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.

[tygger2]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #250]

There are 4 different cases (5 if you count the vocative which is seldom used) for nouns. That is, just to take the noun in question (god), Nominative (theos), Accusative (theon) Genitive (theou) Dative (theo). They all mean "god" but are different parts of speech. For example, theos is used as the subject or predicate noun in a clause. Theon is used as an object, usually the direct object, in a clause. Theou is used, normally as "of god." Etc.

For it to mean "God" the nominative theos will have the definite article (ho) with it. Their are a few exceptions, but they are well known.

So the use of theon in John 1:1b merely indicates it is an object. But it has the definite article (tov in the accusative case) so it refers to God. In John 1:1c the unmodified theos does not have the article (ho in the nominative case), so it does not refer to God.

[Difflugia]

Will you please link to the post that mentions "chairman of the committee" I would like to read the comment in context.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #250]

There are 4 different cases (5 if you count the vocative which is seldom used) for nouns. That is, just to take the noun in question (god), Nominative (theos), Accusative (theon) Genitive (theou) Dative (theo). They all mean "god" but are different parts of speech. For example, theos is used as the subject or predicate noun in a clause. Theon is used as an object, usually the direct object, in a clause. Theou is used, normally as "of god." Etc.

For it to mean "God" the nominative theos will have the definite article (ho) with it. Their are a few exceptions, but they are well known.

So the use of theon in John 1:1b merely indicates it is an object. But it has the definite article (tov in the accusative case) so it refers to God. In John 1:1c the unmodified theos does not have the article (ho in the nominative case), so it does not refer to God.

Simply put, and correct, for anyone who understands the rules for translating Greek into English.

[JehovahsWitness]

The Greeks certainly used metaphor and hyperbole, but "god," "master," and "chairman of the committee" weren't interchangeable concepts.

This comment us uncalled for and misleading, nobody in this thread has said that {to quote you} " "god," "master," and "chairman of the committee" [were] interchangeable concepts" and there is no reason to imply anyone has claimed so.

It's generally considered polite to link your sources, even if they're only secondary ones. ...

Do better!


JW

[placebofactor]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #250]

There are 4 different cases (5 if you count the vocative which is seldom used) for nouns. That is, just to take the noun in question (god), Nominative (theos), Accusative (theon) Genitive (theou) Dative (theo). They all mean "god" but are different parts of speech. For example, theos is used as the subject or predicate noun in a clause. Theon is used as an object, usually the direct object, in a clause. Theou is used, normally as "of god." Etc.

For it to mean "God" the nominative theos will have the definite article (ho) with it. Their are a few exceptions, but they are well known.

So the use of theon in John 1:1b merely indicates it is an object. But it has the definite article (tov in the accusative case) so it refers to God. In John 1:1c the unmodified theos does not have the article (ho in the nominative case), so it does not refer to God.

Simply put, and correct, for anyone who understands the rules for translating Greek into English.

You wrorte, "So the use of theon in John 1:1b merely indicates it is an object. But it has the definite article (tov in the accusative case) so it refers to God. In John 1:1c the unmodified theos does not have the article (ho in the nominative case), so it does not refer to God."

And you're claiming to be more versed, have a higher education in translating the ancient text than the thousands of Hebrew and Greek scholars who went before you? From the time the first Bible was introduced as a complete book in the 4th century, through to Wycliff, Tindal, and his people, the Great Bible, the Reformation Bible, the 60 (professors, authors, teachers and scholars) who worked on the K.J.B. and the thousands of scholars who worked on these manuscripts since 1611 A.D., all agree on John 1:1 except for the Watchtower unknowns. And until Westcott and Hort in the 1890s got their dirty hands-on corrupted manuscripts, the A and B. text, and created the confusion that exists today, everybody is wrong but the Watchtower, is that what you are suggesting?

[onewithhim]

[Replying to onewithhim in post #250]

There are 4 different cases (5 if you count the vocative which is seldom used) for nouns. That is, just to take the noun in question (god), Nominative (theos), Accusative (theon) Genitive (theou) Dative (theo). They all mean "god" but are different parts of speech. For example, theos is used as the subject or predicate noun in a clause. Theon is used as an object, usually the direct object, in a clause. Theou is used, normally as "of god." Etc.

