Changes

|}

|}

=== Controversy ===

=== Controversy ===

: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'' joins other translations (see below) in translating 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.

:In the original Greek, John 1:1 uses the word ''the-os´'' in two places.  Once preceded by the definite article ''ho'' and once without the definite article.  Where the definite article indicates a specific individual "the God", the lack of a definite article indicates a quality possessed by the one being described; in this case the Word.  In Greek grammar, the lack of a definite article results in the predicate being considered "anarthrous" [http://www.forananswer.org/Glossary.htm] (without a definite article).

:In the original Greek, John 1:1 uses the word ''the-os´'' in two places.  Once preceded by the definite article ''ho'' and once without the definite article.  Where the definite article indicates a specific individual "the God", the lack of a definite article indicates a quality possessed by the one being described; in this case the Word.  In Greek grammar, the lack of a definite article results in the predicate being considered "anarthrous" [http://www.forananswer.org/Glossary.htm] (without a definite article).

:Philip B. Harner wrote in the ''Journal of Biblical Literature'' in 1973 "with an anarthrous predicate preceding the verb ... they indicate that the ''logos'' has the nature of ''theos''."

:Philip B. Harner wrote in the ''Journal of Biblical Literature'' in 1973 "with an anarthrous predicate preceding the verb ... they indicate that the ''logos'' has the nature of ''theos''."

:''Other translations rendering of John 1:1''

::''Other translations rendering John 1:1 in a similar fashion''

 

::''The Emphatic Diaglott - English/Greek Interlinear''

::''The Emphatic Diaglott - English/Greek Interlinear''

::In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was the Word.

::In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was the Word.

::''The Complete Bible, An American Translation'' Edgar J. Goodspeed (1939)

::''The Complete Bible, An American Translation'' Edgar J. Goodspeed (1939)

::In the beginning the Word existed.  The Word was with God, and the Word was divine.

::In the beginning the Word existed.  The Word was with God, and the Word was divine.

=== Critical Reviews ===

=== Critical Reviews ===

On the other hand, Jason BeDuhn, associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University (Flagstaff, AZ), examined the ''The New World Translation'' along with eight other translation.  Although critical of some translation choices made, the professor noted ''The New World Translation'' as a "remarkably good" translation that is "better by far" and "consistently better" than some of the others considered.  He concluded that the translation is "one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available" and the "most accurate of the translations compared". Where translators may feel pressure to paraphrase or expand on what the Bible says, BeDuhn commented that ''The New World Translation'' is different in "the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal, conservative translation of the original expressions of the New Testament writers." - ''Truth in Translation:  Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament'' (2003)

On the other hand, Jason BeDuhn, associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University (Flagstaff, AZ), examined the ''The New World Translation'' along with eight other translation.  Although critical of some translation choices made, the professor noted ''The New World Translation'' as a "remarkably good" translation that is "better by far" and "consistently better" than some of the others considered.  He concluded that the translation is "one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available" and the "most accurate of the translations compared". Where translators may feel pressure to paraphrase or expand on what the Bible says, BeDuhn commented that ''The New World Translation'' is different in "the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal, conservative translation of the original expressions of the New Testament writers." - ''Truth in Translation:  Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament'' (2003)