Changes

Spelling/Grammar Check, typos fixed: foreward → foreword, through-out → throughout, etc) → etc.)
Line 3: Line 3:  
Released in a series of installments as translation work was completed, the first volume to be released was the ''New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures'' on August 2, 1950.  It was not until 1963 that the entire Bible, both the Hebrew-Aramaic ([[Old Testament]]) and the Christian Greek Scriptures ([[New Testament]]) were released in a single volume.
 
Released in a series of installments as translation work was completed, the first volume to be released was the ''New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures'' on August 2, 1950.  It was not until 1963 that the entire Bible, both the Hebrew-Aramaic ([[Old Testament]]) and the Christian Greek Scriptures ([[New Testament]]) were released in a single volume.
   −
Previous to beginning the translation work of the ''New World Translation'', Jehovah's Witnesses quoted from either the ''[[King_James_Bible]]'' or the ''[[American Standard Version]]'' in their publications.  Although the ''New World Translation'' has become the primary translation in Jehovah's Witness publications they continue to make use of other translations in their publications.
+
Previous to beginning the translation work of the ''New World Translation'', Jehovah's Witnesses quoted from either the ''[[King James Bible]]'' or the ''[[American Standard Version]]'' in their publications.  Although the ''New World Translation'' has become the primary translation in Jehovah's Witness publications they continue to make use of other translations in their publications.
   −
In the foreward to 1963 release, the anonymous translation committee stated that their method of translation was with the goal of being as literal as possible to the point of understandableness.  The language is intended to be modern, when compared to the archaic English of the ''King James''.
+
In the foreword to 1963 release, the anonymous translation committee stated that their method of translation was with the goal of being as literal as possible to the point of understandableness.  The language is intended to be modern, when compared to the archaic English of the ''King James''.
    
The completed 1963 edition ran 3,646 pages and included thousands of footnotes, cross-references, an appendix that outlined the translators rationale behind specific decisions made in the translation process, and an index of Bible words.  Today the ''New World Translation'' is offered in soft cover editions, including a pocket sized version, or a hard-cover reference version that contains over 125,000 marginal references.
 
The completed 1963 edition ran 3,646 pages and included thousands of footnotes, cross-references, an appendix that outlined the translators rationale behind specific decisions made in the translation process, and an index of Bible words.  Today the ''New World Translation'' is offered in soft cover editions, including a pocket sized version, or a hard-cover reference version that contains over 125,000 marginal references.
Line 56: Line 56:  
|}
 
|}
   −
An on-line English version (absent marginal references, appendices, etc) is available at the [http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/index.htm Jehovah's Witnesses Official Web Site].
+
An on-line English version (absent marginal references, appendices, etc.) is available at the [http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/index.htm Jehovah's Witnesses Official Web Site].
      −
=== Features ===
+
== Features ==
   −
In addition to the aforementioned appendices and marginal references, ''The New World Translation'' features consistency in translation choices through-out the text.  An example is the Hebrew word ''sheol'' which was translated in the ''King James Version'' 31 times as "hell," 31 times as "grave," and 3 times as "pit".  The ''New world Translation'' uniformly leaves the word untranslated.
+
In addition to the aforementioned appendices and marginal references, ''The New World Translation'' features consistency in translation choices throughout the text.  An example is the Hebrew word ''sheol'' which was translated in the ''King James Version'' 31 times as "hell," 31 times as "grave," and 3 times as "pit".  The ''New world Translation'' uniformly leaves the word untranslated.
    
Changes in language from the 17th century English used by the ''King James Version'' and the modern language of the ''The New World Translation'' can be seen in the following examples:
 
Changes in language from the 17th century English used by the ''King James Version'' and the modern language of the ''The New World Translation'' can be seen in the following examples:
Line 72: Line 72:  
*"letteth" becomes "acting as a restraint" (2 Thessalonians 2:7)
 
*"letteth" becomes "acting as a restraint" (2 Thessalonians 2:7)
   −
=== Controversy ===
+
== Controversy ==
    
Because of the choices available to translators, no two translations of the same text will necessarily read alike.  The following items are considered to be the more controversial translation decisions made in ''The New World Translation''.
 
Because of the choices available to translators, no two translations of the same text will necessarily read alike.  The following items are considered to be the more controversial translation decisions made in ''The New World Translation''.
Line 80: Line 80:  
:In supporting their use of the Jehovah, the translators note in Appendix 1D of the Reference edition, that early Christian writers such as Matthew and Peter would have relied on either Hebrew copies of Scriptures then available or the Greek Septuagint.  These sources would have naturally included the Tetragrammaton (הוהי ), although the custom of the day was to use the word Adonai.
 
