Comparing K.J.B. with N.W.T.

[placebofactor]

This is a direct challenge, verse by verse of the N.W.T., and the King James Bible. I am not going to give an opinion. You can compare and decide which Bible is true to the word. I will be using an 1824 and 2015 King James Bibles. As for the N.W.T., I have the 1971, 1984, and 2013 editions. Their first copyright came out in 1961. Before 1961 the Witnesses used a K.J.B.

Okay, let’s get started.
We should all agree on this. The original language of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew and a few verses were written in Chaldean. The New Testament was originally penned in Greek.
The foundation source for the K.J.B. is the Textus Receptus or Received Text. The translation of the text of all ancient known Papyrus Fragments, Uncials, Cursives, and Lectionaries, collectively are known as the "Receptus Textus" and the "Masoretic text." Their number, 5,500 copies, plus 86,000 quotations or allusions to the Scriptures by early Church Fathers. There are another 45 document sources for the N.W.T., although they list 94 in the 1984 edition. The N.W.T. two main sources are the "B" Vatican manuscripts 1209, and the A. or, "Aleph Sinaiticus."

Let’s begin with Philippians 2:8-9-10-11.

Verse 8 in K.J.B. ends with “death of the cross.”
Verse 8, N.W.T. ends with, “death on a torture stake.”

Verse 9 in the N.W.T. ends with a comma “,”.
Verse 9 in the K.J.B. ends with a colon: I hope you understand the difference between the two. The N.W.T. is the only Bible that ends verse 9 with a comma.

Also, note as you read these verses, they have added the word (other) and put it in brackets in the 1984 edition, but removed the brackets in the 1971 or 2013 editions, making it part of the verse. Adding the word (other) gives a reader the impression that the name of Jesus is second to the name Jehovah. In their Interlinear translation, their Greek reads, “over every name.”

Also, "(at) the name of Jesus" has been changed to "(in) the name of Jesus.
"Bow a knee" has been changed to "bend," and "confess" has been changed to "acknowledge."

Bend is not a New Testament word. In the O.T. it is used strictly for “bending or stringing a bow.” To bow a knee is to pay homage or worship. Compare with Romans 14:11, As I live, said the LORD, every knee shall bow to me,” Same word in Philippians.

In English, "bend," means to change shape, or change someone's will, to yield or submit. To yield or submit is not to worship. This change of words chips away at the glory of the Lord Jesus.
Compare verses below:

K.J.B.
Philippians 2: 9-10-11, "God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth and things under the earth; (semi colon) And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

N.W.T.
Philippians 2:9-10-11, “For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every (other) name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, (coma) and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.
Your comments on the above.

[onewithhim]

Thank you Difflugia.

Here onewithhim, you can see Rev 1:9.
Rev 1:7, states about Jesus coming with the clouds and every eye will see Him.
Rev 1:8 speaks of, who is, who was, and who is to come.
Rev 1:9 read as, the author patient waiting for Jesus.
Before and after verse 8, refer to Jesus, how come verse 8 not?

You thanked Difflugia and he just backed up the fact that the verses we were discussing say that "the Word was a god." So says the 1864 version. Looks like the 1942 version was changed a bit. Didn't you say previously that the older renderings were superior to the more modern ones? Now are you changing your mind?

Remember that it is God who gave Revelation to John through Jesus. God speaks directly many times in Revelation; you could say all of Revelation comes from Jehovah. Is it so far-fetched to say that Rev. 1:8 is spoken by God Himself? It's His book!

As I've said to you before I relied on the English translation of the author in the right side. That's what Benjamin understand the Greek in English. Didn't you see the link I've sent you?
The Emphatic Diaglott, a famous example, is a Bible translation that displays the original Greek text alongside a word-for-word English translation. https://www.google.com/search?q=diaglot ... e&ie=UTF-8

Then if you interpret it as Father who said it. Is Jesus wrong by saying John 5:37?

John 5:37-38
37 "And the Father who sent Me, He has borne witness of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.
NASB

I don't see how that fits in with what has been said here.

Yes, let us be plain here, is Jesus words in John 5:37 correct or wrong to you?

Of course his words are correct, as I've told you before. Explain what your point is.

