Did Jehovah's Witnesses Rewrite some of the bible???

Question

Did Jehovah's Witnesses rewrite some of the verses of the bible to suit their doctrine?

Answer 1

This so-called "question" seems less concerned with magnifying the Divine Author and more concerned with demeaning Jehovah's Witnesses. Jehovah's Witnesses have distributed more than 145 million copies of "New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures", in dozens of languages.
http://watchtower.org/languages.htm

The entire text of NWT is freely available at the official website of Jehovah's Witnesses, and a personal printed copy can be requested at no charge:
http://watchtower.org/bible/
https://watch002.securesites.net/contact/submit.htm
http://watchtower.org/how_to_contact_us.htm


Jehovah's Witnesses certainly like NWT, but they are happy to use any translation which an interested person may prefer, and in fact Jehovah's Witnesses themselves distribute other translations besides NWT. Jehovah's Witnesses attach no particular infallibility or inspiration to NWT.

It seems that the vast majority of the criticism against the New World Translation is actually as a proxy for blind hatred against Jehovah's Witnesses. The hatred must be "blind" since secular experts of biblical Hebrew and Greek have consistently refused to condemn any particular verse or phrase as an unacceptable translation. Instead, it is religionists with preconceived theologies who bigotedly insist upon particular wordings, since these are necessary to prop up the shaky tenets of their false worship.

(2 Timothy 4:3-5) For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, whereas they will be turned aside to false stories. You, though, keep your senses in all things, suffer evil, do the work of an evangelizer, fully accomplish your ministry.

It seems significant that the relatively small religion of Jehovah's Witnesses are the ones best known for their worldwide preaching work. Yet Jesus commanded that ALL who would call themselves "Christian" perform this public work:

(Matthew 28:19,20) Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And, look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.

Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/20000622/
http://watchtower.org/e/pr/index.htm?article=article_04.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/na/
http://watchtower.org/e/20020915/article_01.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/20050715/article_02.htm

Answer 2

Depends on what you mean by re-write the bible.

Does it read the same as the NIV, NASB, KJV, etc?

Not in all verses. In this case you could say yes they 're-wrote'

If you are refering to re-writing it and changing the translation from the Greek and Hebrew, the orignial languages.

Then the answer is NO.

As a translation the NWT is a very accurate, and honest translation.

Old Testament:
In fact, the New World Translation is a scholarly work. In 1989, Professor Benjamin Kedar of Israel said:
"In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translation, I often refer to the English edition as what is known as the New World Translation. In doing so, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this kind of work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew....Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translating. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain."

New Testament:

While critical of some of its translation choices, BeDuhn called the New World Translation a “remarkably good” translation, “better by far” and “consistently better” than some of the others considered. Overall, concluded BeDuhn, the New World Translation “is one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available” and “the most accurate of the translations compared.”—Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament.

“Here at last is a comprehensive comparison of nine major translations of the Bible:

King James Version, New American Standard Bible, New International Version, New Revised Standard Version, New American Bible, Amplified Bible, Today's English Version (Good News Bible), Living Bible, and the New World Translation.

The book provides a general introduction to the history and methods of Bible translation, and gives background on each of these versions. Then it compares them on key passages of the New Testament to determine their accuracy and identify their bias. Passages looked at include:

John 1:1; John 8:58; Philippians 2:5-11; Colossians 1:15-20; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1

Jason BeDuhn
Associate Professor of Religious Studies, and Chair
Department of Humanities, Arts, and Religion
Northern Arizona University

Answer 3

You can ask the same thing about the King James. It was created because the Genesis Bible was consider too strict. Even then, it took 150 years and was revised four times before it sufficiently matched the teachings of the Church of England and was "Authorized". The same church whose Bishop last November declared that children born with handicaps should not be allowed to live.

The part of the NWT that people claim to have been rewritten can also be found in other Bibles dating back hundreds of years. The only reason the King James became the most common "Version" used is that it won the popularity wars.

As for doctrine, you should look beyond just the issue of the Bible. Which religions exhibit the most Christian values? The ones using the King James or the one using the NWT?

