Can some one in Jehovah Witness tell me of their bible how it came to existance?

Question

The reason is because all bibles supposed to be the same although am not condem... of their bible but i only need to know why some part of their bibles being blunked without any verse writen but blunked, is it a new style or teachings of God?


Although it is writen in the bible that shall not judge but i am not judging i only want to be frank with you guys the reasons of the blunked spaces for it is writen in the bible do not add nor subtract from the word of the Lord for all are from the breathing and inpirations of God. Why then has your bible been blunked then, ithink you people are the right person to know why i need your help.

Answer 1

The bible is the Word of God; Jehovah Himself is the Divine Author of the Holy Scriptures.

(2 Timothy 3:16) All Scripture is inspired of God

(2 Peter 1:20-21) No prophecy of Scripture springs from any private interpretation. For prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit.

(Acts 28:25) The holy spirit aptly spoke through Isaiah the prophet to YOUR forefathers

(Acts 1:16) For the scripture to be fulfilled, which the holy spirit spoke beforehand by David’s mouth

(Mark 12:35-36) Jesus began to say as he taught in the temple: “...By the holy spirit David himself said [a particular Scripture]

(2 Samuel 23:1,2) And these are the last words of David: “...The spirit of Jehovah it was that spoke by me, And his word was upon my tongue.

(Zechariah 7:12) The law and the words that Jehovah of armies sent by his spirit, by means of the former prophets

(Luke 1:68-70) Blessed be Jehovah the God of Israel, because he has turned his attention and performed deliverance toward his people... just as he, through the mouth of his holy prophets from of old, has spoken


But 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.

The "New World Translation Committee" which oversaw the translation work request anonymity 'en perpetuity', and are likely all dead since the primary work was completed 45 years ago. Guesses at specific names have always been merely guesses. Since the same manuscripts used by the NWT translators are still widely available for study, and since there are dozens of alternate translations for comparison, anyone who chooses to use NWT does so informedly.

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

It came about the same way every bible came about. They took a look at every known manuscript that has been discovered and made a simple translation into English, no doubt using whatever resources were available. Interestingly, some people who hate JWs want to bash them by saying their bible translators didn't have the credentials to translate properly and were biased in the translation. My research has shown the King James Version to be so, in fact! Look up the subject of the "Comma Johanneum" on Wikipedia. Also note how the KJV translates three different words with different meanings as "hell". There are many more biases and mistakes in the KJV but these are a couple. Another interesting point is that I, personally, have never heard anyone argue that reference works such as Strong's Dictionary of Greek and Hebrew words are biased or inaccurate, but that very dictionary will back up what I'm saying. Not to mention that it also backs up the translation of the New World Translation bible that we JWs prefer. After seeing the mistakes and biases in the KJV, it's no wonder that someone finally wanted the truth about what the bible says. Sadly, many people were already so used to the KJV that some actually believe it's translation was inspired! There's nothing wrong with the NWT bible and it certainly isn't biased. Go get one, research it, and see for yourself!

Answer 3

The New World Translation is the Bible that most Jehovah's Witnesses prefer to use because it has put God's personal name, Jehovah, back where other Bibles have replaced it with LORD or GOD. It is a modern language translation. But it is not "our" Bible, it is the Bible, and the translators did nothing to change the original meaning or wording of any verses.

Answer 4

because there is no original text found (regarding the blunked).

Answer 5

The really odd thing is that they shift the verb tenses in their bible so that there are no past or future tenses, so something that said :"And so and so said______" in other bibles now reads "And so and so KEEPS SAYING______" in their bible. They've never given me a satisfactory answer as to why they did this, doesn't it sound kind of stupid to assert that someone who's been dead for 5,000 years keeps repeating some certain phrase? They're also very vague about why they've got such a hard-on for the two witnesses from the bible, I asked them directly once and they just handed me some literature that never even addressed the issue.

Answer 6

They used to use the King James Bible, but then had it re-written to suit the translation that they want..
The translators made it say what the JWs at their head quarters wanted.
Four out of the five men on the committee had no Hebrew or Greek training at all.
http://www.bible.ca/Jw-NWT.htm

Answer 7

All bibles are not the same

Answer 8

Do not add or subtract from what Bible? None of the complete writings of the Apostles lasted much past their deaths. It was two hundred years before an effort was made to piece together the scrapes of material that was still around. That is why the oldest scrolls only date back to the third century.

