JW's: The disappearing act of "Me" in John 14:14

[Faber]

John 14:14
If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it. (NASB)

A. This passage teaches that the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of prayer.
1. Hans Bietenhard: The unity of the Son with the Father finds expressions in the fact that prayer in the name of Jesus can be directed to either Father or Son (TDNT 5:276, onoma).
2. See more citations by Nick Norelli as found here:
https://rdtwot.wordpress.com/2011/07/13 ... john-1414/

B. In the 'New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures' by the Watchtower John 14:14 reads:
If you ask anything in my name, I will do it.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/l/r1/lp-e?q=John+14%3A14

C. In their 'Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures' the "Me" appears in the Greek text of John 14:14.

D. Since the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that the Lord Jesus is not to be prayed to my question to any Jehovah's Witness is this:
Is there any other instance anywhere in the 'Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures' where a Greek word was not translated into English that would alter the meaning of the passage to the level it does in John 14:14?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by Faber]


QUESTION: Is the New World Translation justified in omitting the world "me" in John 14:14?

JOHN 14:14 reads as follows:
"If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it." - New American Standard Bible
"If you ask anything in my name, I will do it."- New World Translation

The New World Translators are entirely justified in their rendition the following reasons:

[1] The "me" of John 14:14 is disputed.

While "ask me" is found in p66 (the earliest extant Greek text) and similar early codices, it is absent from a variety of other early textual witnesses. Indeed, The Expositor’s Greek New Testament (Vol. 1, p. 824) described by some as 'The Premier Greek Resource.' omits “me� from its text and Robert Bowman, while himself favoring its inclusion, due to the words appearance in early manuscripts, does admit " that some later Greek manuscripts omitted this word..." {end quote} - Understanding Jehovah’s Witnesses, Baker Book House, 1991, pp. 67-68.

[2] A variety of other translation have also chosen to omit the "me" from the text of John 14:14 due to its dubious origins.

King James Bible
If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

Jubilee Bible 2000
If ye ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

King James 2000 Bible
If you shall ask anything in my name, I will do it.

American King James Version
If you shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

American Standard Version
If ye shall ask anything in my name, that will I do.

Darby Bible Translation
If ye shall ask anything in my name, I will do it.

Webster's Bible Translation
If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

World English Bible
If you will ask anything in my name, I will do it.

Young's Literal Translation
if ye ask anything in my name I will do it.

FOOTNOTE: While the "me" is in the Alexandrian text, the Sahidic Coptic text (2nd/3rd century) which is in the Alexandrian text family, as well as other ancient witnesses, it does not have "me" at John 14:14. The Sahidic Coptic text reads: ЄΤЄΤ�ϢΑ�ΑΙΤЄΙ �ΟΥϨШΒ ϨΜ ΠΑΡΑ� ΠΑΙ ϯ�ΑΑΑϤ, "If you should ask anything in my name, this I will do."

[Faber]

I am well aware that it is disputed but that does not answer my question. Here it is again:


Is there any other instance anywhere in the 'Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures' where a Greek word was not translated into English that would alter the meaning of the passage to the level it does in John 14:14?

[JehovahsWitness]

C. In their 'Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures' the "Me" appears in the Greek text of John 14:14.

QUESTION: Why does the "me" of John 14:14 appear in the Jehovah's Witness WBTS Greek Interlinear but not in their bible translation?

In 1969 Jehovah's Witnesses, published a Greek-English word for word interlinear. based on the text of Westcott & Hort's Greek New Testament. This was a critical Greek text based primarily on Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (where the "me" does appear).
http://www.qbible.com/greek-new-testament/john/14.html

Along side the publication has the rendition of the New World Translation which, although it does extensively reference W&H is NOT based exclusively on their text but references a number of other Greek manuscrips as well. The New World Translation Committee, for reasons stated above decided, contrary to the Wescott & Hort, not to include the "ask me" in its main text of John 14:14*.

*NOTE: The Jehovah's Witness 1984 NWT Reference [Study] Bible does references the alternative reading in its footnote, stating " “Ask,� ADIt and in agreement with 15:16 and 16:23; P66 [Aleph]BWVgSy(h,p), “ask me.�"

Why did the NWT choose NOT to include the "me" in John 14:1* despite the fact it is included in the Wescott and Hort's Greek Text?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 055#864055

Further reading (Search For Bible Truths SFBT)
http://searchforbibletruths.blogspot.fr ... ation.html

The New World Translation can be read online or downloaded for free from the LINK below
https://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/nwt/books/

[Elijah John]

John 14:14
If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it. (NASB)

A. This passage teaches that the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of prayer.

You are right...John's Jesus teaches this. But if I'm not mistaken, the Synoptic Jesus never does. The Synoptic Jesus only teaches prayer directed to the Father.

Which do you think more likely reflects the real, historical Jesus?

What do you think more likely the Jesus of history (as opposed to John's Supernatural, interpreted Jesus) actually taught?

Whenever a person prays "In Jesus name" or TO Jesus, they reveal a Johannine bias.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Faber]


QUESTION: Is the New World Translation justified in omitting the world "me" in John 14:14?

JOHN 14:14 reads as follows:
"If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it." - New American Standard Bible
"If you ask anything in my name, I will do it."- New World Translation

The New World Translators are entirely justified in their rendition the following reasons:

[1] The "me" of John 14:14 is disputed.

