Serious Research?

[tigger2]

Hoghead1 wrote in post 148 of What is a soul?

FYI: [A] I've done some serious research on the NWT, which is precisely why I say it is bogus. For one thing, the translators are kept secret. this is the only translation of teh Bible I have ever found where nobody wants to reveal who the translators were. [C]More importantly, the text, key points, has been unduly corrupted to suit the biases of teh WatchTower Society. For example, in the prologue to JN. the indefinite article "a" is inserted, so that the text is mistranslated as "and the Word was a God." The rules of Greek grammar rule out the use of teh indefinite article here, which is why it is absent in the solid, standard translations. The reason why the WatchTower Society want the "a" in there is that this will support their anti-Trinitarian bias. [D]Also, in passages that speak of Hell and torment, the NWT reads "annihilation." That was done to bludgeon Scripture to fit their bias about the afterlife. It is one thing to disagree with Scripture. I respect that. it is quite another to corrupt the translation so that it agree with your position. [E]Also, "Jehovah" is a serious mistranslation. And that is Hebrew 101 material. So I feel I have very good reason to write off the NWT as bogus and corrupt.

I intend to discuss the individual parts (A-E) of the above.

Ill save part A for last.

B. You wrote:

For one thing, the translators are kept secret. this is the only translation of teh [sic] Bible I have ever found where nobody wants to reveal who the translators were.

For the first 30 years at least, the publishers of the NASB kept their translators anonymous:

The Fourfold Aim of The Lockman Foundation
1.These publications shall be true to the original Hebrew and Greek.
2. They shall be grammatically correct.
3. They shall be understandable to the masses.
4. They shall give the Lord Jesus Christ His proper place, the place which the Word gives Him; no work will ever be personalized. - page v., NASB, Ref. Ed., Lockman Foundation, 1971.

For many years the names of the NASB translators and editors were withheld by the publisher. But in 1995 this information was finally disclosed. - http://www.bible-researcher.com/nasb.html

Bible translations of the OT and NT texts should be judged according to their accuracy - not the person(s) who did the translation.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 5 by tigger2]

It is illegitimate to out the indefinite article in. They are braking the rules of Greek grammar. They took that liberty so that their version of teh Bible squares with their anti-trintarianisn. If you want to challenge the Bible on the tr8inity, that is OK. But you should not deliberately bludgeon the translation so that it suits your position.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 25 by JehovahsWitness]

There is no "Jehovah" in the Bible, period. It is a serious mistranslation.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 25 by JehovahsWitness]

Sorry, but you might want to do some more homework on this one. No existent Greek copy of the NT contains the Tetragrammaton. Some scholars did make a suggestion that perhaps the earliest Greek manuscripts did. However, their case is purely circumstantial and was based on rabbinical references to Christian writings containing the Divine Name being burnt. It is not know, however, if this meant the NT.
In any case, "Jehovah" is a serious mistranslation. We know how the mistake occurred, which is by a failure to properly understand the situation with the vowel indicators being used. And we know the proper pronunciation was very close to Yahweh.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 2 by tigger2]

Translating Jn. as saying the "Word was a god" breaks the rules of Greek grammar, which is why it is translated otherwise, period, no question about it. Furthermore, it is polytheistic.

[hoghead1]

Hoghead1 wrote in post 148 of What is a soul?

FYI: [A] I've done some serious research on the NWT, which is precisely why I say it is bogus. For one thing, the translators are kept secret. this is the only translation of teh Bible I have ever found where nobody wants to reveal who the translators were. [C]More importantly, the text, key points, has been unduly corrupted to suit the biases of teh WatchTower Society. For example, in the prologue to JN. the indefinite article "a" is inserted, so that the text is mistranslated as "and the Word was a God." The rules of Greek grammar rule out the use of teh indefinite article here, which is why it is absent in the solid, standard translations. The reason why the WatchTower Society want the "a" in there is that this will support their anti-Trinitarian bias. [D]Also, in passages that speak of Hell and torment, the NWT reads "annihilation." That was done to bludgeon Scripture to fit their bias about the afterlife. It is one thing to disagree with Scripture. I respect that. it is quite another to corrupt the translation so that it agree with your position. [E]Also, "Jehovah" is a serious mistranslation. And that is Hebrew 101 material. So I feel I have very good reason to write off the NWT as bogus and corrupt.

I intend to discuss the individual parts (A-E) of the above.

Ill save part A for last.

B. You wrote:

For one thing, the translators are kept secret. this is the only translation of teh [sic] Bible I have ever found where nobody wants to reveal who the translators were.

For the first 30 years at least, the publishers of the NASB kept their translators anonymous:

The Fourfold Aim of The Lockman Foundation
1.These publications shall be true to the original Hebrew and Greek.
2. They shall be grammatically correct.
3. They shall be understandable to the masses.
4. They shall give the Lord Jesus Christ His proper place, the place which the Word gives Him; no work will ever be personalized. - page v., NASB, Ref. Ed., Lockman Foundation, 1971.

For many years the names of the NASB translators and editors were withheld by the publisher. But in 1995 this information was finally disclosed. - http://www.bible-researcher.com/nasb.html

Bible translations of the OT and NT texts should be judged according to their accuracy - not the person(s) who did the translation.

We are not talking here about the NASB, we are talking about the NWT, period. Let's stick to that. And actually you accounts a bit off about it. Scholars were well aware who did the translations, though the publisher might not have made this known.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 3 by tigger2]

That isn't anywhere near accurate about Sheol. Very clearly, persons in Sheol do in fact live on, thought in a kind of semi-comatose state, as weak and trembling shades, as more than one OT passage makes abundantly clear. You might try Saul and the medium at Endor, for example. Now, can you point to specific NT passages that support your thesis that persons are annihi8lated in Hades?

[tigger2]

[Replying to post 25 by JehovahsWitness]

There is no "Jehovah" in the Bible, period. It is a serious mistranslation.

There is no "Jesus" in the Bible, period. It is a clear mistransliteration.

"Jehovah" is a transliteration. LORD is a serious mistranslation.

[tigger2]

Answering Post 29 by hoghead

[

Replying to post 5 by tigger2]

It is illegitimate to out the indefinite article in. They are braking[sic] the rules of Greek grammar. They took that liberty so that their version of the[sic] Bible squares with their anti-trintarianisn. If you want to challenge the Bible on the tr8inity, that is OK. But you should not deliberately bludgeon the translation so that it suits your position.

"out the indefinite article in"??

Apparently you didn't actually read post 2!

[JehovahsWitness]

There is no "Jehovah" in the Bible, period. It is a serious mistranslation.

Jehovah is clearly an English word. Are you suggesting that the Tetragrammaton (which appeared thousand of times in the Hebrew text) is not in the bible or that were are no English words in the original text?

Naturally being written in Hebrew and Greek there were no English words in the original text but the Divine Name most certainly did appear therein and Jehovah is a legitmate English transliteration of that name.

Tigger provided a detailed explanation of the above here - post #4 I see, as yet no counterarguments to his (or my) points as yet. Feel free if you wish to address (present a counter argument) to the point therein.

Stating your conclusion as if it is an argument (which is all you have done with your one line reply) is circular.

JW

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 37 by JehovahsWitness]

It was taken to be the actual, original name of God, however. It was not assumed to be some sort of Anglicization. It is simply a serious mistranslation based on confusion over how the vowel indicators worked and that tradition about uttering God's name.