For it to mean "God" the nominative theos will have the definite article (ho) with it. Their are a few exceptions, but they are well known.

So the use of theon in John 1:1b merely indicates it is an object. But it has the definite article (tov in the accusative case) so it refers to God. In John 1:1c the unmodified theos does not have the article (ho in the nominative case), so it does not refer to God.

Simply put, and correct, for anyone who understands the rules for translating Greek into English.

You wrorte, "So the use of theon in John 1:1b merely indicates it is an object. But it has the definite article (tov in the accusative case) so it refers to God. In John 1:1c the unmodified theos does not have the article (ho in the nominative case), so it does not refer to God."

And you're claiming to be more versed, have a higher education in translating the ancient text than the thousands of Hebrew and Greek scholars who went before you? From the time the first Bible was introduced as a complete book in the 4th century, through to Wycliff, Tindal, and his people, the Great Bible, the Reformation Bible, the 60 (professors, authors, teachers and scholars) who worked on the K.J.B. and the thousands of scholars who worked on these manuscripts since 1611 A.D., all agree on John 1:1 except for the Watchtower unknowns. And until Westcott and Hort in the 1890s got their dirty hands-on corrupted manuscripts, the A and B. text, and created the confusion that exists today, everybody is wrong but the Watchtower, is that what you are suggesting?

That might be sizing it up nicely. (The majority isn't always right.)

"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat. Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and FEW there be that find it." (Matthew 7:13,14, KJV)

[tygger2]

[Replying to Capbook in post #247]

John 1:1c - English translation: "The Word was God [or 'a god']."
- NT Greek: θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
---------------"god was the word."

The NT Greek word for "God" and "god" is theos (θεὸς). In the writings of the Gospel writers (including John) when an unmodified theos (the form used for subjects and predicate nouns) is accompanied by the article, "the" (ὁ [pronounced ho] in Greek), and has no added phrases (e.g., "the god of this world"), then it always refers to the only true God. - See DEF study.

But Jn 1:1c has an unmodified theos without the article. Therefore, even some trinitarian scholars are forced to admit that this passage may be literally translated as "the Word was a god"!
This includes W. E. Vine (An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words);
Dr. C. H. Dodd (director of the New English Bible project);
Murray J. Harris (Jesus as God);
Dr. Robert Young (Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary);
Rev. J. W. Wenham, The Elements of New Testament Greek.

Of course, being trinitarians, they often insist that the correct interpretation of such a literal translation must be, somehow, trinitarian.

Even the most knowledgeable of the early Christian Greek-speaking scholars, Origen (died 254 A.D.), tells us that John 1:1c actually means "the Word was a god"! - "Origen's Commentary on John," Book I, ch. 42 - Bk II, ch.3.

The usual trinitarian interpretation for John 1:1c ("the Word was God") is based on the fact that an unmodified theos is used as a predicate noun (predicate nominative) without a definite article (anarthrous) and comes before the verb in the original New Testament (NT) Greek. When you find an anarthrous predicate noun in that position, some trinitarians will say, it is to be interpreted differently ("qualitative" or "definite": i.e., as though it actually had the definite article with it) from a predicate noun which normally comes after the verb.

Although such a "reversed" word order is extremely rare in English, it is common in NT Greek because word order within a sentence has little significance in NT Greek!

In fact, one of the first things a beginning student of NT Greek learns is that word order has very little, if any, significance as far as the meaning is concerned. For example, respected NT Greek authorities, Dr. Alfred Marshall and Prof. J. Gresham Machen tell us in their NT Greek primers that, unlike English, NT Greek does not use word order to convey meanings but instead uses the individual endings on each word (inflections).

"The English translation must be determined by observing the [Greek word] endings, not by observing the [word] order." - p. 27, New Testament Greek For Beginners, Machen, The Macmillan Co. (Cf., pp. 7, 22, New Testament Greek Primer, Marshall, Zondervan)

http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... er_21.html