Answer 4

Every religion may hold a piece of the puzzle. Many interpret the bible for their own individualized doctrines. They are not the only ones who see Jesus differently as the Arch Angel Michael. These arch angels can or may represent the eyes or spirits of God and in that sense are of God and one with God. Arguing about interpretations isn't much different than or is "exactly" fulfilling the Biblical prophecy of brother against brother. Remembering the story of the tower of babel, to me this is just another key to that puzzle. To others it might just mean human arrogance ignoring gods word or laws. Many may agree even on a false interpretation made long ago. In many ways it's a word game. I like to refer to it as; The Bible Game.

Answer 5

The New World Translation committee only had one member with any working knowledge of Bible languages. For the New Testament (Greek Scriptures to them) they copied verbatim the renowned Westcott & Hort Greek text (all the work done by W&H), then offered their 'translation' which was an Americanised rehash - some of the heaviest English language you'd wish never to read in a Bible. Dr Westcott condemned their distortion of John 1:1. The word "other" was added many times in reference to Christ to suit their anti-trinitarian stance (adopted long before the NWT was produced). When "other" is removed, the meaning of those verses is completely different. There are far too many examples to give here.

Bible language scholars are aghast at the NWT. Needless to say, JW leaders never quote them! They only edit partial quotes from some unfortunates to make them seem as if they enthuse about the NWT when the opposite is true. I have examples of this but there isn't enough space here. I have to hand a list of quotes of 11 experts who condemn specific points of the NWT. One of them, Dr J Johnson of California State University shows why their rendition of John 1:1 is grammatically impossible, adding, "I am neither a Christian nor a trinitarian."

Unsurprisingly, JW leaders do not encourage rank and file members to study biblical languages. If anyone wants to know what the most ancient available manuscripts say, there are plenty Hebrew, koine Greek and Aramaic scholars around who could tell you. Not one of them, to the best of my knowledge, is a JW. Enough said?

Answer 6

More than some, they have changed many. They are not alone in this as others have noted.

You might find the following site a blessing and it will keep you aware of many changes. It will also show you the value of the King James version of 1611. At this site you can enter the King James Version 1611 group.**

http://www.scionofzion.com

For myself I see no trouble in finding the one true God, and no trinity, in the KJV. Uncounted people, calling themselves Oneness, UPC, Message Believers or just believers have found no problem in accepting the fact that Christ, in a human body, was Mighty God, the Everlasting Father and the Prince of Peace. And further that the same Jehovah God that was born in a manger is the same Jehovah God, the same Christ, present with us and in us in this dispensation of the Holy Spirit.

**Do those at scionofzion believe exactly as I do? I do not know; but I count them of the same spirit in the word. I do know that the comparison of subtle and damaging changes in Scripture are well presented for all to see.

It may show you how you have been led away from God's Word and become powerless in your Christian life. Or perhaps it may show that all you have is an oh-so-nice religious spirit and not true life in Christ Jesus?

Answer 7

Heck, I don't know about Jehovah's Witnesses, but I know that just about EVERYONE had rewritten SOMETHING in the Bible. Most have even taken whole books out (even AFTER the big conference and weeding done originally by the Roman Catholic church!). So, it wouldn't really surprise me that YET ANOTHER religious denomination decided to do this.

Answer 8

All versions of Christianity have done this to one degree or antoher. Don't believe me? Go to a bookstore and look at the shelves of different Bibles. A careful read through them will reveal that none of them have the exact same wording. In some places the differences are irrelevant. In some places, they are very significant.

Answer 9

Yes, they changed some things to fit their beliefs.

But as to the other's who say that all religions have done this...not true. There are different translations, and I'm sure you've heard the phrase "something is lost in the translation" meaning that when we translate something from another language it's difficult to get the true meaning translated. This has been true of the Bible. Version like KJV is a good example becuase it's a double translation which means it's lost even more...the Bible was translated from Hebrew to Greek to King James...so the original meanings of the words are really lost and some people think this means the Bible was changed. Not so.

There are some new translations such as the American Standard which was translated directly from the original language that the Bible was written in. They took great care to make it a true translation. They even give you the original words and their root meaning in the written language.

Answer 10

No, that was done by the King James translators in order to support the false trinity doctrine. They added complete verses which are not in the original Greek manuscripts such as the verse at 1John 5:7.

Answer 11

Nope. In fact we have had to change our beliefs, and our actions to conform to the Bible. If we were not interested in following the Bible we would probably still be celebrating Pagan holidays like Christmas