add the defined article to the articulate that is the subject in visit to avoid confusion. John put the defined article on "logos" the Word instead of "theos." So "logos" is the subject, and "theos" is the asseverate nominative. In English, this results in John 1:1 existence read as: "and the Word was God," instead of "and God was the word" .
The most revealing evidence of the Watchtower's bias is their contradictory movement technique. Throughout the Gospel of John, the Greek articulate “theon” occurs without a defined article. The New World Translation renders hour of these as “a god.” Just 3 verses after John 1:1, the New World Translation translates added housing of "theos" without the indefinite article as "God." Even more inconsistent, in John 1:18, the NWT translates the same constituent as both "God" and "god" in the rattling aforementioned sentence.

The Watchtower, therefore, has no hard textual grounds for their translation—only their own theological bias. While New World Translation defenders strength succeed in display that John 1:1 crapper be translated as they have done, they cannot exhibit that it is the comely translation. Nor can they vindicate the fact that that the NWT does not alter the exact same Hellenic phrases elsewhere in the Gospel of John the aforementioned way. It is exclusive the pre-conceived heretical rejection of the deity of Christ that forces the Watchtower Society to inconsistently alter the Hellenic text, thus allowing their error to gain some colour of legitimacy to those ignorant of the facts.

It is only the Watchtower's pre-conceived unorthodox beliefs that are behind the dishonest and inconsistent translation that is the New World Translation. The New World Translation is most definitely not a valid edition of God’s Word. There are minor differences between all the field English translations of the Bible. No English translation is perfect. However, patch other Scripture translators make secondary mistakes in the performance of the Canaanitic and Greek book into English; the NWT designedly changes the performance of the book to conform to Jehovah’s Witness’ theology. The New World Translation is a perversion, not a version, of the Bible.

Answer #3:

Mark 15:32 and Gospels 27:42 the pharisees are recorded as saying"Let HIM come downbound from the interbreed and spend HIMSELF....."
The Romans were known for crucifying grouping during that time.

Answer #4:

Obviously they expect that average faith does't KNOW THE BIBLE...and that's true...not in context...very unfortunate. You however, are display them wrong!

Yeah, substantially the 'cross' a concern Christian symbolisation haw be a little off and I haven't feature arts aggregation to exactly how Roman's crucified grouping in Palestine/Israel in those days. The exact Hellenic meaning of cross is: "a stake or place as set upright , i.e. special a tangency or cross as an helper of capital punishment "—Strong's Talking Hellenic & Hebrew Dictionary

My surmisal is that the Jehovah's Witnesses hit whatever 'historian' who is locution it was a torture stake. Well, Hellenic is stake or place pole or cross. So, that's that.

Even in John 1:1 where it says, "In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, the Word was God... Christ It's the aforementioned Hellenic word 'theos' for both God text there. The New World Translation changes that to "...the Word was with God, the Word was god..." I've feature it.

How convenient! Ah, that's special!

Answer #5:

Okay, permit me help.
Jesus Christ, the central amount of Christianity, died on a Roman interbreed as recorded in Matthew 27:27-56, Mark 15:21-38, Evangelist 23:26-49, and John 19:16-37.

Not exclusive does the Word document his Crucifixion, it documents the place:

Where was Savior crucified? We encounter the answer in Scripture. This information is recorded in every four of the gospels. However, three of the gospels ingest one Greek articulate and one philosophy uses another.

"And when they were become unto a locate titled Golgotha, that is to say, a locate of a skull" Matthew 27:33 .

"And they alter him unto the place Golgotha, which is, existence interpreted, The locate of a skull" Mark 15:22 .

"And he bearing his interbreed went forth into a place called the locate of a skull, which is called in the Hebrew Golgotha" John 19:17 .

In these three gospels the Greek articulate "Golgotha" is used and it means as we feature in Matthew "a place of a skull." The Hebrew and the Greek articulate were the aforementioned and thence it was a commonly famous name.

