Why has the Bible been changed by Jehovah's Witnesses?

Answer 1

The teachings of the Bible in its unedited form do indeed match the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Bible as a recognized source of authority is thus not needing to be changed by us to provide support for our teachings for the simple reason that our beliefs are derived from Scripture.

Biased response:The teachings of the Bible in its unedited form do not match the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Bible as a recognized source of authority is thus needing to be changed by them to provide support for their teachings. ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONThe above question is based on the suppossition that Jehovah's witnesses have "changed the bible", ie. that, rather than provide one of many additional translations (such as was done by the translators of the King James Bible, the Catholic New Jerusalem bible or many others...) that the translation used by many Jehovah's witnesses is not faithful to the original Hebrew and Greek texts. While there is indeed disccussion on the rendering of certain verses in the New World translation this is mainly due to its breaking from tranditional renditions of certain texts rather than a lack of faithfulness to the Hebrew language.

The bible translation has been recognised by many experts (see link below) as an excellent and faithful rendering of the original texts that, according to documented texts, merits its place alongside other modern translations of the holy scriptures.

For a list of quotations from translators (not Jehovah's Witnesses) see RELATED QUESTION:

Is

Did the jehovahs witnesses write their own bible

Answer

It isn't the Hebrew and Greek Bible which has been changed by the Jehovah's Witnesses. Those engaged in the translation work would not be of sufficient expertise or qualification in these languages to do so. What has most certainly been done is to change the meaning in translation to more closely conform to the theology of Jehovah's Witnesses. This is done even when it results in inconsistent translating. In other words, the same word is translated differently, when it is 'inconvenient' to the JW theology. This is most objectionable and just plain dishonest. I do not believe that the average witness would be aware of the extent of the deception which is being sold to them and so they will probably be horrified that such assertions are made. It must be made clear that this is not stated with any malice towards any witnesses but in the interests of plain truth. I have studied the Greek in its original and compared it in a number of places to the New World Translation. It does not deserve this name.

Answer:The answer immediately above begins with the statement: "It isn't the Hebrew and Greek Bible which has been changed by the Jehovah's Witnesses." This is true - the Hebrew and Scriptures were written thousands of years ago and many copies of manuscripts have been preserved to our day.

The remainder of the response contains errors and assumptions. We have not changed the modern language translations of the Bible; we have restored them closer to the original languages from which they are derived. Many translations are not translated accurately, and one of the most glaring examples of this involves the hallowed Name of God. (Matthew 6:9)

God's Name in the original Hebrew appears almost 7,000 times. It is יהוה, or YHWH, and the English translation of this is Jehovah. (Exodus 6:3; Psalm 83:18 in the KJV [not the New KJV; it has removed the Divine Name completely.])

Obtain a Strong's Concordance and you will note that every time you see the word LORD or GOD in all uppercase letters, most translations have actually removed God's personal name from the text and replaced it with these titles.

The NWT has restored it to its proper place. That is just one example of many. Using Vines expository and a Strong's Concordance, as well as other reference works NOT produced by Jehovah's Witnesses, one can see that the NWT is an extremely accurate translation. This is verified further by anyone who has the Large Print Reference Bible with Footnotes. The copius footnote system and the appendices show the excellent scholarship that is behind the highly accurate modern language rendering of Jehovah's inspired written word.

ADDITIONALLYIt is interesting to note that back in the 16th century, opposers said that Martin Luther's translation of the Bible was changed, and contained "1,400 heretical errors and lies." Today, Luther's Bible is viewed as a landmark translation. The book Translating the Bible even calls it "a work of genius"! Luther's Bible was criticized because it was produced by a man who exposed the shortcomings of the traditional religion of his day. His translation opened the way for ordinary people to see the truth of much of what he said. Similarly, the New World Translation is criticized because it is published by Jehovah's Witnesses, who outspokenly declare that many of Christendom's doctrines are not found in the Bible.

Theologian C. Houtman explains the reason for the unorthodoxy of the New World Translation: "Various traditional translations of important terms from the original text have been discarded, apparently in order to arrive at the best possible understanding. " In other words, while many translations prefer to use "traditional" terms to render imporatant words in the Bible, the NWT uses terms that are more readily understood by the reader in our modern language.

Here are some examples of the claimed "changes" that critics of the NWT point to:

*One example is the rendering of the words syn·te´lei·a and te´los. Both of these words are translated "end" in many translations, however, in the NWT, syn·te´lei·a is rendered "conclusion" and te´los "end," to more accurately indicate different shades of meaning between these two words.

*Another criticsm that many place on the NWT is the redering at Luke 23:43, where Jesus said to the dying criminal beside him on the torture stake, "Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise."(NWT) Many translations place the comma before the word "today" and not after the word. Critics claim that the NWT is wrong because most translations render Luke 23:43 to read as though Jesus and the criminal were bound for Paradise that very day. But the facts indicate that the NWT is accurate in it's rendering of that verse. The Bible indicates that Jesus himself was dead for parts of three days afterward, and he did not ascend to heaven until some 40 days after that, so he could not have been telling the criminal that he would be with him in paradise on that day. The original Greek was not written with any punctuation such as commas, so the puntuation marks were added by translators. In view of this, Professor Wilhelm Michaelis renders the verse: "Truly, already today I give you the assurance: (one day) you will be together with me in paradise."

*At John 1:1 the New World Translation reads: "The Word was a god." In many translations this expression simply reads: "The Word was God" and is used to support the Trinity doctrine. Not surprisingly, Trinitarians dislike the rendering in the New World Translation. But John 1:1 was not falsified in order to prove that Jesus is not Almighty God. Jehovah's Witnesses, among many others, had challenged the capitalizing of "god" long before the appearance of the New World Translation, which endeavors accurately to render the original language. Five German Bible translators likewise use the term "a god" in that verse. At least 13 others have used expressions such as "of divine kind" or "godlike kind." These renderings agree with other parts of the Bible to show that, yes, Jesus in heaven is a god in the sense of being divine. But Jehovah and Jesus are not the same being, not the same God.-John 14:28; 20:17.

It seems reasonable that students of the Bible should consider this question: 'Why have modern translations been so liberal in removing the name of the Father from their translations?' A great example exists in our very day. Pick up an original King James Version and read Psalms 83:18. That scripture in the original KJV of 1611 reads,"That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth." Now read the same verse in the New King James Version. That scripture reads,"That they may know that You, whose name alone is the LORD, Are the Most High over all the earth." Why did the writers of the NKJV feel at liberty to remove, altar, change God's word, and in fact remove the very name of God from the Bible and insert a surrogate title?

In 1989, Professor Benjamin Kedar of Israel said: "In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translations, I often refer to the English edition of what is known as the New World Translation. In so doing, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible. Giving evidence of a broad command of the original language, it renders the original words into a second language understandably without deviating unnecessarily from the specific structure of the Hebrew. . . . Every statement of language allows for a certain latitude in interpreting or translating. So the linguistic solution in any given case may be open to debate. But I have never discovered in the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the text that it does not contain."

Jehovah's Witnesses haven't changed the Bible but other religions have