the new world translation is the most accurate translation?

Question

www.tetragrammaton.org/truthintrans.htmwww.tetragrammaton.org/truthintrans.htm ......

Answer 1

It most definitely is!
Before I ever started studying the scriptures with Jehovah's Witnesses, I researched to see if they were accurate in this translation as compared to KJV.
NWT won!!

And one point worth noting-- this translation does not use archaic English as many other translations do. A person can do research and study with this version and all the time understand what was written.Vast improvement!

Answer 2

Yes, the New World Translation is the translation which best conveys the thought which was expressed in the original Bile languages, and it is a direct translation from those languages. Consider one example:

John 5:28

(NASB) John 5:28 "Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,

(KJV) John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

(CEV) John 5:28 Don't be surprised! The time will come when all of the dead will hear the voice of the Son of Man,

Now how does this verse read in the New World Translation?

(John 5:28) 28 Do not marvel at this, because the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice

The original Greek word is mnēmei´on, is derived from the verb meaning "to remember" or "to memorialize." Some Bible translations may render this Greek word by the one word "tomb" in English, but the word "tomb" does not fully express the meaning of the original Greek word because "tomb" in the Greek is derived from the verb that means "to cut, to hew, or to dig." But the Greek word mnēmei´on includes the thought of being remembered or of remembrance. Jesus did not use the plural of the Greek word ta´phos, which means "grave" or "burial ground." The thought here is that everyone who is in the memory of God will live again.

One common objection to the New World Translation is that it uses God's name in the "new testament". Here is a partial qoute for this basis:

"Well, some very old fragments of the Septuagint Version that actually existed in Jesus' day have survived down to our day, and it is noteworthy that the personal name of God appeared in them. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Volume 2, page 512) says: "Recent textual discoveries cast doubt on the idea that the compilers of the LXX [Septuagint] translated the tetragrammaton YHWH by kyrios. The oldest LXX MSS (fragments) now available to us have the tetragrammaton written in Heb[rew] characters in the G[ree]k text. This custom was retained by later Jewish translators of the O[ld] T[estament] in the first centuries A.D." Therefore, whether Jesus and his disciples read the Scriptures in Hebrew or Greek, they would come across the divine name.

Thus, Professor George Howard, of the University of Georgia, U.S.A., made this comment: "When the Septuagint which the New Testament church used and quoted contained the Hebrew form of the divine name, the New Testament writers no doubt included the Tetragrammaton in their quotations." (Biblical Archaeology Review, March 1978, page 14) What authority would they have had to do otherwise?"

The link to this discussion is here:

http://www.watchtower.org/library/na/article_06.htm

If you would like to read the New World Translation for yourself, or compare it with your version here is a link:

http://www.jehovantodistajat.fi/e/bible/index.htm

For information about this modern Bible translation you can go to Wikipedia here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Translation_of_the_Holy_Scriptures

Also for a defense against the critics of the New World Translation you can go here:

http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/newworldtranslation/pageindex.htm

Personally I have four other Bibles in addition to the New World Translation, and I also access and compare other Bible versions at Olivetree and Crosswalk, but the New World Translation is the best one possible.

Answer 3

zorro: In all actuality, there is no, one English "more accurate translation". Either, it is accurate or it isn't. The original Greek writings of the Holy Bible [Coptic] , that is the Greek language in its translation into English loses a lot of its intended meaning. This is because the Greek language has phrases which make English renditions all most impossible. To attempt to convey some Greek meanings into English pose quite a lot to be desired.

Answer 4

yes it is.
if you have any doubts, why not research it yourself?
the most fair and balanced way to do so, is to procure a 1611 King James Version bible, and a Strong's Exhaustive Concordance.
Take these two publications, and compare them with the NWT, and any other modern translation, and you will find that all other modern translations are murky at best.
I know for a fact this is true. I, am not a JW, but I have researched their trans (even using the so-called "deliberate doctrinal changes" from accuser's websites) and found that all you opposers of this truthful translation, are either liars, or have not investigated the NWT on your own. Will there ever be a time when the masses will stop being led around by their predjudices and look at something for what it is?
Of course not. Yet every translation is in agreement there.

Answer 5

The World English Bible Greek is based on the Greek Majority Text. As for the New World Translation, I have no idea.

Answer 6

NO it is not even considered a real bible it is a cult document. Bad Translations of the Jehovah's Witness Bible, the New World Translation (NWT). 1. Gen. 1:1-2 - "In [the] beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth proved to be formless and waste and there was darkness upon the surface of [the] watery deep; and God's active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters," (New World Translation, emphasis added). 1. The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society denies that the Holy Spirit is alive, the third person of the Trinity. Therefore, they have changed the correct translation of "...the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters," to say "...and God's active force was moving to and fro over the surface of the waters." 2. Zech. 12:10 - In this verse God is speaking and says, "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son" (Zech. 12:10, NASB). 1. The Jehovah's Witnesses change the word "me" to "the one" so that it says in their Bible, "...they will look upon the one whom they have pierced..." Since the Jehovah's Witnesses deny that Jesus is God in flesh, then Zech. 12:10 would present obvious problems--so they changed it. 3. John 1:1 - They mistranslate the verse as "a god." Again it is because they deny who Jesus is and must change the Bible to make it agree with their theology. The Jehovah's Witness version is this: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." 4. Col. 1:15-17 - The word "other" is inserted 4 times. It is not in the original Greek, nor is it implied. This is a section where Jesus is described as being the creator of all things. Since the Jehovah's Witness organization believes that Jesus is created, they have inserted the word "other" to show that Jesus was before all "other" things, implying that He is created. 1. There are two Greek words for "other": heteros, and allos. The first means another of a different kind, and the second means another of the same kind. Neither is used at all in this section of scripture. The Jehovah's Witness have changed the Bible to make it fit their aberrant theology. 5. Heb. 1:6 - In this verse they translate the Greek word for worship, proskuneo, as "obeisance." Obeisance is a word that means to honor, show respect, even bow down before someone. Since Jesus, to them, is created, then he cannot be worshiped. They have also done this in other verses concerning Jesus, i.e., Matt. 2:2,11; 14:33; 28:9. 6. Heb. 1:8 - This is a verse where God the Father is calling Jesus God: "But about the Son he says, 'Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.'" Since the Jehovah's Witnesses don't agree with that they have changed the Bible, yet again, to agree with their theology. They have translated the verse as "...God is your throne..." The problem with the Jehovah's Witness translation is that this verse is a quote from Psalm 45:6 which, from the Hebrew, can only be translated as "...Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever; a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom." To justify their New Testament translation they actually changed the OT verse to agree with their theology, too! The NWT translation is not a good translation. It has changed the text to suit its own theological bias in many places.

Answer 7

No. Be careful of any--and I repeat, any--translation done one person or by the followers of a single church or religious sect. The translation is usually very skewed toward supporting the views of the translators. In those translations done by linguists of various denominations or sects, bias is kept to a minimum because opposing translators will help keep others in check.

Answer 8

What is your question?

But let me ask one: Why don't we have the original writings?

If the bible is the so-called "word of god" then how did it happen that they became lost? I mean these are not just ordinary letters are they? The world would have a right to have the originals, not copies from copies from copies etc. I mean an apostle (an eye witness), who witnessed god in the flesh, suddenly after 60 years decides to write about it, and then loses the writing? And then Christians can't understand why people are sceptical?

Answer 9

Good chance it's not translated form the absolute original texts? Then no.

Answer 10

Nope its the worst.

It is where the JWs put their perverted doctrines right into the text.

I call it the Revised Standard Perversion.

Pastor Art