Hundreds of Bibles have been taken from that. The King James Version was created only because King James thought the Genesis Bible was too strict, and even then, the KJV had to be revised four times over a 150 year tome period before it sufficiently matched the teachings of the Church of England to be "Authorized." This is the same version from which their Bishop got his views past November that handicap children should not be allowed to live.

Here is some info on the NWT from a source other than a wittness.

Excerpts from:
TRUTH IN TRANSLATION:
ACCURACY AND BIAS IN ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE NEW TESTIMENT
By Jason David BeDuhn

The eight English Translations Compared in BeDuhn's book are:
- The King James Version (KJV)
- The (New) Revised Standard Version (RSV)
- The New International Version (NIV)
- The New American Bible (NAB)
-The New American Standard Bible (NASB)
- The Amplified Bible (AB)
-The Living Bible (LB)
-Today's English Version (TEV)
-The New World Translation (NW)

Excerpts
Chapter Four
Examples of translation of the Greek word prokuneo, used fifty-eight times in the New Testament. The word is translated various ways as worship, do obeisance, fall down on one's knees, bow before. Scriptures discussed include Matt. 18:26, Rev. 3:9; Mark 15:18,19; Matt 2:1, 2, 8, 11; Matt 14:33; Matt 28:9,
"... in our exploration of this issue, we can see how theological bias has been the determining context for the choices made by all of the translations except the NAB and NW. ... translators seem to feel the need to add to the New Testament support for the idea that Jesus was recognized to be God."
Regarding Matt. 28:16, 17, where all versions except the NW use "worship" where the NW uses "did obeisance":
"Here all translations except the NW have recourse to "worship" -- a rendering which makes no sense in this context... This contradiction seems to be missed by all the translators except those who prepared the NW."

Chapter Five
A discussion of Philippians 2:5-11
"The NW translators... have understood harpagmos accurately as grasping at something one does not have, that is, a "seizure." The literary context supports the NW translation (and refutes the KJV's "thought it not robbery to be equal)..."

Chapter 7
A discussion on Col. 1: 15-20
"It is a tricky passage where every translation must add words." "The LB translator is guilty of all the doctrinal importation discussed above with reference to the NIV, NRSV, and TEV, and even surpasses them in this respect. So it is the NIV, NRSV, TEV and BL -- the four Bibles that make no attempt to mark added words - that actually add the most significant tendentious material. Yet in may public forums on Bible translation, the practice of these four translations is rarely if ever pointed to or criticized, while the NW is attached for adding the innocuous "other" in a way that clearly indicates it character as a addition of the translators....
But the NW is correct...."Other" is implied in "all", and the NW simply makes what is implicit explicit. ... It is ironic that the translation of Col. 1:15-20 that has received the most criticism is the one where the
"added words" are fully justified by what is implied in the Greek."
Chapter Eight
A discussion on Titus 2:13; 2 Thess. 1:12; 2 Peter 1:1, 2; "... the position of those who insist "God" and "Savior" must refer to the same being... is decidedly weakened."

Chapter Nine
A discussion of Hebrews 8:1 ".so we must conclude that the more probable translation is "God is your throne..," the translation found in the NW. ...It seems likely that it is only because most translations were made by people who already believe that Jesus is God that the less probable way of translating this verse has been preferred."

Chapter Ten
A discussion on John 8:58
"Both the LB and the NW offer translations that coordinate the two verbs in John 8:58 according to proper English syntax, and that accurately reflect the meaning of the Greek idiom. The other translations fail to do this."
"There is absolutely nothing in the original Greek of John 8:58 to suggest that Jesus is quoting the Old Testament here, contrary to what the TEV tries to suggest by putting quotations marks around "I am.""

"The majority of translations recognize these idiomatic uses of "I am", and property integrate the words into the context of the passages where they appear. Yet when it comes to 8:58, they suddenly forget how to translate."
"All the translations except the LB and NW also ignore the true relation between the verbs of the sentence and produce a sentence that makes no sense in English. These changes is the meaning of the Greek and in the normal procedure for translation point to a bias that has interfered with the work of the translators."
"No one listening to Jesus, and on one reading John in his own time would have picked up on a divine self-identification in the mere expression "I am," which, if you think about, is just about the most common pronoun-verb combination in any language."
"The NW... understands the relation between the two verbs correctly... The average Bible reader might never guess that there was something wrong with the other translations, and might even assume that the error was to be found in the ...NW."

