What would make you trust an anonymously translated Bible? something? nothing?

Question

As a presbyterian I might wonder, If a group had a translation they insisted was the best clearest ever, but wouldn't say who translated it, would or should someone be suspicious. If an unqualified but sincere person tries to translate the scriptures how to they guard against 'translating' to their point of view.

for example, The New World Translation is anonymously transalted and word on the street is that it was done mostly by a past leader who had a couple semesters of Greek and self taught in Hebrew Should one trust it... would it be a case of trusting the organization... and transfering that trust to a particular viewpoint translation... or is it good scholarship? and why would you consider it good scholorship

I am rather surprised some Jehovah's witnesses feel the New World was not anonymously translated. I would love to hear who they think wrote it.

motives? it says in Thesalonians... "they did not receive the love of truth so as to be saved"... the love of truth is a good thing, no?

I see a refererence to an author in Flagstaff Arizona who favors NWT given below and I see an in depth discussion with him on Mars Hill
http://www.forananswer.org/Mars_Jw/JB-RH.Jn1_1.Index.htm
You have to go all the way to FLagstaff Az to find a religion scholar that likes the NWT... not an impressively weighty argument you must admit

Answer 1

The New World Translation is the "bible" the Jehovah's Witnesses use and it is an inaccurate translation of the bible. (Thumbs down for that one?) They claim it is the work of competent scholars. In reality, it is the work of a Bible Tranlation Committee with no working knowledge of biblical languages. Dr. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton says it is a frightful mistranslation and describes it as being erroneous, pernicious, and reprehensible.
It mistranslates the Greek scriptures in order to expunge the deity of Jesus Christ. Jesus is downgraded from God to "a" god in John 1 and demoted from the Creator of all things to a mere creature who created all other things in Colossians 1. They claim, that the Christian scriptures have "been tampered with" in order to eliminate the name Jehovah from the text. Greek scholars across the board denounce the NWT.
Revelation 22:18-19 says" I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book."

Answer 2

The the first thing to realize is that English itself is an evolving language. Hence a few phrases used within the sixteenth and even the twentieth century don't imply the identical as they do in these days. One seen instance is the phrase "homosexual" which used to intend "completely happy" however now manner "gay". Thus translations in general must be revised to make sure that the language is saved up-to-date. The moment factor is that seeing that the primary English Bible used to be translated within the seventeenth century making use of a latin translation, many previous copies of the Bible (on the subject of the NT, written inside one hundred years of the usual) in its usual language had been determined. Thus so much modern day models are translated immediately from those previous records. The 3rd factor is that a phrase in a single language can imply 10 distinctive matters in an extra language and students can disagree as to the pleasant manner of translating a particluar phrase or word. As you've mentioned many translations in these days furnish the reader with know-how that students now recognize from the usual records. This isn't a foul factor. The sections in query don't difference the total message of the Bible. Here is a quote that explains the total accuracy of the Bible that we've got in these days: "The truth is that the Bible has now not been rewritten. Take the New Testament, for instance. The disciples of Jesus wrote the New Testament in Greek and although we shouldn't have the usual records, we do have round 6,000 copies of the Greek manuscripts that have been made very just about the time of the originals. These quite a lot of manuscripts, or copies, consider each and every different to nearly one hundred percentage accuracy. Statistically, the New Testament is ninety nine.five% textually natural. That manner that there's handiest one million/two of one million% of of all of the copies that don't consider each and every different flawlessly. But, if you're taking that one million/two of one million% and compare it, you uncover that almost all of the "disorders" are not anything greater than spelling mistakes and really minor phrase changes. For instance, rather of claiming Jesus, a variant possibly "Jesus Christ." So the genuine quantity of textual variant of any situation is highly low. Therefore, we will say that we've got a remarkably correct compilation of the usual records."

Answer 3

Dear Whirlingmercury,

Great question!

I have many translations of the Bible and I trust them to be God's Word until proven otherwise.

I used to belong to the United Church of Christ (UCC) and I served three 3-year terms as a Deacon (I did leave and now belong to a Bible-believing church). One of my responsibilities was to read the Epistle lesson on Sunday morning. I used to check several translations to see which one would be easiest for the congregation to understand as well as the easiest for me to read to be heard. We had many people who are hard of hearing so I definitely kept them in mind as I chose which Bible I would read from.

I do have a copy of the NWT which a cousin gave me ten years ago telling me it was much better than all of the other Bibles I have (about 50 now in about 10 translations). I did not even want it but I prayed about it and the Holy Spirit told me that I should look it over and compare just as I did when I compared the Epistle lessons.

As I did it became obvious to me that the NWT was / is man's word not God's. It really reminds me of the papers I had to write referencing the encyclopedia in junior high school. It was such a struggle to put the information in my own words and it sure did sound stilted!

I consider reading the Bible from cover-to-cover as being the BEST thing I've ever done in my life. It keeps getting better each time I do it but I will not read the NWT from cover-to-cover because it simply doesn't measure up. I can only call it a "black book" not the Bible.

For His glory,
JOYfilled

Answer 4

The bible is the divinely inspired word of God; but since there are many translations, I think it's important to reference at least three translations when actually STUDYING scripture. God gives us the Holy Spirit to help us discern His truths. If I can take an anonymously translated bible, compare it to at least two other versions (KJV and NIV for example) and the content agrees, then I would probably trust the anonymously translated bible. But if there are too many discrepancies, I wouldn't give the anonymously translated bible credence.

Answer 5

The history of Bible translation is far from pristine. Manipulation shows up in every translation. The JWs are no worse. This just means they are not as "special" as they are led to believe.
(PS: I'm glad Joyfilled took that Bible. I keep copies of the NWT for comparison as well. Good reason.)

Answer 6

I'd suggest you take a look at the book TRUTH IN TRANSLATION: ACCURACY AND BIAS IN ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT by Jason David BeDuhn, who is the Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff.

In the book he compares 9 different translations of the Bible (The King James Version (KJV), The Amplified Bible, (AB), The Living Bible (LB), The New American Bible (NAB), The New American Standard Bible (NASB), The New International Version (NIV), The New World Translation (NW), The (New) Revised Standard Version (NRSV), Today's English Version (TEV)). The NW comes out as the most accurate of the bunch, to the surprise and dismay of many. What's interesting is that the comparison is made based on several theologically significant passages in an attempt to discern not only general accuracy, but also bias (as the title suggests) in the rendering of such passages. So it is on these hotly disputed and criticized passages that the NW emerges as the most accurate.

BTW, the NWT was not written anonymously. It's not designed to attack any particular religion/belief. But you're writing your blog anonymously. That makes me suspicious. What are your motives?

Answer 7

Nothing. Translations are not necessarily a good thing. It's best to go straight to the source. There are many reputable sources of the original.

Answer 8

Nothing can make me trust damn bible unless you bring some sort of physical and empirical evidence for every single chapter and every single character's existence inside it..

Answer 9

It's dreadful scholarship. Jesus came to take away our sin not to steal our brain.