Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-10-2008, 03:31 PM
 
8,989 posts, read 14,563,102 times
Reputation: 753

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by alicenavada View Post
What new book? I'm still confused. And if the word 'worship' was replaced with 'obeisance' I'm sure it had to do w/ the context and an uwillingness to confuse the reverence we owe Christ with that of God.
The New World Translation. How can you deliberately change the word "worship" to another meaning under the presupposition that Jesus is not God. yet leave it for lower forms such as the devil etc... Is that responsible theology?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-10-2008, 03:40 PM
 
Location: Pleasant Shade Tn
2,214 posts, read 5,578,215 times
Reputation: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reformed Liberal View Post
The New World Translation. How can you deliberately change the word "worship" to another meaning under the presupposition that Jesus is not God. yet leave it for lower forms such as the devil etc... Is that responsible theology?

The words are paralell...how is this irresponsible? If you choose to feel it takes something away from Jesus' position to use obeisance instead of worship, that is your right. I'm sure the translators of this and other bibles felt that 'obeisance' was more in keeping w/ the context. But it doesnt matter what bible you use, Jesus will always point to his Father as the one deserving of divine reverence. In the third person, mind you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2008, 03:51 PM
 
8,989 posts, read 14,563,102 times
Reputation: 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by alicenavada View Post
The words are paralell...how is this irresponsible? If you choose to feel it takes something away from Jesus' position to use obeisance instead of worship, that is your right. I'm sure the translators of this and other bibles felt that 'obeisance' was more in keeping w/ the context. But it doesnt matter what bible you use, Jesus will always point to his Father as the one deserving of divine reverence. In the third person, mind you.
Why didn't you leave it the way it was written in the ancient greek text, "proskuneo" when it pertained to Jesus then?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2008, 03:59 PM
 
Location: Pleasant Shade Tn
2,214 posts, read 5,578,215 times
Reputation: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reformed Liberal View Post
Why didn't you leave it the way it was written in the ancient greek text, "proskuneo" when it pertained to Jesus then?
Err, because the NWT is an ENGLISH translation and as I've mentioned before, proskuneo means several things. Since the english word 'worship' has somewhat extreme connotations, I feel obeisance is the more accurate English word to use which is one of the reasons the New World Translation is my bible of choice. But I also use the King James bible and rendering the word 'worship' does not change the meaning of the text.

If you don't like the way the NWT renders the verses, by all means don't use it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-10-2008, 09:15 PM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,492,238 times
Reputation: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by alicenavada View Post
Err, because the NWT is an ENGLISH translation and as I've mentioned before, proskuneo means several things. Since the english word 'worship' has somewhat extreme connotations, I feel obeisance is the more accurate English word to use which is one of the reasons the New World Translation is my bible of choice. But I also use the King James bible and rendering the word 'worship' does not change the meaning of the text.

If you don't like the way the NWT renders the verses, by all means don't use it.
alicenavada: The reason the NWT renders certain things the way it does has nothing to do with accuracy, It has everything to do with an agenda. The NWT remains true to the Greek in most cases that do not teach the deity of Christ. When it comes to the deity of Christ, however, the unidentified "scholars" or "translators" (they refuse to identify themselves in order to cover up their lack of scholarship) played loose and fast with the Greek words. Words are added without precedent or justification (as in Colossians) to make Christ just another created being (i.e. "other"), the clear reference to deity of ego eimi is rendered in the past perfect (I have been instead of I AM--John 8:58), and worship is corrupted to mean obeisance in order to detract from Jesus' right to be recognized and honor as God!

The fact that JWs are taught that John 1:1 says "a god" proves this lack of scholarship. If anyone is interested I can post the inconsistency of the JW naive argument that a lack of a definite article makes Theos mean "a god." There are many other places in the NT where there is no definite article, yet the NWT translates Theos as GOD! Not surprisingly, those occur in passages in which Christ's deity is not in question!

Let's consider the word proskuneo in the NWT. The word occurs in the NT more than fifty times. In Matthew 2 (verses 2, 8, and 11) where the word is used of Jesus, the NWT corrupts it to mean obeisance. Just 2 chapters later when it is used of the LORD (Kurios--4:10), the NWT translates the SAME word (proskuneo) as "worship!" In reference to Satan, proskuneo is incorrectly rendered "do an act of worship." The word is clearly a verb ("to worship"--2 pers. singular, aorist active subjunctive) and not a noun! The bias of the "translator" is clear here.

In chapter 8 where it is used of Jesus (verse 2), it is again corrupted to say obeisance! The same is true of 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 18:26; 20:20; 28:9, 17!

We find the same translator bias and agenda in the other Gospels (see Mk. 5:16; 15:19; Luke 4:7, 8; 24:52). In the account of the Samaritan woman (John 4), the word proskuneo is again rendered worship because it is in the context of the Father. It is nothing less than arrogant bias that gives one a false authority to change the meaning of the same word according to the context in which it is found! In chapter 8 (verse 38) where Jesus is involved, the word once more becomes obeisance.

