To begin, let us return to that ubiquitous Hebrew and Greek Bible critic Alexander Thomson. According to Bowman, Much has been written about the NWT, particularly regarding its additions to and subtractions from key scriptures concerning the person of Christ and the believer’s relationship with Him; and it is not felt necessary to repeat them here – such material is widely available elsewhere. What this article attempts to show is its historical development and its inability to be considered even a reasonable translation of the Biblical Hebrew and Greek which it purports to be. As we look at this we must remember the Society’s own words, it must be “a faithful translation of the Scriptures from the original languages.” Signs indicating Greek and Hebrew participles, articles, numbers, emphatic prepositions, tenses and moods

Notwithstanding all the publishing activity described above, Jehovah’s Witnesses claimed that all the Bible versions in use were defective in some way, even those they had used and published themselves. They were found to have Alexander Thomson in The Differentiator, (June 1959), cited in Ian Croft, “The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures: Does It Really Have the Support of Greek Scholars?” (Perth, Western Australia: Concerned Growth Ministries, 1987 p. 2) … return Who were the men that were responsible for the NWT, and what were their credentials and qualifications as translators of these ancient languages?

Subscribe

In 1902 the Society arranged for a special printing of the Holman Linear Parallel Edition of the Bible that incorporated cross-references to Watchtower publications in the margin. It contained the Revised Version with the KJV printed above where the translations differed [1] . . The Emphatic Diaglott (ED) is an interlinear New Testament and is also, like the Rotherham translation above, used to support the Society’s rendering of ‘presence’ instead of ‘coming’ for the Greek word parousia [Reasoning p. 341; NWT p. 1248 and other verses]. Thus, although cited as a supporting reference, it is not an independent source and therefore its use is open to question. Benjamin Wilson, the original publisher of the ED was a newspaper editor. He was not well educated; neither did he have the respect of well-known scholars. Additionally, he was a Christadelphian, and therefore shared a common theology with the Watchtower Society on issues such as denial of the Trinity, the personality of the Holy Spirit, eternal punishment and the full atonement of Christ. Christadelphians are also known to be millenialists [Apostles pp. 194-5]. Much more could be said about the ED and Benjamin Wilson [see Apostles pp.193-6]. For the last word we may refer to Dr Bruce M Metzger of Princeton (Professor of New Testament Language and Literature) who said that, in several particulars, the ED is the ancestor of the NWT [3] . . A comparison of verses such as Matt 21:42; 22:37, 44; 23:39; 24:3, 27, 37, 39 proves this. For further information please see Apostles pp.195-6. Robert M Bowman Jr, of the Christian Research Institute, California, is pithy in his summation of the contents of the NWT (particularly the NWTCGS). There is “evidence of a pervasive doctrinal bias in the NWT” [Understanding Jehovah’s Witnesses [Understanding] p. 65-6]. In fact Bowman devotes a whole chapter of his book to proving this claim. But as Bowman himself points out: “do the insertions and omissions, mistranslations and biases render the NWT unscholarly?”

The translators have their own views on Hebrew tenses…They profess to offer a rendering into modern English which is as faithful as possible. In fact, the jargon which they use is often scarcely English at all…the translation is marked by a wooden literalism which will only exasperate an intelligent reader…it is an insult to the Word of God…From beginning to end this volume is a shining example of how the Bible should not be translated” [10]. . Diligent Scripture study led Mr. Newberry into association with a remarkable revival which took place in the British Isles early in the last century, when the Spirit of God led many eminent Christians to search the Holy Scriptures in relation to their ecclesiastical associations. The conviction was forced upon many of their souls that much of the teaching was not in harmony with the Word of God; that many of the customs were based upon expediency rather than conformity to "the law and the testimony" (Isa. 8. 20); that principles and practices (which were plainly recorded in the Epistle to the Corinthians and other Scriptures, as characteristic of the churches of God as founded by the apostles, after the Divine pattern given to Paul, "the wise masterbuilder") were not being observed, although 1 Corinthians 1.1,2 said they were binding upon "all that in every place call upon the Name of Jesus Christ our Lord." It is not possible to store OneNote date file in Apple Icloud storage. Microsoft offers both OneNote and OneDrive (5GB cloud storage) for free. ii) that the Society leads its readers to believe that it presents “all the evidence, all the possibilities” so that they may make an informed decision. In 1863, Mr. Newberry (now in his early fifties) was given a copy of Constantin von Tischendorf’s transcription of The Greek New Testament, based on Tischendorf’s discovery of Codex Sinaiticus (a 4th century copy of the New Testament, and a very significant find in the fields of textual criticism and Bible translation). Newberry was thrilled with this gift, and immediately made good use of it. As he read it, he began to make abundant notes within the text. He enjoyed his study of the Bible so much that he wanted others, who did not know Hebrew or Greek, to benefit from the treasures he observed. He carefully developed his own unique notation system, within the lines of the text itself, with a view toward bringing to light underlying details of Scripture for the benefit of those who read only an English Bible. This took an immense amount of painstaking Biblical study. His self-developed notation system was a great accomplishment and was published in The Englishman’s Bible – known more popularly today as The Newberry Study Bible. While many of the benefits of a Newberry Bible are available today in Bible software, Newberry’s system put the information right into the printed text; and remarkably, he produced it all in a pre-digital age.Like so many other godly Bible students of that era, he came to see that the ecclesiastical set-up around him did not match what he found in the Word of God. He noticed that many of their customs were based upon historical tradition or social expediency, and that their principles and practices were not those of the churches described in the New Testament. He realised that as long as he tried to work within that ecclesiastical framework he would not be able to practise all that he found in Scripture, nor would he be able to preach and teach it all. The Word of God was being ignored and even violated at too many points. In Awake! 22 March 1987, p.12 [cited in Understanding p. 126] there is a contributor’s comment designed to persuade the reader that the Watchtower Society, in opposition to the writers of Christendom, is honest in its publications, giving all the relevant material and then allowing the reader to make an informed decision. It reads: Ron Rhodes, Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1993)