Chapter 11
A discussion of John1:1
"Surprisingly, only one, the NW, adheres to the literal meaning of the Greek, and translates "a god."
"Translators of the KJV, NRSV, NIV, NAB, NASB, AB, TEV and LB all approached the text at John 1:1 already believing certain things about the Word...and made sure that the translations came out in accordance with their beliefs.... Ironically, some of these same scholars are quick to charge the NW translation with "doctrinal bias" for translating the verse literally, free of KJV influence, following the sense of the Greek. It may very well be that the NW translators came to the task of translating John 1:1 with as much bias as the other translators did. It just so happens that their bias corresponds in this case to a more accurate translation of the Greek."
"Some early Christians maintained their monotheism by believing that the one God simply took on a human form and came to earth -- in effect, God the Father was born and crucified as Jesus. They are entitled to their belief, but it cannot be derived legitimately from the Gospel according to John."

"John himself has not formulated a Trinity concept in his Gospel." "All that we can ask is that a translation be an accurate starting point for exposition and interpretation. Only the NW achieves that, as provocative as it sounds to the modern reader. The other translations cut off the exploration of the verse's meaning before it has even begun."
Chapter Twelve
A discussion of holy spirit.
"In Chapter Twelve, no translation emerged with a perfectly consistent and accurate handling of the many uses and nuances of "spirit" and "holy spirit." The NW scored highest is using correct impersonal forms of the relative and demonstrative pronouns consistently with the neuter noun "holy spirit," and in adhering to the indefinite expression "holy spirit" in those few instances when it was used by the biblical authors."


Summary
"... it can be said that the NW emerges as the most accurate of the translations compared. ...the translators managed to produce works relatively more accurate and less biased than the translations produced by multi-denominational teams, as well as those produced by single individuals."
"Jehovah's Witnesses...really sought to re-invent Christianity from scratch... building their system of belief and practice from the raw material of the Bible without predetermining what was to be found there.
Some critics, of course, would say that the results of this practice can be naive. But for Bible translation, at least, it has meant a fresh approach to the text, with far less presumption than that found in may of the Protestant translations."

"...Most of the differences are due to the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal, conservative translation of the original expressions of the New Testament."

Commenting on bias in translation:
"To me, it expresses a lack of courage, a fear that the Bible does not back up their "truth" enough. To let the Bible have its say, regardless of how well or poorly that say conforms to expectations or accepted forms of modern Christianity is as exercise in courage or, to use another word for it, faith."

About The Author
Jason David BeDuhn is an associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff. He holds a B.A. in Religious Studies form the University of Illinois, Urbana, an M.T.S. in New
Testament and Christian Origins form Harvard Divinity School, and a Ph.D. in Comparative Study of Religions form Indiana University, Bloomington.

Hope that helps.

Answer 9

The same way other bible came....Someone wrote it.

Answer 10

The Bible was originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic (a language related to Hebrew) and common (koi·ne′) Greek. Since relatively few people today understand these languages, it has become necessary to translate the Holy Bible into modern languages to present its life-giving message to people of all nations.

HEBREW TEXT: The Masoretic Hebrew text used for the preparation of the English text of the Hebrew Scripture portion of the New World Translation was the Codex Leningrad B 19A (of U.S.S.R.), as presented in R. Kittel’s Biblia Hebraica (BHK), seventh, eighth and ninth editions (1951-55). An update of this work known as Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS), 1977 edition, was used to prepare the footnote apparatus of this 1984 edition. Italicized words designated as “Heb.” are transliterated from BHS.

Certain portions of the Hebrew Bible are actually in the Aramaic language but written in Hebrew characters. Transliterations from these portions are preceded by “Aram.” Other Aramaic versions are indicated by their respective symbols.

GREEK TEXT: The basic Greek text used for the preparation of the English text of the Christian Greek Scripture portion of the New World Translation was The New Testament in the Original Greek, by Westcott and Hort (originally published in 1881). The Greek texts of Nestle, Bover, Merk and others were also considered. The Greek transliterations for the Christian Greek Scripture portion of the Bible, identified as “Gr.,” are from the Westcott and Hort text as reproduced in The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures (1969). In the Hebrew Scriptures “Gr.” refers to transliterations from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), by A. Rahlfs, Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart, 1935. Other Greek sources have been indicated by their respective symbols.