While "ask me" is found in p66 (the earliest extant Greek text) and similar early codices, it is absent from a variety of other early textual witnesses. Indeed, The Expositor’s Greek New Testament (Vol. 1, p. 824) described by some as 'The Premier Greek Resource.' omits “me� from its text and Robert Bowman, while himself favoring its inclusion, due to the words appearance in early manuscripts, does admit " that some later Greek manuscripts omitted this word..." {end quote} - Understanding Jehovah’s Witnesses, Baker Book House, 1991, pp. 67-68.

[2] A variety of other translation have also chosen to omit the "me" from the text of John 14:14 due to its dubious origins.

King James Bible
If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

Jubilee Bible 2000
If ye ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

King James 2000 Bible
If you shall ask anything in my name, I will do it.

American King James Version
If you shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

American Standard Version
If ye shall ask anything in my name, that will I do.

Darby Bible Translation
If ye shall ask anything in my name, I will do it.

Webster's Bible Translation
If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

World English Bible
If you will ask anything in my name, I will do it.

Young's Literal Translation
if ye ask anything in my name I will do it.

FOOTNOTE: While the "me" is in the Alexandrian text, the Sahidic Coptic text (2nd/3rd century) which is in the Alexandrian text family, as well as other ancient witnesses, it does not have "me" at John 14:14. The Sahidic Coptic text reads: ЄΤЄΤ�ϢΑ�ΑΙΤЄΙ �ΟΥϨШΒ ϨΜ ΠΑΡΑ� ΠΑΙ ϯ�ΑΑΑϤ, "If you should ask anything in my name, this I will do."

The fact remains, the "I will do it" remains even in the examples you cite. Is that really any better than than the missing "me"?

Should Jesus (can he) be answering prayer? Or Jehovah God only.

[2timothy316]

Despite the controversy of if 'me' should be in that scripture or not, in context I don't see where this saying we are pray to Jesus. The word prayer or pray doesn't even come up in the whole chapter.

This is just another failed attempt to justify the trinity. Especially when the trinity idea disappears when it is Jesus who says that he as to ask to get something done. Almighty God wouldn't have to ask anyone for permission for anything. In the same chapter Jesus says, "The things I say to you I do not speak of my own originality."

"If you ask anything in my name, I will do it. If you love me, you will observe my commandments. And I will ask the Father and he will give you another helper to be with you forever." (John 14:14-16)

Even if we were to ask Jesus directly, Jesus would still ask his Father and it is Jesus' Father that gives another helper according to scripture. This means that Jehovah and Jesus are not equals which is in harmony with other scriptures. So leave 'me' in or don't. Doesn't change the dynamic between Jesus and Jehovah. Jehovah the master and Jesus the servant. While on Earth in Mark 5:23 a man asked Jesus to heal his daughter. There is nothing in the Bible that says this man asking Jesus to heal his daughter is considered a prayer or worship. If John asked Jesus to pass the wine at dinner, would that be considered a prayer or worship?

Every time I see one of this sandbag type post I can't help but think that those that create posts like these have already had all of these issues addressed on another board. That somehow the replies will be different somewhere else?

[Faber]

John 14:14
If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it. (NASB)

A. This passage teaches that the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of prayer.

You are right...John's Jesus teaches this. But if I'm not mistaken, the Synoptic Jesus never does. The Synoptic Jesus only teaches prayer directed to the Father.

Which do you think more likely reflects the real, historical Jesus?

What do you think more likely the Jesus of history (as opposed to John's Supernatural, interpreted Jesus) actually taught?

Whenever a person prays "In Jesus name" or TO Jesus, they reveal a Johannine bias.

Thank you for your admission that the Gospel f John teaches tat the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of prayer.

In Matthew 16:27 the Lord Jesus refers to Himself that which was spoken of by Daniel chapter 7. In Daniel 7:14 the Aramaic word "pelach" is used which demonstrates that the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of worship.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 5 by Elijah John]

I do believe the OP was asking for the JEHOVAH'S WITNESS point of view. Are you suggesting I misrepresented what JW's believe?

[onewithhim]

Despite the controversy of if 'me' should be in that scripture or not, in context I don't see where this saying we are pray to Jesus. The word prayer or pray doesn't even come up in the whole chapter.

This is just another failed attempt to justify the trinity. Especially when the trinity idea disappears when it is Jesus who says that he as to ask to get something done. Almighty God wouldn't have to ask anyone for permission for anything. In the same chapter Jesus says, "The things I say to you I do not speak of my own originality."

"If you ask anything in my name, I will do it. If you love me, you will observe my commandments. And I will ask the Father and he will give you another helper to be with you forever." (John 14:14-16)

Even if we were to ask Jesus directly, Jesus would still ask his Father and it is Jesus' Father that gives another helper according to scripture. This means that Jehovah and Jesus are not equals which is in harmony with other scriptures. So leave 'me' in or don't. Doesn't change the dynamic between Jesus and Jehovah. Jehovah the master and Jesus the servant. While on Earth in Mark 5:23 a man asked Jesus to heal his daughter. There is nothing in the Bible that says this man asking Jesus to heal his daughter is considered a prayer or worship. If John asked Jesus to pass the wine at dinner, would that be considered a prayer or worship?

Every time I see one of this sandbag type post I can't help but think that those that create posts like these have already had all of these issues addressed on another board. That somehow the replies will be different somewhere else?

This is an excellent precis of the subject! I pray to Jehovah that curious ones who come here to find a morsel of truth will catch sight of this post.


"Pray, then, in this way: 'OUR FATHER who is in heaven...'" (Matt.6:9, NASB)