In Acts 7:42 proskuneo is rendered "render sacred service.' This totally downplays the idolatrous nature of what the Israelites were allowed by God to do. His allowing them to "worship" idols in the same sense that they should have worshiped Him is the foundation for their condemnation not a simple rendering of sacred service! They WORSHIPED idols. Period!

In Acts 8:27 (in a context not dealing with Jesus), the word is again freely rendered "worship." Acts 10:25 is extremely interesting. Why did Peter not allow Cornelius to "worship" at his feet? What did Peter find so objectionable? Was it simply someone doing "obeisance" to him? No! Notice that Peter makes it clear that Cornelius should not kneel before him because he too was only a man. What was he saying? He was saying that such an act of WORSHIP was rightfully given only to one who is not a mere man! And that is why the word is changed to "obeisance." Even though it does not directly involve Jesus, it deals with the worship of someone other than a mere man!

Let's consider Hebrews chapter 1 where the subject IS JESUS. Here the angels are told to WORSHIP Him. Here the NWT has it correctly rendered "worship!" (I won't now get into the horrible translation found in the NWT of much of this chapter!).

Clearly, anyone who has an agenda can corrupt the Scriptures and lead people astray. Only those with eyes of faith and a regenerated heart can see through the many falsehoods of the NWT. This corruption of the Scriptures, however, must not go unchallenged. Unfortunately, I have found that the average JW who comes to my door knows more about his error than the average true believer knows about his Truth! That is why so many will not answer the door! This is a tragedy. We must be ready in season and out of season to give a reason for the hope that is within us! Jesus Christ, God of very God, became a man, took upon Himself the sins of man, died, rose again, and is seated in His rightful place on His throne in glory where He is deserving of WORSHIP from all! No sin seems more heinous and more despicable to me than the refusal of men to acknowledge that Jesus is GOD and merits our honor and worship!

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2008, 06:59 AM
 
Location: Pleasant Shade Tn
2,214 posts, read 5,578,215 times
Reputation: 561
Thank you for your comments Preterist. I've heard them before. I'll respond the same way I did then: If you feel the Jehovah's Witnesses have an agenda in their bible translation, you evidently don't know much about them. I've seen the NWT ripped apart online but never has anyone approached me w/these concerns. Many people in my area use it, regardless of their beliefs or religion. And many millions trust it.

But I'll say it again. The truth of Gods word is available in ANY bible and we used the King James bible for many years before the NWT was available. We still do. I use the NKJV, the NWT, TLB, ASV, etc. None of them make it evident that Jesus is God, especially when context is considered. TO me, the allowance of this doctrine into 'Christianity' is the heinous thing.

I hope I have made it clear that I AM ready to make a defense for the hope within me. And I don't know a single Jehovah's WItness who isnt prepared to do just that. And I'll use any bible you like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2008, 12:49 PM
 
Location: Pleasant Shade Tn
2,214 posts, read 5,578,215 times
Reputation: 561
Oh, and I have to ask: Are you under the impression that the NWT is the ONLY bible that makes these same changes to the KJV? Keep in mind, the KJV (as it was written originally) was based on the received text of the day and since then, alternate copies of the bible books have been discovered. In addition, I do not know a single person that uses an original copy of the KJV since the language is far too archaic for modern readers. It has been changed by modern translators to be understandable , while still (for some reason ) retaining the 'thees' and 'thous' of the original-ostensibly to maintain it's 'beauty'. But the bible was not written as a piece of light poetry-it's a guidebook. And thus being, it deserves to be translated in the most accurate way possible-so that it can be understood by even the simplest reader. Those who claim the KJV to be the most accurate arent aware of how many changes it has undergone since its writing. They would no doubt be likewise insulted at how it has been corrupted.

I respect and appreciate all translators who do their best to make the original Hebrew and Greek writings available in ANY language, not just english. My point here is not to change your feelings, but to help you understand that Jehovah's Witnesses do not blindly accept anything because that is what they are 'taught'. We are constantly encouraged to research everything for ourselves to determine if these things are correct.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2008, 04:25 PM
 
Location: Central Illinois, USA
7 posts, read 26,852 times
Reputation: 16
Default research

Quote:
My point here is not to change your feelings, but to help you understand that Jehovah's Witnesses do not blindly accept anything because that is what they are 'taught'. We are constantly encouraged to research everything for ourselves to determine if these things are correct.
As a former Jehovah's Witness, I have to wonder how many Witnesses have done any research beyond what the governing body prints and distributes to them?

The usual JW answer: None because they are the 'faithful slave class' who sees that all food is dispensed at the proper time.

My answer: It would be more healthy than to get only one opinion (the governing body's). That is not really doing research from what I understand the term to encompass. That is like doing a term paper for your college professor and only listing one source.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2008, 04:50 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, North Carolina
5,137 posts, read 16,586,374 times
Reputation: 1009
Please tell me which part in the OT has been changed in the bible?

I have seen probably one change, and that's the word jehovah.

The word jehovah is nonexistent, and is manmade.

Watchtower is also nonexistent as they have 'prophesied' many false predictions. One being that Moses will come back so let's build him a mansion. I wonder who's living in that mansion now?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2008, 08:16 PM
 
2,557 posts, read 5,859,963 times
Reputation: 967
They sold it to end an embarassing part of their history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top