[Capbook]

You thanked Difflugia and he just backed up the fact that the verses we were discussing say that "the Word was a god." So says the 1864 version. Looks like the 1942 version was changed a bit. Didn't you say previously that the older renderings were superior to the more modern ones? Now are you changing your mind?

Remember that it is God who gave Revelation to John through Jesus. God speaks directly many times in Revelation; you could say all of Revelation comes from Jehovah. Is it so far-fetched to say that Rev. 1:8 is spoken by God Himself? It's His book!

As I've said to you before I relied on the English translation of the author in the right side. That's what Benjamin understand the Greek in English. Didn't you see the link I've sent you?
The Emphatic Diaglott, a famous example, is a Bible translation that displays the original Greek text alongside a word-for-word English translation. https://www.google.com/search?q=diaglot ... e&ie=UTF-8

Then if you interpret it as Father who said it. Is Jesus wrong by saying John 5:37?

John 5:37-38
37 "And the Father who sent Me, He has borne witness of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.
NASB

I don't see how that fits in with what has been said here.

Yes, let us be plain here, is Jesus words in John 5:37 correct or wrong to you?

Of course his words are correct, as I've told you before. Explain what your point is.

So, Rev 1:8 is not the voice of the Father, or John 5:37 will become wrong to you?

[onewithhim]

As I've said to you before I relied on the English translation of the author in the right side. That's what Benjamin understand the Greek in English. Didn't you see the link I've sent you?
The Emphatic Diaglott, a famous example, is a Bible translation that displays the original Greek text alongside a word-for-word English translation. https://www.google.com/search?q=diaglot ... e&ie=UTF-8

Then if you interpret it as Father who said it. Is Jesus wrong by saying John 5:37?

John 5:37-38
37 "And the Father who sent Me, He has borne witness of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.
NASB

I don't see how that fits in with what has been said here.

Yes, let us be plain here, is Jesus words in John 5:37 correct or wrong to you?

Of course his words are correct, as I've told you before. Explain what your point is.

So, Rev 1:8 is not the voice of the Father, or John 5:37 will become wrong to you?

I asked you to kindly explain your thought. I don't understand what you're getting to.

[Capbook]

I don't see how that fits in with what has been said here.

Yes, let us be plain here, is Jesus words in John 5:37 correct or wrong to you?

Of course his words are correct, as I've told you before. Explain what your point is.

So, Rev 1:8 is not the voice of the Father, or John 5:37 will become wrong to you?

I asked you to kindly explain your thought. I don't understand what you're getting to.

Do you find it difficult?
John 5:37 speaks about no one heard the voice of the Father anytime. You believe that is correct, maybe as of now. I believe you will change your tune when ask;
Whose voice then that said " I am the Alpha and the Omega" in Rev 1:8?

[onewithhim]

Yes, let us be plain here, is Jesus words in John 5:37 correct or wrong to you?

Of course his words are correct, as I've told you before. Explain what your point is.

So, Rev 1:8 is not the voice of the Father, or John 5:37 will become wrong to you?

I asked you to kindly explain your thought. I don't understand what you're getting to.

Do you find it difficult?
John 5:37 speaks about no one heard the voice of the Father anytime. You believe that is correct, maybe as of now. I believe you will change your tune when ask;
Whose voice then that said " I am the Alpha and the Omega" in Rev 1:8?

No, the difficulty lies in the apparent fact that you can't get your point across in an understandable manner.

[Capbook]

Of course his words are correct, as I've told you before. Explain what your point is.

So, Rev 1:8 is not the voice of the Father, or John 5:37 will become wrong to you?

I asked you to kindly explain your thought. I don't understand what you're getting to.

Do you find it difficult?
John 5:37 speaks about no one heard the voice of the Father anytime. You believe that is correct, maybe as of now. I believe you will change your tune when ask;
Whose voice then that said " I am the Alpha and the Omega" in Rev 1:8?

No, the difficulty lies in the apparent fact that you can't get your point across in an understandable manner.

I know you are intelligent enough to understand the presentation below, or you just refuse to understand?
Can you just answer the question?
John 5:37 speaks about no one heard the voice of the Father anytime. You believe that is correct, maybe as of now. I believe you will change your tune when ask;
Whose voice then that said " I am the Alpha and the Omega" in Rev 1:8?

[onewithhim]

So, Rev 1:8 is not the voice of the Father, or John 5:37 will become wrong to you?