SYRIAC TEXT: “Syr.” indicates words transliterated from the Syriac Peshitta (Sy), S. Lee, 1826 edition, reprinted by United Bible Societies, 1979. Other Syriac versions are indicated by their respective symbols.

LATIN TEXT: The edition of the Latin Vulgate (Vg) used was the Biblia Sacra, Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, Württembergische Bibelanstalt, Stuttgart, 1975. “Lat.” designates words from this text. Other Latin versions have been indicated by their respective symbols.

THE TRANSLATION INTO ENGLISH

METHOD: Since the Bible sets forth the sacred will of the Sovereign Lord of the universe, it would be a great indignity, indeed an affront to his majesty and authority, to omit or hide his unique divine name, which plainly occurs in the Hebrew text nearly 7,000 times as הוהי (YHWH). Therefore, the foremost feature of this translation is the restoration of the divine name to its rightful place in the English text. It has been done, using the commonly accepted English form “Jehovah” 6,973 times in the Hebrew Scriptures and 237 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures. For a detailed study of this matter, see App 1A-1D.

In the New World Translation an effort was made to capture the authority, power, dynamism and directness of the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures and to convey these characteristics in modern English.

This translation is presented in modern English, using current speech forms, and does not use archaic English even in the various prayers and addresses to God. Thus we have not used the now-sanctimonious formal pronouns thou, thy, thine, thee and ye, with their corresponding verb inflections.

Paraphrases of the Scriptures are not offered. Rather, an effort has been made to give as literal a translation as possible where the modern-English idiom allows and where a literal rendition does not, by any awkwardness, hide the thought. In that way the desire of those who are scrupulous for getting an almost word-for-word statement of the original is met. It is realized that even such a seemingly insignificant matter as the use or omission of a comma or of a definite or an indefinite article may at times alter the correct sense of the original passage.

Taking liberties with the texts for the mere sake of brevity, and substituting some modern parallel when a literal rendering of the original makes good sense, has been avoided. Uniformity of rendering has been maintained by assigning one meaning to each major word and by holding to that meaning as far as the context permits. At times this has imposed a restriction upon word choice, but it aids in cross-reference work and in comparing related texts.

Special care was taken in translating Hebrew and Greek verbs in order to capture the simplicity, warmth, character and forcefulness of the original expressions. An effort was made to preserve the flavor of the ancient Hebrew and Greek times, the people’s way of thinking, reasoning and talking, their social dealings, etc. This has prevented any indulgence in translating as one may think the original speaker or writer should have said it. So, care has been taken not to modernize the verbal renderings to such an extent as to alter their ancient background beyond recognition. This means the reader will encounter many Hebrew and Greek idioms. In many cases the footnotes show the literalness of certain expexpressions.

Single brackets [ ] enclose words inserted to complete the sense in the English text. Double brackets [[ ]] suggest interpolations (insertions of foreign material) in the original text.—See Luke 23:19, 34 (these interpolations may be found in some ancient manuscripts and not in others)

Here is a partial list of the sources used for the translation:
Codex Sinaiticus, Gr., fourth cent. C.E., British Museum, H.S., G.S.

Codex Alexandrinus, Gr., fifth cent. C.E., British Museum, H.S., G.S.

Aid to Bible Understanding, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, Brooklyn, 1971.

Aleppo Codex, Heb., c. 930 C.E., Israel, H.S.

Aquila’s Gr. translation of H.S., second cent. C.E., Cambridge, England.

Armenian Version, fourth to thirteenth cent. C.E.; H.S., G.S.

Vatican ms 1209, Gr., fourth cent. C.E., Vatican City, Rome, H.S., G.S.

Codex Ephraemi rescriptus, Gr., fifth cent. C.E., Paris, H.S., G.S.

Cairo Codex, Heb., 895 C.E., Cairo, Egypt, H.S.

Bezae Codices, Gr. and Lat., fifth and sixth cent. C.E., Cambridge, England, G.S.

Massoretico-Critical Text of the Hebrew Bible, by C. D. Ginsburg, London, 1926.

Introduction to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible, by C. D. Ginsburg, Ktav Publishing House, New York, 1966 reprint.

The Massorah, by C. D. Ginsburg, Ktav Publishing House, New York, 1975 reprint.
Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar, by E. Kautzsch and A. E. Cowley

I know that this is long so I have not included all of the information available about the New World Translation. Just enough for you to know that it is a scholarly, literal translation. I would be happy to send more information if you'd like. Just e-mail me.