:In supporting their use of the Jehovah, the translators note in Appendix 1D of the Reference edition, that early Christian writers such as Matthew and Peter would have relied on either Hebrew copies of Scriptures then available or the Greek Septuagint.  These sources would have naturally included the Tetragrammaton (הוהי ), although the custom of the day was to use the word Adonai.
   −
:They then quote George Howard (University of Georgia) who wrote in ''Journal of Biblical Literature'' (Vol. 96, 1977, p. 63:  “Recent discoveries in Egypt and the Judean Desert allow us to see first hand the use of God’s name in pre-Christian times. These discoveries are significant for N[ew] T[estament] studies in that they form a literary analogy with the earliest Christian documents and may explain how NT authors used the divine name. In the following pages we will set forth a theory that the divine name, הוהי (and possibly abbreviations of it), was originally written in the NT quotations of and allusions to the O[ld] T[estament] and that in the course of time it was replaced mainly with the surrogate [abbreviation for Ky′ri·os, “Lord”]. This removal of the Tetragram[maton], in our view, created a confusion in the minds of early Gentile Christians about the relationship between the ‘Lord God’ and the ‘Lord Christ’ which is reflected in the MS tradition of the NT text itself.”
+
:They then quote George Howard (University of Georgia) who wrote in ''Journal of Biblical Literature'' (Vol. 96, 1977, p. 63):  “Recent discoveries in Egypt and the Judean Desert allow us to see first hand the use of God’s name in pre-Christian times. These discoveries are significant for N[ew] T[estament] studies in that they form a literary analogy with the earliest Christian documents and may explain how NT authors used the divine name. In the following pages we will set forth a theory that the divine name, הוהי (and possibly abbreviations of it), was originally written in the NT quotations of and allusions to the O[ld] T[estament] and that in the course of time it was replaced mainly with the surrogate [abbreviation for Ky′ri·os, “Lord”]. This removal of the Tetragram[maton], in our view, created a confusion in the minds of early Gentile Christians about the relationship between the ‘Lord God’ and the ‘Lord Christ’ which is reflected in the MS tradition of the NT text itself.”
    
:'''John 1:1 - "and the Word was a god"''' A proof-text used in support of the [[Trinity]] doctrine, ''The New World Translation'' translates the Greek text in a manner that does not state Jesus Christ (The Word) is God.
 
:'''John 1:1 - "and the Word was a god"''' A proof-text used in support of the [[Trinity]] doctrine, ''The New World Translation'' translates the Greek text in a manner that does not state Jesus Christ (The Word) is God.
Line 102: Line 102:  
::"and a god was the Logos"
 
::"and a god was the Logos"
   −
=== Critical Reviews ===
+
== Critical Reviews ==
 
The ''New World Translation'' has been reviewed by numerous individuals and groups over the years with mixed results.  Those that object most to the translation include those who hold deeply divergent theological viewpoints from Jehovah's Witnesses and tend to be most critical of the religion.  These include Drs. John Ankerberg and John Weldon who wrote that the "translation must not be trusted to accurately convey God's Word because of it's unrelenting biases in translation".  This is because of the translation's use of the divine name, [[Jehovah]] in both the Hebrew and Christian Greek scriptures (see Controversy section above).
 
The ''New World Translation'' has been reviewed by numerous individuals and groups over the years with mixed results.  Those that object most to the translation include those who hold deeply divergent theological viewpoints from Jehovah's Witnesses and tend to be most critical of the religion.  These include Drs. John Ankerberg and John Weldon who wrote that the "translation must not be trusted to accurately convey God's Word because of it's unrelenting biases in translation".  This is because of the translation's use of the divine name, [[Jehovah]] in both the Hebrew and Christian Greek scriptures (see Controversy section above).
   Line 110: Line 110:       −
'''References'''
+
==References==
 
*Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament (©2003, University Press of America)
 
*Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament (©2003, University Press of America)
 
*New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (©1984,1963, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society)
 
*New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (©1984,1963, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society)
   −
[[Category:Bible]]
+
{{Bible Versions}}
Block, SkipCaptcha, apieditor, Automoderated users, Bots, edit, ratelimit-exempt
59,517

edits