I asked you to kindly explain your thought. I don't understand what you're getting to.

Do you find it difficult?
John 5:37 speaks about no one heard the voice of the Father anytime. You believe that is correct, maybe as of now. I believe you will change your tune when ask;
Whose voice then that said " I am the Alpha and the Omega" in Rev 1:8?

No, the difficulty lies in the apparent fact that you can't get your point across in an understandable manner.

I know you are intelligent enough to understand the presentation below, or you just refuse to understand?
Can you just answer the question?
John 5:37 speaks about no one heard the voice of the Father anytime. You believe that is correct, maybe as of now. I believe you will change your tune when ask;
Whose voice then that said " I am the Alpha and the Omega" in Rev 1:8?

Jesus was talking to the Pharisees when he said that they had not heard God's voice. He didn't necessarily include the Apostle John in that statement. Again, he was speaking directly to the hypocritical Pharisees. John heard that statement from God through Jesus, as he also heard Revelation 1:8 from God, through Jesus.

[Capbook]

I asked you to kindly explain your thought. I don't understand what you're getting to.

Do you find it difficult?
John 5:37 speaks about no one heard the voice of the Father anytime. You believe that is correct, maybe as of now. I believe you will change your tune when ask;
Whose voice then that said " I am the Alpha and the Omega" in Rev 1:8?

No, the difficulty lies in the apparent fact that you can't get your point across in an understandable manner.

I know you are intelligent enough to understand the presentation below, or you just refuse to understand?
Can you just answer the question?
John 5:37 speaks about no one heard the voice of the Father anytime. You believe that is correct, maybe as of now. I believe you will change your tune when ask;
Whose voice then that said " I am the Alpha and the Omega" in Rev 1:8?

Jesus was talking to the Pharisees when he said that they had not heard God's voice. He didn't necessarily include the Apostle John in that statement. Again, he was speaking directly to the hypocritical Pharisees. John heard that statement from God through Jesus, as he also heard Revelation 1:8 from God, through Jesus.

Do that mean that the voice in Rev 1:8, is the voice of Jesus?

[onewithhim]

Do you find it difficult?
John 5:37 speaks about no one heard the voice of the Father anytime. You believe that is correct, maybe as of now. I believe you will change your tune when ask;
Whose voice then that said " I am the Alpha and the Omega" in Rev 1:8?

No, the difficulty lies in the apparent fact that you can't get your point across in an understandable manner.

I know you are intelligent enough to understand the presentation below, or you just refuse to understand?
Can you just answer the question?
John 5:37 speaks about no one heard the voice of the Father anytime. You believe that is correct, maybe as of now. I believe you will change your tune when ask;
Whose voice then that said " I am the Alpha and the Omega" in Rev 1:8?

Jesus was talking to the Pharisees when he said that they had not heard God's voice. He didn't necessarily include the Apostle John in that statement. Again, he was speaking directly to the hypocritical Pharisees. John heard that statement from God through Jesus, as he also heard Revelation 1:8 from God, through Jesus.

Do that mean that the voice in Rev 1:8, is the voice of Jesus?

It is actually his angel that has set forth all the things in the Revelation. The angel quotes the Father in Rev. 1:8. It says in verse 1 that Jesus "presented it in signs through him (the angel) to his servant John."

[JehovahsWitness]

When evaluating whether or not the NWT translators are justified in certain translation choices, it's worth keeping in mind the standard that they claim for themselves. This is from the 2013 edition of the NWT:

As stated in the foreword to the original English edition of the New World Translation: “We offer no paraphrase of the Scriptures. Our endeavor all through has been to give as literal a translation as possible, where the modern English idiom allows and where a literal rendition does not for any clumsiness hide the thought.” Thus, the New World Bible Translation Committee has endeavored to strike a balance between using words and phrasing that mirror the original and, at the same time, avoiding wording that reads awkwardly or hides the intended thought. As a result, the Bible can be read with ease and the reader can have full confidence that its inspired message has been transmitted faithfully.

Note that they explicitly claim that the NWT is "no paraphrase of the Scriptures" and as it is their own standard, holding the NWT to it isn't unreasonable.

I don't understand the context of you comment, are you suggesting that the NWT translators fail to hold to their own stated standards? If so, in what way?


JEHOVAH'S WITNESS