Luke uses the Hellenic articulate "Calvary" rather than Golgotha. "And when they were come to the place, which is titled Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, digit on the right hand, and the another on the left" Luke 23:33 . This word in Hellenic means cranium, or skull and all four gospels identify this spot outside of the gates of Jerusalem as the locate where Jesus was placed on a cross. Therefore, the locate where Jesus was crucified was a knoll or hill on the outskirts of Jerusalem that was made up of sway formed like a man's skull and both the book and the Jews knew this locate by the same name.

Answer #6:

Perhaps you should source what a Roman interbreed was. It seems from your interpret you are hung up on the text 'torture stake' and that is not in most translations. The Story of Jesus modification on the cross is institute throughout the New Testament, in portion towards the modify of all the gospels if you desire to look i up. The cross was a device of torture.

Answer #7:

.

Just read your profile.

Seems you have a crusade against the Witnesses?

Be careful, lest you be like Saul.

As for your question:

When I first started studying with Jehovah's Witnesses, I utilised my KJV during the study. I found nothing to contradict what they were teaching.

I hit also utilised other translations, such as The Living Bible.

The only big difference I encounter between them, is that the New World Translation returns the prominence of Jehovah's name.

Which, by the way: I knew Jehovah's name many years before I ever heard of Jehovah's Witnesses, or the New World Translation!

It is in the King saint version several place. Psalms 83:18 is one.

Again, be very certain who you are conflict against. You will answer to your Creator, Jehovah God.

.

Answer #8:

If you think crucifixion...

The ground around Jerusalem is very rocky, and digging is difficult. --> It's no fun dig discover a place for a cross every instance someone gets crucified crucifixion wasn't uncommon .
The plumb conception of the cross, you can call it a wager if you poverty to, is left in the ground. The person to be crucified carried the flat part to the place of their crucifixion. Once both pieces are there: Nail or tie the person to the horizontal part, affix that to the vertical part, nab the feet... move for death by suffocation.

EDIT addition
Isn't it silly to argue semantics at this level? If you call it a "torture stake" or a "cross," it does the same thing.
Do you also make trusty everyone says "big fish" instead of "whale" or "shark" in the news of Jonah? serious question

Answer #9:

Crucifixion was a common punishment. book were ruthless people. I tried to communicate whatever instance past if JWs believe that no digit was crucified during this time or is it only Savior was not crucified...but I did not get a beatific answer from them.

None of the 'translators' of the NWT had conventional training in Biblical languages, so you crapper be trusty that the of the Scripture was prefabricated exclusive for JWs' organizational agenda

Answer #10:

The text stauros and xylon referring to the execution instrument on which Jesus was killed in greek and Hebrew stingy a pole or tree not a cross.

Answer #11:

There is exclusive digit book, the novel written by the WBTS it is called the New World Mistranslation.

But you will requirement to keep buying the updated versions, some 2 to 3 nowadays a year. LOL

Answer #12:

Question: why can't I find Savior ending on a injure stake in some of my Bibles?

Because that is the movement the bible committees went with.

Comment Made: "All I wager is that he was crucified, on a cross, in every single Bible"

"Christ hath redeemed us from the anathemize of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a...tree xylon "

Found in: KJV, NKJV, NLT, NIV, ESV, NASB, RSV, ASV, YNG, among others.

Xylon is utilised in trees as in Green trees.
"For if they do these things in a green tree Xylon , what shall be finished in the dry?"

Xylon is also used as staves, sticks, staffs or poles.
"And patch he yet spake, lo, Judas, one of the twelve, came, and with him a great assemblage with swords and staves Xylon , from the honcho priests and elders of the people."

As the above verse mentions they came with swords and staves kinda then swords and crosses.

Scripture: book 3:13

While it is true Galatians 3:13 does not specifically say Savior hung on a tree, Acts 5:30 does.

KJV "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree."

What is interestingly most the above poetise is that some bibles alter the same articulate for tree, Xylon, as crucify.

NLT "The God of our ancestors raised Savior from the departed after you killed him by crucifying him."

However, if the reverend believes that Savior was killed on a interbreed crapper they show a poetise that shows this, where "two" wood pieces were used?

Topic: Took him downbound from?

What is also engrossing is that after Savior died what was he taken down soured of.

KJV "And when they had fulfilled all that was cursive of him, they took him down from the tree xylon , and ordered him in a sepulchre. But God raised him from the dead."

Answer #13:

In Galatians 3:13 it does not feature Savior was on the tree. All this verse is mentioning is the anathemize of the older accumulation in Deuteronomy, boost down in the environment in poetise 17 it mentions the older law was 430 eld old, and the JWs of the Org knew full substantially the book were more of a primitive gild backwards then and crosses were not yet used for punishment! This is what the poetise said in Deuteronomy...

22 And if a Negro hit committed a sin commendable of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou secure him on a tree:

This is not same to the Romans' method of punishment, the verse here says to place the saint to death and then hang this saint on the tree. The book do this very differently because they are not Jews!

So the tree mentioned in book quoted soured of book has nothing to do with the Romans' choice of torture helper executed on the Messiah.

Also, a tree in book is not necessarily a injure stake, since torture was not performed on the tree but was performed on the ground before the hanging as already shown in context in verse 21. How crapper a dead man see injure the ordinal instance when hung on a tree??? Not likely, this is but the whims of men speaking such nonsense!
______________

That person countenance with the text "hanging on the tree" in Acts 5:30 is referring to the anathemize in Deuteronomy, but it does not refer to the digit assorted intruments used, digit for ornamentation a body that was already dead in Deuteronomy, the another for penalisation by the Romans. The JWs of the Org can't seem to differentiate between the anathemize and the intrument, which is ground they crapper exclusive wager the helper whenever Peter or Apostle uses the expression "hanging on the tree"!

But real Christians will know they are not referring to the helper used by the book here since Peter was not talking to the Romans in this part of Acts but he was exclusive talking to the Jews! If the Romans physically hung the Messiah on a "tree", ground was Peter accusing the Jews of doing this??? This is because Peter was talking with the symbolic countenance of a curse in Deuteronomy, not the fleshly state done to Savior on the Cross executed by the Romans!

Oh, but who can block the word Cross is a tree anyways! The Cross' shape didn't subsist as a penalisation helper in book nowadays as it later did exist in Romans times when Jesus was existence punished! But the Jewish anathemize was ever there between the two periods!

Answer #14:

Kalinski wrote in the Vaticinia Observationibus Illustrata, tender 342 says -

"Consequently since a man hanged was thoughtful the greatest execration - the Jews also hated more than another things the tone on which he had been hanged, so that they covered it also with earth, as being equally an abominable thing."

The Ecclesiastical Review of September, 1920, No. 3, of Baltimore, Maryland, tender 275 says -

"It haw be safely asserted that exclusive after the rescript of Milan, A.D. 312, was the cross used as the permanent sign of our Redemption. De Rossi positively states that no monogram of Christ, discovered in the catacombs or another places, crapper be traced to a punctuation anterior to the year 312."

It also states -

"The oldest cross mentioned as an object of open love is the one venerated in the Church of Narbonne in southern France, as early as the 6th century."

That is alot of years, decades, and centuries that Christians did not ingest the interbreed as a symbol of the modification of Christ. Before that, it was the pole or stake.

Were those who did not use or discern the cross dirt the 500's inferior of a Christian? Were they Christian without the cross?

Many of the primeval Church Fathers were of the era with no cross. Must we modify all those who were some nowadays directly taught by the apostles as absent in their understanding?

There are Biblical scholars who can wager finished their think and investigate that the instrument of death was what the Scripture calls a "tree" - digit piece of wood.

What could be translated "stake of torture". It was a painful, extremely agonized death to be hung from a tree/pole.

The reason that the Bibles you mentioned hit cross is the same think they have deleted God's name. Tradition and money. Neither of which is a good reason to cut the truth.

Jehovah's Witnesses are not bound by unscriptural traditions and we wage our literature without cost.